The Glasgow Treaty does not preclude an increase in temperature to + 2.7 C in 2100. COP26 concluded on Saturday, November 13 with an agreement to reduce ambitions. Descriptions.
One day late in the schedule, COP26, the United Nations Climate Conference, on Saturday adopted an agreement that included last-minute changes in coal, which provoked criticism from countries vulnerable to the effects of climate change.
The words of the coal part of the text were changed shortly before the last full session of the conference, India proposed to change the verb “Delete” (“Base Out” in English) by “Lack” (“Grid down”).
Lack of compensation
The text of the final announcements, compiled under the name Glasgow Climate Agreement, marks the first reduction in the use of fossil fuels, along with warnings and other concessions introduced by India. Member States are invited “Accelerate efforts to gradually reduce coal burning capacity without capture system (CO2) and inefficient fossil fuel subsidies”. The original text was substantially edited: it did not have the words “attempts towards efforts”, “likes settings” or “useless”.
When rich countries promise to give $ 100 billion a year to poor countries, break the promise of financial aid: “With great regret”, Notes the final statement, the promise has not been fulfilled. Compensation for “damage losses” The poor have not heard much about compensation for the devastating effects of droughts and storms already.
And if the declaration “Reaffirms” Purpose of the Paris Agreement “Continue efforts to control temperature rise to 1.5 C”, Glasgow recognizes that the deal will take a “Rapid, deep and lasting reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions”.
How? ‘Or’ What? The Paris Agreement guarantees each country greenhouse gas reduction targets, CDNs, and “nationally determined contributions”. By calling “Take into account national circumstances”, Text opens the door to many exceptions.
“Far from reflecting the urgency of the situation”
“Unfortunately, we find that this text is still far from reflecting the urgency of the situation. There is a huge gap between what we study and what science tells us.”, At the end of the contract, Arrow Mathew of the Climate Action Network expressed regret. For the NGO, it was COP26 “COPs of the North Reflect the Priorities of Rich Countries”. According to the United Nations, the planet cannot escape global warming “Disaster” 2.7 C at 2100. Other reactions: “COP26 is over. A quick review: Blah, blah, blah. But the real work continues outside of these rooms. We will never give up.”, Swedish activist Greta Dunberg tweeted. To climate expert Jean Joezel, “This is not a big COP. There are some interesting points in coal and methane, but this dynamic is not what we expected. […] We always put it off until next year.