Climate pledge to move away from fossil fuels is huge. There’s just one problem | Opinion
The 28th U.N. Climate Change Conference, known as COP28, recently concluded with what many are calling a historic deal: an agreement that seeks, for the first time, a global transition away from fossil fuels.
Perhaps even more remarkable is that this agreement was signed in the United Arab Emirates, a top-10 oil producer, and overseen by Dr. Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, the COP28 president and head of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company.
The deal paves the way for what environmentalists’ hope will be the “beginning of the end” of the fossil fuel era, and the deep emission cuts pledged at COP28 (coupled with substantially increased financing) are intended to set the world on that path. But it’s not words that impact the climate. It’s actions, and the money to fund them.
While COP28’s “transition away” language is stronger than COP27’s “phase down,” it certainly does not mean “phase out” as so many countries wanted. That’s why hydrocarbons will be a big part of the energy mix for at least decades to come. Consider some of the projects under way among the parties at COP28:
Europe will expand its capacity to import liquid natural gas by one-third by the end of 2024.
The United States is supporting significant oil and gas mergers and acquisitions.
Since the beginning of 2022, China has approved new coal plants producing up to 152 gigawatts, more than all the coal plants in the European Union combined.
India has set a target of doubling coal production by 2030.
The UK has issued 27 new hydrocarbon exploration licenses in the North Sea.
Norway has approved 19 oil and gas projects on the Norwegian continental shelf .
The current buildout of U.S. liquified natural gas infrastructure, intended to export the country’s plentiful gas, is the largest fossil-fuel expansion proposed in the world.
There is an emerging intellectual consensus that a full “phase out” of hydrocarbon production is neither practical nor desirable if the world is to continue to progress on grand challenges beyond climate — including social mobility and reducing poverty.
Ultimately, COP28 is a good step, as it advances the world’s commitment to funding the innovation needed to arrive at an “all of the above” approach to energy production. This will require every form of energy in a broad portfolio of solutions to meet the world’s demand in a way that is as environmentally sustainable as possible. Saying anything more idealistic would ignore the reality of the nexus between our environmental goals and our energy needs.
One positive result of COP28 is that all parties are required to submit stronger carbon-cutting plans by 2025. The impact would be particularly profound if China and India put a rapid transition to renewable energy at the forefront of their plans, but they’re not.
The agreement also calls on developed countries to lead the transition away from fossil fuels in a “just, orderly, and equitable manner.” But there is plenty of criticism here too, particularly from Pacific Island countries and territories that are most vulnerable to climate change. Notably, China’s vice environment minister, Zhao Yingmin, emphasized that developed countries bear historical responsibilities for climate change. In his closing speech, U.N. Climate Change Executive Secretary Simon Stiell called on governments and businesses to promptly translate pledges into tangible outcomes, without delay.
The reality is that energy transitions take time. They always have. And they cost money. Climate finance certainly took center stage at COP28, with total pledges to the Green Climate Fund reaching $12.8 billion from 31 countries, and commitments to related funds exceeding $174 million to date.
However, these financial pledges fall far short of the trillions that will eventually be needed to support developing countries with clean energy transitions. The World Resources Institute suggests that trillions annually will be necessary to achieve global climate goals. But the deal doesn’t compel countries to act, and no timescale is specified. It remains a monumental task.
The COP28 agreement makes clear that the transition to clean energy will require rich countries to lead in both action and the provision of finance, both from a technological and human capital standpoint. Simply put, investment in innovation will be the answer to this dilemma.
Each year, the world continues to increase its energy consumption, with our usage steadily rising and offsetting any progress achieved by renewable energy. We need an inclusive energy solution that encompasses fossil fuels for the foreseeable future, as it represents the responsible path towards a globally secure energy future.
The question that no one wants to answer and all will continue to mask in contradicting unrealistic policy notions is: “Do we care more about the planet or the people?”
Dr. Michael Slattery is Director of the Institute for Environmental Studies and Chair of the Department of Environmental and Sustainability Sciences and a Fellow in the Ralph Lowe Energy Institute at TCU. Dr. Ann Bluntzer is the executive director of Ralph Lowe Energy Institute and a professor at TCU’s Neeley School of Business.
