Over 97,000 participants worldwide attended the 28th session of the United Nations Conference of the Parties (COP), commonly known as COP, from 30 November to 12 December 2023. Climate experts, government officials, heads of state, and global industrial sector leaders participated in the COP28 in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Every year, it takes place, and it is the only multilateral decision-making forum on climate change globally. 

This year, the main areas that the COP28 focused on have included transitioning to clean energy, eliminating the dependence on fossil fuels, delivering on climate finance, and mobilizing inclusivity. While some historic decisions were taken at this summit, not everyone is convinced that the COP28 is different from previous COPs and is effective in reality. 

Controversial even before it started

There were concerns regarding the credibility of the COP28 since the United Arab Emirates (UAE) was selected as the host of this crucial event. The host country, UAE, is one of the major oil producers, whereas the COP28 president, Dr. Sultan al-Jaber, is the head of the state-owned Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC). Consequently, it raised questions on whether the UAE and other oil-producing neighboring countries would help in meaningful climate change actions. 

The Gulf region, including the UAE, holds 20% of the global natural gas reserves and 30% of the total petroleum reserves. Recently, this region has experienced extreme climate challenges, again due to the huge usage of natural gas and oil. Even though it has taken some steps to diversify its economy, it still depends greatly on oil and gas exports. Thus, it created a debate around the reliability of the host country. On the contrary, based on some leaked documents, a BBC report claimed that the Emirates planned to use the event of COP28 to strike new oil and gas deals with 15 nations. That sparked further controversies around the COP28. 

Loss and Damage Fund

The Loss and Damage Fund was first agreed upon during the COP27 event, but it finally got operationalized on the first day of COP28. This agreement on a loss and damage fund has been created to compensate the world’s poorest countries for their losses due to climate change. 

Undoubtedly, it is a historical event. However, it is one of the most tricky and complicated adoptions to be taken care of. Developing countries have already expressed concern regarding this fund’s long-term implementation. The concern further rises as the World Bank will be an interim trustee here. Some argued that the World Bank, being the pre-existing trustee, would be able to facilitate the operationalization of the loss and damage fund. At the same time, other delegates have strongly opposed the decision. According to them, the World Bank has a history of charging unfair interest rates on loans in less developed countries. Thus, accepting it as the interim trustee is not a good sign. As per the G-77 countries, an independent organization free from all biases should be in this position to restore the trust of less resourceful countries. 

Another issue is the amount of pledges made by developed countries. Some developed countries pledged over USD 700 million. The COP28 host country, the UAE, has pledged $100 million. Some other notable funding pledges include $100 million from Germany, at least $51 million from the UK, $17.5 million from the US, and $10 million from Japan, while the European Union has committed $245.39 million. 

It seems quite beneficial at a glance. However, the actual scenario is the opposite. Developing countries need at least USD 400 billion per year to address the loss and damage due to climate change. These countries expect the fund to be able to program at least around USD 100 billion annually. Even if the whole pledged fund of USD 700 million is allocated in a year and more pledges may be accepted in the next year, it still would not cover close to 1% of the expected fund of developing countries. On the contrary, only 0.2% of the actual needs of USD 400 billion would be covered by this grant fund, and roughly 0.1% of the expectations of developing countries of USD 100 billion annually.

Not phasing out but transitioning away from fossil fuels

It is the first time around 200 countries have agreed to start decreasing global consumption of fossil fuels to avert the cons of climate change. It may be a signal of the eventual end of the oil age. The COP28 President Sultan al-Jaber called this deal a ‘historic’ event. Though this decision is important, criticisms are raised as the COP28 agreement omitted strong language like ‘phasing out oil, gas and coal use.’ Over 100 countries have lobbied hard to include such strong languages. However, a powerful opposition from the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) influenced the deal significantly. OPEC said that global carbon emissions can be controlled without imposing a hard focus on specific fuels. During one of his speeches, anger and frustration among the COP28 participants spread when the COP28 President claimed that there is no science behind the calls for a phase-out of fossil fuels. 

Now, the announced deal calls for transitioning away from fossil fuels to achieve net zero by, before, or around 2050 and keep the global temperature within the limit of 1.5°C. However, it is still unclear how this overarching aim would be achieved. The UAE and many other oil-producing countries have advocated for carbon capture. However, there are many questions regarding the effectiveness of the carbon capture system. 

Let’s first understand what carbon capture is. Many industrial facilities, including coal-fired power plants and ethanol plants, produce a lot of carbon capture. To control these carbon dioxide emissions, industrial factories can install equipment separating carbon dioxide from all other smokestack gases and permanently store it underground. Even those industries trying to decrease emissions release carbon dioxide to some extent. In this carbon capture system, the carbon released by different industrial facilities is then captured and concentrated into a form that can easily be transported in any vehicle or stored underground for the long term. According to Karl Hausker, a climate expert working to get net zero emissions at the World Resources Institute, this technology would effectively reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration. 

While this mitigating technology seems effective, it is expensive and still not fully ready to deploy. Around 40 large-scale carbon capture projects worldwide capture approximately 45 million metric tons of carbon emissions per year. Although it looks a lot in absolute value, it is roughly 0.1% of the global carbon dioxide emissions. The global carbon emission is 36.8 billion metric tons per the Global Carbon Project. According to some environmentalists, major oil-producing countries and fossil fuel companies are trying to impose an unnecessary focus on carbon capture to distract everyone from the urgent need to phase out fossil fuels, e.g., oil, gas, and coal. As per some climate experts, fossil fuel industries have proven to be dangerous, and the carbon capture system is not enough to control the damage done by these industries. 

In summary, the COP28 is a mixed bag; it is neither an outright win nor a loss. The final agreement does not go well with how some topics were discussed before. Thus, it has created loopholes for transitioning to clean energy. The call to ‘transition away from fossil fuels’ has created a lot of room for oil-producing companies and states that can be used detrimentally. However, the international consensus from COP28 is clear that the era of fossil fuels should end, and renewable energy is the ultimate future. Despite its shortcomings, the COP28 has created momentum to achieve the net zero emissions target and set the stage for further development. The 29th Conference of the Parties (COP) will be hosted in another oil state called Azerbaijan. Hopefully, it will allow us to verify whether the commitment to renewable energy is in progress and to tighten the existing loopholes.

Jinat Jahan Khan is a Senior Research Assistant at BRAC James P Grant School of Public Health. She is keenly interested in microeconomic research and has previously worked as a Research Associate at DataSense. She is also a Recipient of the Female Champions Fellowship by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Centre for Research and Development (CRD).

s-2017218216@econ.du.ac.bd