MORE THAN a day after it was meant to finish, COP26 finally came to an end, with 197 parties agreeing to the newly-dubbed “Glasgow Climate Pact”. There were several notable achievements. Countries committed themselves to further accelerating their decarbonisation plans and, specifically, to strengthening their emissions-reduction targets for 2030 by next year, rather than in 2025 as per the five-year schedule set out under the Paris agreement. Developed countries were “urged” to double funding for adaptation in developing countries by 2025. Rules to create a framework for a global carbon market were approved, settling a problem that had plagued negotiators since 2015. The need to reduce global greenhouse-gas emissions by a whopping 45% by 2030 was formally recognised. Not the stuff of triumph; but not a trainwreck, either.
The closing moments, though, were hardly jubilant. Speaking from the floor of the final plenary India demanded that a particularly contentious clause be changed. Instead of a commitment toward “accelerating efforts towards the phase-out of unabated coal power and of inefficient subsidies for fossil fuels”, the country’s lead negotiator requested a call to escalate “efforts to phase down unabated coal power, and phase out inefficient fossil-fuel subsidies”.
This explicit acknowledgement of coal and fossil fuels as the main drivers of climate change had been celebrated as a major breakthrough. The European Union, Switzerland and many developing nations—which had previously strongly objected to the wording being watered down once through the qualifiers “unabated” and “inefficient”—expressed outrage. But they ultimately decided that they could not let it derail the agreement. Alok Sharma, the COP26 president, succumbed briefly to tears before gavelling the amended package through. “To all delegates, I apologise for the way in which this process has unfolded. I am deeply sorry,” he said. His voice broke as he concluded “But I think that, as you have noted, it is also vital we protect this package.”