Climate summit draft agreement omits reference to phasing out fossil fuels
Newly released draft agreement at COP28 climate talks sparks disappointment among climate groups, observers, and nations advocating for more robust language as it omits any mention of a phase-out of fossil fuels
The latest draft of the core agreement for the COP28 climate talks, released on Monday, has omitted the call to gradually eliminate fossil fuels, which are the primary cause of the climate crisis. This represents a softening of previous versions and appears to be a compromise to satisfy oil-producing nations that had resisted the proposal.
Over 100 countries participating in the Dubai talks had backed the language advocating for the phase-out of fossil fuels, and it is expected that many of them will express their opposition to the revised draft during the upcoming plenary session. If the current draft fails to gain widespread support, it is possible that negotiators will need to resume discussions.
Previous versions of the draft included multiple proposals for countries to gradually eliminate climate-polluting oil, gas, and coal, a promising indication that this year's summit agreement would be more robust than in past years.
A new option in the current draft urges countries to address the reduction of emissions that contribute to global warming, offering a range of possibilities such as "reducing both the use and production of fossil fuels in a fair, methodical, and equitable manner in order to achieve net zero emissions by, before, or around 2050 in alignment with scientific findings."
CNN
As climate change intensifies, which countries are the top polluters? The conference is set to conclude on Tuesday, but the controversial new draft, which deviates significantly from the desires of many nations in Dubai, may prolong one of the most high-stakes conferences in its almost thirty-year history.
The draft for Monday's publication was delayed by more than six hours following extensive negotiations. Harjeet Singh, the head of global political strategy at Climate Action Network International, expressed disappointment, describing the latest draft as "a significant regression" from earlier versions.
According to him, the surprising change in language avoids directly addressing the phase-out of fossil fuels and instead makes a vague commitment to reducing both consumption and production by 2050. This shift reflects the significant influence of the fossil fuel industry's lobbying on shaping global policies to support continued use of fossil fuels.
Rachel Cleetus, the policy director and a lead economist for the Climate and Energy Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, expressed deep disappointment with the draft agreement, stating that it falls far short of the level of ambition needed to address the global climate crisis.
She said the draft includes a large "could" qualifier at the top, which means that all the actions listed are optional for nations and contains numerous loopholes, such as the absence of meaningful timelines.
In contrast, Mohamed Adow, director of climate think tank Power Shift Africa, expressed optimism, stating, "We are cooking a fossil-free meal here in Dubai. People may debate whether it's the right recipe, but the important thing is that all the necessary ingredients are present."
This is a developing story and it will be updated.
