Berl Falbaum
In a recent column, I wrote that it was time to recite the last rites for the Earth as a habitable planet for humans and the animal kingdom.
I did not address dozens of insoluble environment issues but focused exclusively on global warming, pointing out that the goal of world powers is to keep temperatures below 1.5° Celsius (2.7° Fahrenheit), which is 0.4° higher than the increase in temperatures we already have experienced since the pre-industrial era (about the mid-1800s).
If we are burning up now — and we are — then, obviously, any increase will be even more devastating.
Given this scenario, I followed closely the 30th international summit meeting on the environment known as COP30 (the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change), which met in Belém, the capital in the state of Pará in northern Brazil, the gateway to the Amazon rainforest. The 11-day conference closed November 21.
Sadly, after every previous summit, the environment on the planet continued to deteriorate, despite all the dire warnings from numerous world leaders, including U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, who has cited a “code red” alarm for the Earth numerous times.
Well, COP30 proved to be no different. Overall, it was business — no meaningful business — as usual: Lots of speeches, “negotiations,” “promises,” but few, if any, definitive actions that will save the planet.
The most drastic flaw in the final agreement reached by some 200 countries participating was no mention of working toward a reduction in fossil fuels which account for 90 percent of CO2 emissions and are a major culprit in destroying the Earth.
Early in the meeting, a draft text included a resolution calling for “phasing out fossil fuels,” but pressure from Saudi Arabia, India, Russia and China, forced that wording to be deleted. (Worth noting: For the first time in 30 years, the U.S., the world’s second worst emitter of CO2 behind China, did not attend the meeting.)
Consider, this was just a nonbinding resolution, not a specific plan with timetables and financing. If simple words in a resolution cannot be accepted, how can we expect the world to ever launch a serious attack on the poisons killing the Earth?
“Under no circumstances are we going to accept this,” European Union (EU) Commissioner for Climate Wopke Hoekstra said in a statement before the final vote on the agreement.
The EU indicated it could “move beyond its comfort zone” on finance for developing nations, but only if proposals to cut planet-warming emissions were enacted. It was not to be despite the strenuous objections of 80 countries.
“These negotiations keep hitting a wall because wealthy nations profiting off polluting fossil fuels fail to offer the needed financial support to developing countries and any meaningful commitment to move first,” said Jean Su, energy justice director at the Center for Biological Diversity.
“…[T]his is the COP of truth,” said Daniela Durán González, a Colombian diplomat. “The truth cannot support an outcome that ignores the science.”
Added Ilan Zugman, Latin American and Caribbean director for 350.org, an environmental group: “The lack of concrete commitments in the final text of COP30 shows us who is still benefiting from the delay: the fossil fuel industry and the ultrarich, not those living the climate crisis every day,”
As I stated in the previous column, the politics and economics are too difficult to overcome.
COP30 officials touted achievements in increasing proposed — focus on “proposed” — financial aid to developing countries, totaling some $1 trillion, and several other initiatives to save forests and increase the use of clean energy.
But $1 trillion is just the proverbial drop in the bucket to what is actually needed and there is no guarantee that “rich” countries follow up on this obligation.
The agreed-upon deal does specify where the money would come from — wealthy nations themselves, banks or the private sector.
(An anti-deforestation initiative, the Tropical Forests Forever Facility, sought to raise $25 billion in public financing that would help countries protect forests. The result: the program received around $5 billion in pledges from small countries including Norway, Indonesia and France. Germany said it would “soon” contribute some funds.)
Most important, commitment to the agreement is not compulsory; there is no punishment for those who ignore the agreement they signed. It is all voluntary. We cannot be confident that any of the initiatives will be implemented. And if COP history tells us anything, it is we cannot expect any change of heart from anywhere in the world.
Too ironic to ignore: A major fire broke out on the grounds of the conference held at the doorstep of the Amazon Forest, which is considered the “lungs of the planet” because it absorbs CO2. Despite the obvious symbolism, the delegates also failed to adopt measures to protect the forest.
“The venue bursting into flames couldn’t be a more apt metaphor for COP30’s catastrophic failure to take concrete action to implement a funded and fair fossil fuel phaseout,” said Su.
