WEBVTT - COP26 report card: Progress but yet more room for improvement? | EP 56 0:00:00.040 --> 0:00:03.170 the following is a CNN a podcast. May I just 0:00:03.170 --> 0:00:05.729 say to all delegates, I 0:00:05.730 --> 0:00:07.170 apologize for 0:00:07.180 --> 0:00:10.610 the way this process has unfolded and I'm deeply 0:00:10.610 --> 0:00:11.530 sorry, I 0:00:11.530 --> 0:00:14.990 also understand the deep disappointment but I think as you 0:00:14.990 --> 0:00:20.350 have noted it's also vital that we protect this package. 0:00:21.040 --> 0:00:24.759 Welcome back to the climate conversations. I'm Jamie ho and 0:00:24.760 --> 0:00:28.500 that was president of the last conference of parties. Alok 0:00:28.500 --> 0:00:31.889 Sharma so cop 26 is over and all eyes on 0:00:31.890 --> 0:00:33.460 the next year in Egypt. 0:00:33.740 --> 0:00:36.470 So the expectations of the world on Glasgow, just what 0:00:36.470 --> 0:00:40.390 did the two week conference achieve? We've heard analogies are plenty. 0:00:40.400 --> 0:00:43.890 The goal of keeping temperature increases to 1.5 degrees Celsius 0:00:43.900 --> 0:00:47.319 is alive but its pulse this week. Besides that, what 0:00:47.320 --> 0:00:49.870 did the nearly 200 countries and parties to the UN's 0:00:49.870 --> 0:00:54.210 climate convention achieve where they did fall below expectations. It's 0:00:54.210 --> 0:00:55.990 been said that the can has been kicked down the 0:00:55.990 --> 0:00:58.460 road at least two next year and a new president 0:00:58.460 --> 0:01:01.640 to guide negotiations. But can we really afford to do 0:01:01.640 --> 0:01:02.150 that 0:01:02.540 --> 0:01:06.940 with me to discuss? This is Melissa law research fellow 0:01:06.940 --> 0:01:09.350 at the N. U. S. Energy Studies Institute 0:01:09.740 --> 0:01:13.020 Having participated in previous cops for over a decade. Melissa 0:01:13.020 --> 0:01:16.820 this time has been tracking 26 negotiations from home Melissa. 0:01:16.819 --> 0:01:17.479 Welcome 0:01:17.490 --> 0:01:19.720 Jamie, thanks for having me. It's a pleasure to be here. 0:01:19.730 --> 0:01:21.800 You're a cop veteran. You've been to? I don't know 0:01:21.800 --> 0:01:25.080 how many now in the past and you apparently weren't 0:01:25.090 --> 0:01:27.750 in Glasgow, tell us why you didn't go this time 0:01:27.750 --> 0:01:29.920 and what it was like keeping track of things all 0:01:29.920 --> 0:01:30.650 the way from here. 0:01:30.840 --> 0:01:34.600 I decided not to go to Glasgow this year? First? 0:01:34.600 --> 0:01:37.899 Of course I needed a break. I have travel anxiety, 0:01:37.910 --> 0:01:41.069 but also because I decided to save my emissions, not 0:01:41.069 --> 0:01:46.050 go to Glasgow. Yes, and also because the presidency promised 0:01:46.060 --> 0:01:49.580 a virtual platform, the cop 26 virtual platform and all 0:01:49.580 --> 0:01:50.960 of us who are credited, 0:01:51.040 --> 0:01:54.840 we have access to this platform, so I was accredited 0:01:54.840 --> 0:01:57.360 and I decided to go on. However, 0:01:57.740 --> 0:02:01.580 there were quite a few technical glitches in the first week, 0:02:01.590 --> 0:02:04.580 which meant that some of us observing from afar, we're 0:02:04.580 --> 0:02:07.060 not really able to go in, but it's okay. I'm 0:02:07.070 --> 0:02:09.180 on quite a number of mailing lists and there were 0:02:09.180 --> 0:02:11.950 people updating about the car, you know, what was happening 0:02:11.950 --> 0:02:14.950 inside the Scottish event campus. So there was no shortage 0:02:14.950 --> 0:02:16.959 of information coming out of Glasgow, 0:02:17.139 --> 0:02:19.049 I will take it that you were then at least 0:02:19.050 --> 0:02:23.279 able to keep track of things unfold on a daily basis. 