Leaders in Glasgow weaken on coal pledge

World leaders have backed down from scrubbing out coal and fossil fuels from future energy mixes as marathon talks roll on.

Youth climate activists protest as they build a human corridor. Picture: Getty Images

World leaders have backed down from scrubbing out coal and fossil fuels from future energy mixes, instead looking to accelerate phasing out unabated coal power and inefficient subsidies for fossil fuels in the latest draft statement at the COP26 climate summit.

Environmentalists have welcomed that reduction of coal and fossil fuels has remained a key component of the Glasgow summit outcomes, but warned countries could simply argue that their subsidies are “efficient”.

The British presidency of the COP26 climate talks said late Friday it intended to work through the night, aiming to close the marathon negotiation with a global deal on Saturday.

The meeting has already overshot its scheduled finish, with major fault lines still between rich and poor nations on who should foot the bill for the planetary crisis.

UK minister Alok Sharma said he planned to release the text of a new draft deal on Saturday, “based on the consultations that are ongoing” through the night.

“I will then convene a short informal plenary meeting in the morning, at a time to be confirmed but the meeting will not take place before 10am (GMT),” he said in a message to delegates.

“I envisage formal plenary meetings in the afternoon to adopt decisions and close the session on Saturday,” Sharma added

A previous draft had called on nations to accelerate the phasing out of “all coal and fossil fuel subsidies”, but the latest version calls for phasing out of “unabated coal power and of inefficient subsidies for fossil fuels”.

In the past few days the big coal-producing nations, including Australia, succeeded in diluting the text and striking at the heart of Boris Johnson’s hopes for a bold summit flourish.

COP26 president Alok Sharma had earlier proclaimed the “end of coal is in sight”, pointing to deals to choke international coal financing and phase out domestic coal power. The other big attempts of the summit – to bring countries back to the table within 12 months to elevate their 2030 ambitions and to provide more than $100bn a year for developing countries – have also been watered down.

Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said there has been some “incremental progress”, but added: “If I was a young person looking into this summit right now I would say it’s not good enough.”

Greenpeace International executive director Jennifer Morgan said the “fingerprints” of the fossil-fuel interests were obvious and called on negotiators to dilute the influence of governments who have come to “wreck progress”, urging them to instead listen to the calls of youth and vulnerable nations.

Jean Su, energy justice director at the Centre for Biological Diversity, said the COP26 summit had suffered a major blow because “the final language throws a lifeline to climate-killing fossil fuels through carbon capture technologies and continued subsidies to oil, gas and coal”.

Sara Shaw, climate justice and energy co-coordinator for Friends of the Earth International, said: “We are witnessing the ‘great Glasgow get-out’.”

She was critical of the flashy announcements “full of caveats and loopholes”, noting that while rich countries and the UK COP presidency were rushing to close a deal that heaps responsibility for emissions cuts on developing countries, it was without providing the money they need to move away from fossil fuels.

In the Bahamas, Prime Minister Philip Davis said COP decisions were “a lot of fancy words, without any teeth to them”.

Australia and other countries who came to Glasgow without having improved their 2030 ambitions will now be invited “to consider further actions to reduce by 2030 non-carbon dioxide greenhouse gas emissions, including methane”.

Australian scientist Simon Bradshaw from the Climate Council said: “Once again, the message to Australia is unequivocal: come back in 2022 with a much stronger target for 2030 and a plan to move beyond coal and gas.”

He said it was “extremely disappointing, albeit predictable, to see the Australian government working to weaken this text”.

Dr Bradshaw added: “The government’s actions here are against our national interest, ignore the wishes of the vast majority of Australians, and risk harming our future security and prosperity, not to mention our children and the very future of our planet.”

Senior ministers and negotiators were continuing over the weekend to hammer out the final phasing of the draft to be able to deliver a final cover statement for the COP26 as countries continued to squabble.

The UK’s goal as host of reducing global warming as quickly as possible and keeping “1.5C alive” was “on life support’’, according to the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. “Promises ring hollow when the fossil fuels industry still receives trillions in subsidies,” he said.

The latest draft, released on Friday, noted “with deep regret” that developed countries had not mobilised $100bn a year for developing countries, and urged countries to fully deliver on the goal urgently and through to 2025. It said climate finance has to be mobilised for all sources to reach a level to achieve Paris Agreement goals.

This point is particularly controversial because developed countries are responsible for most greenhouse gas emissions but developing countries see the worst effects of climate change. Developing countries also argued that developed countries have seen the massive benefits of industrialisation, while they are being denied the same advantages.

Insiders said during Thursday’s negotiations Russia and Saudi Arabia had been trying to block any mention of phasing out coal, or reducing government subsidies to fossil fuels, a position supported by Australia, India and China. But the latest text, if adopted in the final statement, would allow Australia’s fossil fuel production to continue, and to subsidise efforts to mitigate carbon emissions through carbon capture and storage. It would allow countries to use so-called “blue hydrogen’’, which uses fossil fuels to make hydrogen, as opposed to using renewables to make green hydrogen, which is the cause of much debate.

Environmental groups claim that burning fossil fuels to make hydrogen produces more carbon than if it was just allowed to burn.

Meanwhile, British climate think tank Ember said the wealthiest countries remained among the worst coal-power emitters per head of population.

Australia topped the list, with annual per person emissions five times greater than the global average and 40 per cent higher than any other major coal-power user, Ember said.

Australia emitted 5.34 tonnes of carbon dioxide per person each year, placing it ahead of South Korea (3.81), South Africa (3.19), the US (3.08) and the world’s biggest emitter, China (2.71).