COP 31 — the next Conference of Procrastination — will be held a year from now in Antalya, Turkey.
I did not address dozens of insoluble environment issues but focused exclusively on global warming, pointing out that the goal of world powers is to keep temperatures below 1.5° Celsius (2.7° Fahrenheit), which is 0.4° higher than the increase in temperatures we already have experienced since the pre-industrial era (about the mid-1800s).
If we are burning up now — and we are — then, obviously, any increase will be even more devastating.
Given this scenario, I followed closely the 30th international summit meeting on the environment known as COP30 (the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change), which met in Belém, the capital in the state of Pará in northern Brazil, the gateway to the Amazon rainforest. The 11-day conference closed November 21.
Sadly, after every previous summit, the environment on the planet continued to deteriorate, despite all the dire warnings from numerous world leaders, including U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, who has cited a “code red” alarm for the Earth numerous times.
Well, COP30 proved to be no different. Overall, it was business — no meaningful business — as usual: Lots of speeches, “negotiations,” “promises,” but few, if any, definitive actions that will save the planet.
The most drastic flaw in the final agreement reached by some 200 countries participating was no mention of working toward a reduction in fossil fuels which account for 90 percent of CO2 emissions and are a major culprit in destroying the Earth.
Early in the meeting, a draft text included a resolution calling for “phasing out fossil fuels,” but pressure from Saudi Arabia, India, Russia and China, forced that wording to be deleted. (Worth noting: For the first time in 30 years, the U.S., the world’s second worst emitter of CO2 behind China, did not attend the meeting.)
Consider, this was just a nonbinding resolution, not a specific plan with timetables and financing. If simple words in a resolution cannot be accepted, how can we expect the world to ever launch a serious attack on the poisons killing the Earth?
“Under no circumstances are we going to accept this,” European Union (EU) Commissioner for Climate Wopke Hoekstra said in a statement before the final vote on the agreement.
The EU indicated it could “move beyond its comfort zone” on finance for developing nations, but only if proposals to cut planet-warming emissions were enacted. It was not to be despite the strenuous objections of 80 countries.
“These negotiations keep hitting a wall because wealthy nations profiting off polluting fossil fuels fail to offer the needed financial support to developing countries and any meaningful commitment to move first,” said Jean Su, energy justice director at the Center for Biological Diversity.
“…[T]his is the COP of truth,” said Daniela Durán González, a Colombian diplomat. “The truth cannot support an outcome that ignores the science.”
Added Ilan Zugman, Latin American and Caribbean director for 350.org, an environmental group: “The lack of concrete commitments in the final text of COP30 shows us who is still benefiting from the delay: the fossil fuel industry and the ultrarich, not those living the climate crisis every day,”
As I stated in the previous column, the politics and economics are too difficult to overcome.
COP30 officials touted achievements in increasing proposed — focus on “proposed” — financial aid to developing countries, totaling some $1 trillion, and several other initiatives to save forests and increase the use of clean energy.
But $1 trillion is just the proverbial drop in the bucket to what is actually needed and there is no guarantee that “rich” countries follow up on this obligation.
The agreed-upon deal does specify where the money would come from — wealthy nations themselves, banks or the private sector.
(An anti-deforestation initiative, the Tropical Forests Forever Facility, sought to raise $25 billion in public financing that would help countries protect forests. The result: the program received around $5 billion in pledges from small countries including Norway, Indonesia and France. Germany said it would “soon” contribute some funds.)
Most important, commitment to the agreement is not compulsory; there is no punishment for those who ignore the agreement they signed. It is all voluntary. We cannot be confident that any of the initiatives will be implemented. And if COP history tells us anything, it is we cannot expect any change of heart from anywhere in the world.
Too ironic to ignore: A major fire broke out on the grounds of the conference held at the doorstep of the Amazon Forest, which is considered the “lungs of the planet” because it absorbs CO2. Despite the obvious symbolism, the delegates also failed to adopt measures to protect the forest.
“The venue bursting into flames couldn’t be a more apt metaphor for COP30’s catastrophic failure to take concrete action to implement a funded and fair fossil fuel phaseout,” said Su.
COP 31 — the next Conference of Procrastination — will be held a year from now in Antalya, Turkey.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://www.legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