0:02:23.290 --> 0:02:26.860 Right back to the substance Glasgow was meant to be 0:02:26.870 --> 0:02:30.250 a really big caught, the one after paris in 2015 0:02:30.250 --> 0:02:33.230 that would operationalize many of the decisions from paris. There 0:02:33.230 --> 0:02:35.610 was so much riding on it now, we've had a 0:02:35.610 --> 0:02:38.639 few days to digest it, a few days to read 0:02:38.639 --> 0:02:40.750 through all the reports, what's your take 0:02:41.040 --> 0:02:44.250 on what happened? It's not exactly a definitive moment for 0:02:44.250 --> 0:02:47.860 concerted climate action that we'd all maybe hopeful. But in 0:02:47.860 --> 0:02:49.950 your eyes, were there really big surprises, 0:02:50.040 --> 0:02:52.180 maybe a few wins, then what's your take on the 0:02:52.180 --> 0:02:53.990 biggest disappointments? You 0:02:53.990 --> 0:02:56.470 Just need to Google Cop 26 and you'll know right. 0:02:56.470 --> 0:02:59.290 A lot of mixed reactions about whether the cup was 0:02:59.290 --> 0:03:02.900 a success or failure. I personally think that there were 0:03:02.900 --> 0:03:05.760 some winds but there were also a number of disappointments. 0:03:06.139 --> 0:03:08.730 I think for me one of the big winds was 0:03:08.730 --> 0:03:13.190 that the U. K. Really displayed great diplomacy and they 0:03:13.200 --> 0:03:17.490 managed to invite some 120 world leaders and these world 0:03:17.490 --> 0:03:20.500 leaders attended something called the World Leaders Summit on the 0:03:20.500 --> 0:03:24.120 1st and 2nd of november, the UK presidency said these 0:03:24.120 --> 0:03:27.950 were decorations on coal, cars, cash and trees. 0:03:28.139 --> 0:03:31.200 It also includes maintain some of the big declarations, if 0:03:31.200 --> 0:03:33.829 you don't mind, I'll just share here. Was that a 0:03:33.840 --> 0:03:36.339 number of countries, I think something like 42 of them 0:03:36.340 --> 0:03:39.600 have set coal phase out dates and also they have 0:03:39.600 --> 0:03:43.080 publicly announced that they would end finance or coal. And 0:03:43.080 --> 0:03:47.360 then for cars over 20 countries also signed some pledge 0:03:47.440 --> 0:03:51.230 By 2035 that they would actually have zero emission cars 0:03:51.240 --> 0:03:54.170 on the roads. But then some of the observers have 0:03:54.170 --> 0:03:57.600 pointed out that major car manufacturers such as like Germany 0:03:57.610 --> 0:04:01.790 China France, Japan and us have not joined this declaration. 0:04:01.800 --> 0:04:04.900 There was also something on forests. Very, very big news 0:04:04.910 --> 0:04:06.060 about forests. 0:04:06.340 --> 0:04:11.560 141 countries actually pledged to halt and reverse deforestation 0:04:11.640 --> 0:04:15.420 By 2030 or within the decade and that's significant. There 0:04:15.420 --> 0:04:18.880 was another one on methane where over 100 countries agreed 0:04:18.880 --> 0:04:21.910 to reduce methane emissions. You know maintain emissions got a 0:04:21.910 --> 0:04:24.979 higher global warming potential than carbon dioxide. So they've agreed 0:04:24.980 --> 0:04:29.550 to reduce this by 30% from 2020 levels by the 0:04:29.550 --> 0:04:31.270 end of the decade as well. And there was quite 0:04:31.270 --> 0:04:33.450 a bit of money I think 328 million 0:04:33.540 --> 0:04:36.380 pledged by a number of philanthropies to to tackle methane 0:04:36.380 --> 0:04:39.380 as well. What was really surprising actually for me was 0:04:39.390 --> 0:04:44.300 the US china joint Glasgow declaration on enhancing climb action 0:04:44.300 --> 0:04:47.339 in the 2020. This was really big. I think nobody 0:04:47.339 --> 0:04:50.310 really saw it coming. It was a surprise announcement in 0:04:50.310 --> 0:04:51.260 the second week 0:04:51.440 --> 0:04:53.660 and in fact this was the same people 0:04:53.740 --> 0:04:58.990 that made some announcements about US china called a collaboration prepare. 