COP28 ends with tears, and a historic deal on transition away from fossil fuels

Dubai: The global climate talks have ended with a compromise text supporting a historic “transition away from fossil fuels”, but including support for the use of controversial abatement technologies such as carbon capture and storage.

The end of the negotiations came suddenly, a day after the talks were to have ended and after two marathon nights of tough talks between voting blocs wanting to see a “phase out” of fossil fuels and petro states wanting to ensure they were not mentioned in the document at all.

United Nations Climate Chief Simon Stiell (right) and COP28 President Sultan al-Jaber embrace at the COP28 Credit: AP

A few minutes after 11am (6pm AEDT) on Wednesday a plenary session was opened in which delegations were expected to respond to the draft text released earlier in the day. Instead, the COP president, Dr Sultan Al Jaber, declared that what he called the “UAE consensus” was endorsed without objection.

Despite years of activism and debate no COP text has ever specifically cited fossil fuels in the past, focusing instead on the need to reduce emissions without addressing their prime cause.

Parties have agreed to triple renewable energy capacity and double energy efficiency and formally launch a “loss and damage” fund to render financial assistance to help poorer climate-vulnerable nations.

“It is a plan that is led by the science. It is a balanced plan that tackles emissions and bridges the gap in adaptation ... It is built on compromise, it is strengthened by full inclusivity and it is enhanced by balance,” Al Jaber said.

The UN climate chief, Simon Stiell, said COP28 had achieved much of what the world needed it to do. He said without the UN climate treaty, the world would be headed for 5 degrees of warming compared with pre-industrial averages – “a death sentence for our species”.

As a result of action driven by the treaty, it was now headed for just less than 3 degrees.

Australian Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen, speaking on behalf of the so-called Umbrella Group of countries – a negotiating bloc including nations such as Australia, the US, the UK and Norway – said the consensus did not go as far as some countries wanted.

But he said it sent a clear signal that most of the world acknowledged “the reality that our future is in clean energy and the age of fossil fuels will end”.

On behalf of Australia he said that the agreement might not meet all the calls made by the Pacific for even more ambitious action, but that their voices were being heard.

Speaking with journalists later he acknowledged the disappointment of some Pacific observers and delegates that the compromise adopted included references to abatement of fossil fuels and carbon capture and storage technology, which they see a loophole that would allow for ongoing use of fossil fuels.

“This decision is not what everybody would have written themselves as they got off their plane, and that’s true of the Pacific as it’s true Saudi Arabia, but it is a clear direction.

“And for countries that are at the front line of climate change – their voices are being heard. And as far and as long as we have anything to do with it, they will continue to be heard, and continue to be heard even more loudly.”

After the decision was gaveled through a spokeswoman for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), Anne Rasmussen, addressed the plenary saying the group had not approved the final text and did not view it as strong enough, but did not formally object to it.

Her objection to the process was cheered by many delegates and applauded by Stiell.

“Thank you Samoa, we understand your concerns,” said Al Jaber in response.

Before the COP began, a growing majority of countries had wanted the final agreement to call on all states to phase out fossil fuels this decade to put the planet on a path to 1.5 degrees of warming.

But after early negotiations, a draft text appeared that stripped most such references from the document, prompting another furious round of overnight negotiations.

The agreed text “recognises the need for deep, rapid and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in line with 1.5 degrees pathways”.

It calls on parties to the United Nations climate treaty to “contribute to the following global efforts” including tripling renewable energy capacity and doubling the global average rate of energy efficiency improvements.

It includes a line calling for parties to “transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action this decade”.

But the inclusion of references to “carbon capture and storage” and “storage and abatement” disappointed and even angered nations and observers who argue those technologies are used to greenwash and extend the life of fossil fuels.

Climate scientist Bill Hare, chief of climate analysis and policy think tank Climate Analytics, described the document as “riddled with compromise” and said it failed to put the world on a path to holding warming to 1.5 degrees, which the COP’s presidency said had described as the meeting’s “north star”.

He said that a reference to the use of gas as a “transitional fuel” has been promoted by LNG and gas exporters, but he said overall it was an improvement on the previous text.

The reference to “transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems” echoed language used by Bowen in a crisis meeting at the conference, and a statement endorsed by Australia and its Pacific neighbours at the recent Pacific Islands Forum meeting.

Bowen used the language in an effort to keep the intent of “phase down” language intact even if some nations refused to consider endorsing the specific words.

In a statement, the Association of Small Island States welcomed references to science-based targets but said the agreement still did not put the planet on a path to 1.5 degrees.

Joseph Sikulu, Pacific director for the climate activist group 350.org, described the proposed agreement as a death sentence.

Tom Evans, a policy adviser at think tank E3G, said that it would show a collective recognition that the world must quickly turn away from fossil fuels.

“Champions for this vision – both small island states and major economies – have worked tirelessly overnight. However, it is clear that not everyone is ready to admit the truth of what’s needed.

“This text alone might help avoid disaster in Dubai, but it does not avoid disaster for the planet.”

The writer’s travel to Dubai was supported by Climate Action Network Australia.

Get to the heart of what’s happening with climate change and the environment. Sign up for our fortnightly Environment newsletter.