Much work still needs to be done at the crucial climate summit in Glasgow

Almost everyone wants to limit global warming, but can they agree on how? In Glasgow, it comes down to it.

In fact, politicians, armed with their climate ambitions, should have traveled to Glasgow last year and – exactly five years after the Paris climate summit – should have hit the ground running. But corona threw a spanner in the works. And so the climate summit was postponed for a year. A year later, however, there is still plenty to talk about. Because despite corona and all climate promises and ambitions, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is still increasing, according to the report earlier this week. Greenhouse Gas Bulletin of the World Meteorological Organization. And as long as the concentration of greenhouse gases rises, the temperature will also rise and the ambitious climate goals that the world set itself in Paris in 2015 seem to be getting further and further out of our reach.

Paris

Five years ago, countries worldwide promised to do everything they could to prevent the earth from warming more than 2 degrees Celsius. And it was even agreed to aim for a maximum warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. To achieve these ambitious climate goals, all participating countries made an individual commitment. They promised to take certain measures at the national level to work towards those climate goals. The Paris climate summit seemed – after years of diplomatic wrangling – to be a real victory; finally there were goals and promises. But compliance with this was disappointing, an international team of researchers concluded in the magazine last year Nature Communications. The countries’ commitments are not sufficient to achieve the emissions reductions needed to achieve the climate goals. And many countries also failed to fulfill those insufficient commitments.

Fill cavities

Not much has changed on the eve of the climate summit in Glasgow, according to Heleen van Soest, scientific researcher international climate policy at the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency and co-author of the study cited above. “We still see two holes. On the one hand, you have the implementation gap: the gap between what countries have promised and what they are doing. And on the other side the ambition gap. That is the gap between the promises countries have made and what really needs to be done to achieve the climate goals.” However, there is also some good news. “In the run-up to the summit, many countries have presented new climate plans, which are often more ambitious. This reduces the ambition gap – albeit very limited.” But that is certainly no reason to fly the flag; the current promises are far from sufficient to achieve the climate target of 1.5 degrees. For this, in fact, another 28 gigatons of CO2 equivalents must be shaved off the annual emissions.

In Glasgow, the ambition and implementation gap will have to be closed further. “More ambitious climate goals need to be set for 2030,” says Van Soest. “And in addition, the United Kingdom (which is organizing the summit together with Italy, ed.) has also called for agreements to be reached that lead to net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.”

Tying up loose ends

But there is still more work to be done. For example, after previous climate summits, there are still quite a few loose ends that urgently need to be tied up. Take it for example Paris Rulebook that prescribes how countries should work together towards the climate goals. Countries agree that this book of rules and guidelines should be published. And some of those rules and guidelines have already been agreed, but other chapters have yet to be negotiated. “For example, it has been agreed that countries must review and resubmit their national climate targets every five years. But there is still no agreement about the time steps in those goals: should countries set a climate goal for 2035 in 2030 or immediately for 2040?” Another point of attention is climate finance for developing countries. “Rich countries have pledged to release $100 billion each year to help developing countries with mitigation and climate adaptation.” But countries have not yet fulfilled that promise, and this should also be discussed in Glasgow.

Not enough

It is a crucial climate summit, says Van Soest. “Just excluding corona, this is the top that will take place five years after Paris.” And in Glasgow the conclusion will be drawn that five years after Paris we are not where we would have liked to be. “You see that more and more countries are on their way to achieving the climate goals. There will be more climate policy and countries will regulate more sectors. But when you add it all up, it just isn’t enough.”

There is nothing the government leaders and policymakers who gather in Glasgow can do to change that. But they can now determine where we will be in five years. “It would be nice if all countries submitted updated and preferably much more ambitious commitments,” says Van Soest. “And it would also be good if countries that have not yet done so express the ambition to work towards net zero emissions and thus immediately make concrete plans for the long term.” But the real work isn’t done in Glasgow in the end. “The most important thing is of course that the goals and ambitions become reality. And the implementation is done at home.”

Feasible

Whether the politicians take their promises and commitments out of their suitcases once at home and then actually get to work with them, remains to be seen, of course. But Van Soest is cautiously optimistic. “I think people have been aware of the urgency of the climate problem since Paris. And I also see many good developments: countries that are achieving their climate goals, large cities that are striving for net zero emissions and technological developments – in the field of solar panels, batteries and electric driving, for example – that are moving much faster than was thought possible.” At the same time, we must also be realistic. “That 1.5 degree becomes very complicated. A lot has to be done in a short time for that.” But the 2 degrees is certainly still within reach. “If you now add up everything that countries promise for 2050 and assume that they will actually implement it, then we are heading towards 2 degrees Celsius.”

from below

It is only logical that all eyes will be on the crucial climate summit in Glasgow next week. A lot is expected of politicians. But anyone who thinks that the climate can only be saved from above is wrong. Also from below there is increasing pressure from citizens and nature and environmental organizations that are increasingly visibly interfering with the climate crisis; they take to the streets to demonstrate against polluters or the pension funds that invest in them. Or they take those polluters or even the entire government to court. “Fortunately, it doesn’t just depend on the climate summits,” concludes Van Soest. “It is also very much necessary to make yourself heard as a citizen and to do your part as a consumer. This is how you show politicians that there is support for climate policy. Moreover, the climate crisis is such a big problem that action on all fronts is necessary.”

Next week the front will be temporarily in Glasgow and politicians will have to show what their promises are worth. “There is no shortage of goals,” says Van Soest. “But now it must be clear how we are going to achieve it.”