0:04:58.990 --> 0:05:02.080 It's right so this is us special envoy john Kerry 0:05:02.080 --> 0:05:05.140 and his chinese counterpart Seattle wa There was a bit 0:05:05.140 --> 0:05:07.420 of a gap in the last four years for the U. S. 0:05:07.430 --> 0:05:10.750 But I think a lot of people were pleasantly surprised 0:05:10.839 --> 0:05:14.100 that the U. S. And china decided to collaborate and 0:05:14.100 --> 0:05:14.860 I think it really 0:05:14.940 --> 0:05:17.190 took us over the finish line. So those are a 0:05:17.190 --> 0:05:19.360 couple of the winds. I feel maybe I just mentioned 0:05:19.360 --> 0:05:23.580 one more ahead of cop 26 2020 was supposed to 0:05:23.580 --> 0:05:26.470 have been the year of cop 26 it was also 0:05:26.470 --> 0:05:30.930 the year where the updated climate pledges or nationally determined 0:05:30.930 --> 0:05:34.859 contributions were due because of the covid 19 pandemic. 0:05:35.140 --> 0:05:37.859 The submissions were fine and few between 0:05:38.040 --> 0:05:41.390 last year. We were really hoping that countries would step 0:05:41.390 --> 0:05:44.170 up this year and ahead of cop 26 submit all 0:05:44.170 --> 0:05:47.090 of the updated pledges by the end of cop 26. 0:05:47.089 --> 0:05:50.080 We had something like 100 and 50 over countries who 0:05:50.080 --> 0:05:54.710 had submitted the updated NBC's. This is important because this 0:05:54.710 --> 0:05:57.450 shows commitment to the paris agreement. It shows commitment to 0:05:57.450 --> 0:05:58.650 the process. 0:05:58.940 --> 0:06:01.940 And we also saw a number of net zero commitments 0:06:01.940 --> 0:06:04.980 grow ahead of the cop. I mean there were really 0:06:04.980 --> 0:06:08.390 some surprising names right countries that came up with net 0:06:08.390 --> 0:06:12.240 zero targets. These are arab countries in the week prior 0:06:12.240 --> 0:06:14.650 to cop the U. A. E. United arab Emirates who 0:06:14.650 --> 0:06:17.260 will host cop 28 in 2023. 0:06:17.440 --> 0:06:21.130 They had announced a net zero target by 2050. And 0:06:21.130 --> 0:06:24.950 Saudi Arabia also committed to net zero emissions by 2060. 0:06:24.960 --> 0:06:29.970 Even India also committed to net zero by 2070 during 0:06:29.970 --> 0:06:33.490 the cup itself. So with some of these additional commitments, 0:06:33.500 --> 0:06:36.900 the international Energy agency actually put out some very early 0:06:36.900 --> 0:06:39.370 estimates saying that we might be able to keep global 0:06:39.370 --> 0:06:41.650 warming to about 1.8 degrees 0:06:41.740 --> 0:06:45.150 Celsius. But then some experts have also said that there 0:06:45.150 --> 0:06:47.109 may be a bit too optimistic. So we'll see what 0:06:47.110 --> 0:06:49.589 the data analysis comes up in the coming days and weeks. 0:06:49.600 --> 0:06:52.180 All of this was kind of a result of the 0:06:52.180 --> 0:06:54.460 big push because of the I. P. C. C. The 0:06:54.460 --> 0:06:57.490 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had released a report in 0:06:57.490 --> 0:07:00.929 august so it's really timely. This is the working group. 0:07:00.930 --> 0:07:01.750 One report 0:07:01.940 --> 0:07:04.940 that report said that it's really urgent climate crisis is 0:07:04.940 --> 0:07:06.050 happening and we must act 0:07:06.640 --> 0:07:08.940 For me, those were the major issues going in to 0:07:08.940 --> 0:07:10.670 the carbon at the car. But of course for me, 0:07:10.670 --> 0:07:14.200 the biggest win was the completion of the Paris rulebook. 0:07:14.210 --> 0:07:18.070 Uh and you see issues like common timeframes reporting tables 0:07:18.070 --> 0:07:22.780 for transparency and Article six all concluded thankfully at this car. 0:07:22.780 --> 0:07:25.060 And that kind of means that we have 0:07:25.140 --> 0:07:27.990 the full set of rules and we can move on 0:07:27.990 --> 0:07:29.300 and get to implementation. 