Dinesh C Sharma

Science commentator

The much-touted Glasgow climate conference came to an end with a watered-down deal, the Glasgow Climate Pact. After months of preparations and a fortnight of hectic negotiations, it would have been a pity if the conference was to end in a logjam or no-deal situation. The negotiators and environment ministers could deliver a deal in the extended hours, but it is weak and diluted to an extent that many have found it disappointing.

Ironically, India — which at the start of the conference was hailed for announcing a bold emission reduction plan and 2070 as the target year for achieving ‘net zero’ status — is being blamed for the below expectation outcome at Glasgow. India, along with China, South Africa and others, forced a critical change in the final agreement on the coal question. The Indian negotiators insisted on replacing ‘phase out’ with ‘phase down’ for coal in the draft. Since the intervention for change in the language was made by India’s Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav, on behalf of coal dependent countries, India is being portrayed as the villain for the weak deal. Irrespective of the merits of the decision, it is an embarrassing and rapid transformation from being a climate hero to a climate villain for a government so conscious of its image in the international media and diplomatic circles.

In the Paris Agreement six years ago, countries had agreed to make efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degree above pre-industrial levels. Glasgow has somehow kept the hopes of doing so alive, taking a tiny step towards that objective by mentioning the need to move away from coal as well as subsidies to dirty fuels. The pact cautiously calls for a transition to low-emission energy systems by “accelerating efforts towards the phase-down of unabated coal power and phase-out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies” while providing targeted support to the poor to ensure a just transition. The word ‘coal power’ has been prefixed with ‘unabated’ and the word ‘fossil fuel subsidies’ with ‘inefficient’. And everything has to be balanced with ‘just transition’. Every word in this paragraph on coal is conditional and open to interpretation. On top of it all, there is no target year fixed for ‘phase down’ of coal or getting rid of subsidies, and of course, no mention of oil and gas at all. This part of the deal is an unapologetic compromise to safeguard the interests of both the developing and developed countries.

At the same time, the very mention of coal in a climate change declaration is considered to be progress because it is the first time since negotiations began a quarter century ago that coal has been named. Following the Glasgow pact, coal stocks on global markets have tumbled a bit. The markets perhaps see the talk of ‘phase down’ as the beginning of the end of coal.

The second most important issue on agenda was climate finance — an issue flagged by India and other developing countries repeatedly. Accepting the responsibility for their historical greenhouse gas emissions, industrialised countries had pledged more than a decade ago to provide $100 billion annually to the global climate fund by 2020. This was to help developing countries in their transition to low-carbon scenario. The pledges have remained on paper. The Glasgow Pact reiterates the need for climate finance and has urged ‘developed country parties to fully deliver on the $100-billion goal urgently and through to 2025’ with transparency in the implementation of their pledges. On additional funding for climate adaptation, the pact urges developed country parties to ‘at least double their collective provision of climate finance’ from 2019 levels by 2025. For long-term finance, it has been decided to hold three high-level ministerial dialogues every two years, starting 2022. In sum, no tangible progress has been made on helping developing countries to move towards a low-carbon pathway or adapting to climate change already happening.

Article 6 of the Paris Agreement provided for conversion of emission reduction into tradable units which could be used for offsetting emissions through purchase. This was supposed to replace the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) that resulted from the now expired Kyoto Protocol. The issue of finalising rules relating to the new mechanism on carbon credits has been hanging fire since 2015. A set of complex rules has been finally adapted at Glasgow though doubts remain if the elaborate credit accounting and trading framework would lead to any real emission reduction at all. A huge unsettled block of credits from the CDM period also needs to be addressed. Another vexed issue that evaded a solution was compensating the poor countries for the loss and the damage they are suffering due to the impacts of climate change such as extreme weather events.

The Modi government has taken a position on key climate related issues at Glasgow. It has promised a massive one billion tonnes’ reduction in emissions by 2030, a radical shift to renewables, a net-zero target for 2070 and a coal phase-down. It has, however, remained non-committal on two other key issues that cropped up on the sidelines of COP26 — methane emission reduction and deforestation. The global methane pledge, a voluntary plan initiated by the European Union, seeks to slash methane emissions by 30 per cent compared with the 2020 levels. Over 100 countries signed this pledge. Another pledge that India stayed away from is the ‘Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use’ that seeks to ‘halt deforestation’ by 2030. About 130 countries have signed this.

It is high time the government takes steps to walk the talk on the domestic front. It should initiate dialogue to prepare a comprehensive climate change policy, national and sectoral roadmaps for ‘net zero’ and a new climate action plan. The existing National Action Plan on Climate Change was unveiled in 2008. Following this, states were asked to prepare state climate action plans. Both national and state plans need a thorough review in the light of new realities and commitments made by the present government.