0:07:29.310 --> 0:07:31.860 Well you've definitely laid it all out. But as you 0:07:31.860 --> 0:07:35.430 were speaking then, I sort of see two sets of 0:07:35.440 --> 0:07:39.130 issues and decisions and news that came out over the 0:07:39.130 --> 0:07:42.510 last two weeks. And I suppose one part of the 0:07:42.510 --> 0:07:43.260 part of 0:07:43.340 --> 0:07:46.720 things that happened were sort of things not necessarily related 0:07:46.720 --> 0:07:49.590 to the formal negotiations at the U N F triple C. 0:07:49.600 --> 0:07:52.550 So all the declarations that came, for example, all the 0:07:52.550 --> 0:07:57.760 leaders declarations that came before negotiators actually started negotiating. And 0:07:57.760 --> 0:08:00.340 we had as you say, all the announcements of methane 0:08:00.340 --> 0:08:04.070 and the forestation, even the US china announcement as well, 0:08:04.080 --> 0:08:06.520 which was kind of separate from the negotiations. But as 0:08:06.520 --> 0:08:09.559 you say, may have provided some impetus for the talks. 0:08:09.740 --> 0:08:10.820 Do you think all 0:08:10.820 --> 0:08:13.250 that happening in parallel had 0:08:13.340 --> 0:08:18.180 significant enough impact on the actual formal negotiations as they 0:08:18.180 --> 0:08:22.020 looked at really decision text for example, which all negotiators 0:08:22.030 --> 0:08:25.170 looked towards and the world looks towards as well. Was 0:08:25.170 --> 0:08:27.790 that enough? And do you think that adds to the 0:08:27.790 --> 0:08:28.980 decision or does it 0:08:28.980 --> 0:08:31.940 actually detract from some of the more concrete things that 0:08:31.940 --> 0:08:35.200 people had hoped that all parties to the U N. F. 0:08:35.200 --> 0:08:37.160 To percy would agree to? Because as you say, there 0:08:37.160 --> 0:08:39.250 was some disappointing parts to it as well. 0:08:39.260 --> 0:08:42.120 Yeah. So you're right, Jamie, I think there were some 0:08:42.130 --> 0:08:45.900 people who felt that these big declarations on cold cash 0:08:45.900 --> 0:08:49.640 cars and trees were considered site deals by the UK 0:08:49.640 --> 0:08:52.910 presidency and there were certainly not formally part of the 0:08:52.910 --> 0:08:55.309 U N F C C C process. I think some 0:08:55.309 --> 0:08:58.500 people also felt that the leaders being in week one 0:08:58.510 --> 0:09:01.890 at the conference actually reduce access a little bit more 0:09:01.890 --> 0:09:05.319 as well because of all the security detail around some 0:09:05.320 --> 0:09:08.550 of these world leaders, the access for observers going into 0:09:08.550 --> 0:09:13.010 the negotiating routes was even smaller. We also know that 0:09:13.020 --> 0:09:15.760 these countries that made these declarations, 0:09:15.840 --> 0:09:18.590 they haven't actually included these in the N D C. S. Right? 0:09:18.590 --> 0:09:20.550 The nationally determined contributions. 0:09:20.640 --> 0:09:22.819 So how will they be held accountable? 0:09:22.830 --> 0:09:23.450 You 0:09:23.450 --> 0:09:27.090 Know, fulfilling these targets as well. And I talked about 0:09:27.090 --> 0:09:30.059 net zero and yourself alluded to it as well. These 0:09:30.059 --> 0:09:33.380 are big dreams, right? Net zero by 2050 it somewhere 0:09:33.380 --> 0:09:35.890 where 30 years away. And we just don't have the 0:09:35.890 --> 0:09:39.059 time or the carbon budget to wait that long. 0:09:39.340 --> 0:09:42.360 Many members of civil society, maybe even some governments 0:09:42.440 --> 0:09:46.429 are really upset right about this are disappointed because I 0:09:46.429 --> 0:09:50.109 read somewhere it's called like a betrayal. And uh so 0:09:50.110 --> 0:09:52.290 there were many countries also who said that there could 0:09:52.290 --> 0:09:55.420 have been more balance in the agenda. So heavily focused 0:09:55.420 --> 0:09:59.360 on mitigation while other issues are adaptation and loss and 0:09:59.360 --> 0:10:01.760 damage finance were actually sidelined 0:10:02.040 --> 0:10:03.660 because of the nature of 0:10:03.740 --> 0:10:08.439 wanting to finalize the paris agreement rules as it were. 0:10:08.450 --> 0:10:11.970 Yeah, I wanted to jump in on a couple of numbers. Okay. 0:10:11.970 --> 0:10:16.229 And I'll use your experience having observed these negotiations over 0:10:16.240 --> 0:10:19.010 maybe even more than a decade and that's basically the 0:10:19.010 --> 0:10:22.660 1.5 degree aspiration and go versus the two degree 0:10:22.840 --> 0:10:24.160 aspiration angle. 0:10:24.340 --> 0:10:28.839 You see different perspectives and where people lie on the spectrum, right? 0:10:28.850 --> 0:10:32.350 Some will feel that you know, 1.5 really is on 0:10:32.350 --> 0:10:36.059 life support. You know, hopefully they'll get there but maybe not. 0:10:36.070 --> 0:10:39.689 But there's some voices as well which are on the 0:10:39.700 --> 0:10:43.910 optimistic side say that actually is now entrenched in the U.N.F. 0:10:43.910 --> 0:10:46.740 people see in the global sort of mindset and 0:10:46.740 --> 0:10:47.770 No one's really talking about two 0:10:47.770 --> 0:10:51.250 degrees anymore. It's not aspiring for 1.5 degrees. Even if 0:10:51.250 --> 0:10:53.950 it's going to be tough. What's your take, having seen 0:10:53.950 --> 0:10:57.370 how over the last 10, 12 years people have spoken 0:10:57.370 --> 0:10:59.839 about 1.5 or two degrees that you know, how would 0:10:59.840 --> 0:11:04.280 you conceptualize and contextualized where we are now compared to 0:11:04.280 --> 0:11:04.880 back then, 0:11:04.890 --> 0:11:07.060 since paris we've certainly seen 0:11:07.240 --> 0:11:10.830 More focused on 1.5 as opposed to 2°, even though 0:11:10.830 --> 0:11:12.550 2° is also enshrined 0:11:12.640 --> 0:11:15.760 as you know, in the paris agreement, there was a quote, 0:11:15.770 --> 0:11:20.690 I think the representative from kenya who said that 1.5 0:11:20.700 --> 0:11:23.480 is unacceptable even to them because it feels something like 0:11:23.480 --> 0:11:25.940 three degrees on the ground and they will experience it 0:11:25.940 --> 0:11:28.530 very differently from a country that might be able to 0:11:28.530 --> 0:11:31.090 adapt to the level of temperature increase. And of course, 0:11:31.090 --> 0:11:33.850 it's an existential issue for small islands 0:11:34.140 --> 0:11:36.280 And I remind you of Singapore is a small island 0:11:36.280 --> 0:11:39.730 as well. So those of us who are acceptable to 0:11:39.730 --> 0:11:41.800 sea level, right? I think we really don't have time 0:11:41.800 --> 0:11:45.670 to waste and 1.5 shouldn't be an aspiration. It is 0:11:45.679 --> 0:11:48.840 a threshold beyond which I think the adverse effects of 0:11:48.840 --> 0:11:51.020 climate change will really be felt and it really is 0:11:51.020 --> 0:11:52.460 being felt this year even 0:11:52.540 --> 0:11:55.559 And the preceding years. So it's really important that we 0:11:55.570 --> 0:11:58.660 stay true to this. 1.5. I do see, as you 0:11:58.660 --> 0:12:00.939 said that there's been a lot of focus, we are 0:12:00.940 --> 0:12:03.980 now focusing more on 1.5 as opposed to two degrees 0:12:03.980 --> 0:12:07.220 because we recognize that the world vulnerable are really going 0:12:07.220 --> 0:12:10.360 to bear the brunt of climate effects. I do see 0:12:10.370 --> 0:12:12.250 more of it these days. 0:12:12.440 --> 0:12:15.260 But the thing is this, there is more attention on it, 0:12:15.340 --> 0:12:18.380 But it's just barely there. And a big part of 0:12:18.380 --> 0:12:22.010 really getting to 1.5, therefore, is everyone really coming up 0:12:22.010 --> 0:12:25.860 with stronger and more ambitious at DCs correct. I suppose 0:12:25.860 --> 0:12:28.179 one of the things that this car agreed to at 0:12:28.179 --> 0:12:31.660 least was that people will come back next year with 0:12:31.740 --> 0:12:36.250 potentially more and hopefully more ambitious targets, was this something 0:12:36.250 --> 0:12:38.430 of a surprise to you that people agree to come 0:12:38.429 --> 0:12:40.160 back so soon? Or did you 0:12:40.240 --> 0:12:43.770 for see some degree of reticence and maybe not total 0:12:43.770 --> 0:12:46.100 agreement that they would come back so soon, given what 0:12:46.100 --> 0:12:47.490 was decided in paris, 0:12:47.500 --> 0:12:52.079 I was completely surprised by this statement or this provision 0:12:52.080 --> 0:12:55.040 in the covering decision of the Glasgow Climate Pact and 0:12:55.040 --> 0:12:58.449 this was originally introduced by the UK presidency. 0:12:58.540 --> 0:13:01.010 So I actually went on record and then said that 0:13:01.020 --> 0:13:02.040 it's not what countries 0:13:02.040 --> 0:13:03.390 agree in 0:13:03.390 --> 0:13:05.540 paris, so they're not going to agree to it, but 0:13:05.540 --> 0:13:09.060 then it remained in the text. And so this has 0:13:09.059 --> 0:13:12.589 led to countries like Singapore, Minister for sustainability and the 0:13:12.590 --> 0:13:16.310 environment actually sit that Singapore will revisit its NBC. So 0:13:16.320 --> 0:13:17.860 I think that's promising. 0:13:17.940 --> 0:13:21.440 However, NBCS is one part of it and the majority 0:13:21.440 --> 0:13:22.760 of the developing world 0:13:22.840 --> 0:13:26.640 have actually called for greater international support in order to 0:13:26.640 --> 0:13:31.230 fulfill some of their conditional targets in the NBCS Trust 0:13:31.240 --> 0:13:34.770 is super important with regard to these international meetings and 0:13:34.770 --> 0:13:38.630 processes where the covering decision is concerned, there was also 0:13:38.630 --> 0:13:41.380 this term that made it into the final text which 0:13:41.380 --> 0:13:43.060 is to express deep regret 0:13:43.140 --> 0:13:48.180 On the failure of developed countries to mobilize the US100 0:13:48.179 --> 0:13:52.040 billion per year by 2020. The NBC suddenly have to 0:13:52.040 --> 0:13:54.990 be taken into consideration the context of whether finance will 0:13:54.990 --> 0:13:58.900 be mobilized as well and whether developing countries ought to 0:13:58.900 --> 0:14:01.160 trust that the developed 0:14:01.240 --> 0:14:06.390 World because of historical responsibility among other things have to provide. Right. 0:14:06.390 --> 0:14:08.480 And this is all enshrined in the convention as you 0:14:08.480 --> 0:14:10.120 know that they always go back to it over and 0:14:10.120 --> 0:14:13.840 over again, right? The principles of common but differentiated responsibilities 0:14:13.840 --> 0:14:17.200 and respective capabilities so on and so forth. But certainly 0:14:17.200 --> 0:14:22.930 the covering decision does indicate that parties will have to 0:14:22.930 --> 0:14:27.290 accelerate the deployment of as you call clean technologies and 0:14:27.290 --> 0:14:29.710 this is paragraph 36 I'm talking about where for the 0:14:29.710 --> 0:14:30.760 first time 0:14:31.240 --> 0:14:35.170 fossil fuels is mentioned in any sort of decision. It 0:14:35.170 --> 0:14:38.260 was quite surprising to me and certainly I think a 0:14:38.260 --> 0:14:40.520 lot of people also you you were pricing on the 0:14:40.520 --> 0:14:44.150 news that folks blaming china and India for watering down 0:14:44.150 --> 0:14:47.000 the text right? It was supposed to have been phased 0:14:47.000 --> 0:14:48.760 out unabated coal power 0:14:48.840 --> 0:14:51.660 but in the end what made it in was face down. 0:14:51.740 --> 0:14:54.390 But if you look at that paragraph in totality, you'll 0:14:54.390 --> 0:14:54.860 see that 0:14:55.340 --> 0:14:57.380 it's got a lot of components to it. So it 0:14:57.380 --> 0:15:01.550 mentions the deployment of clean power generation energy efficiency. 0:15:01.940 --> 0:15:06.090 It also mentions the phasing out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, 0:15:06.090 --> 0:15:09.130 which is really important for this region. And also it 0:15:09.130 --> 0:15:12.720 talks about a just transition. There's a lot to unpack 0:15:12.730 --> 0:15:15.460 moving forward. Really need to think about what this means 0:15:15.470 --> 0:15:20.270 for countries thinking about their NBCS and revisiting it between 0:15:20.270 --> 0:15:23.030 now and november next year, where the cop is going 0:15:23.030 --> 0:15:25.450 to take place in Egypt and they're supposed to bring 0:15:25.460 --> 0:15:28.090 those new NBCS and submit them before that cop in 0:15:28.090 --> 0:15:30.960 Egypt will be a busy for countries 0:15:30.970 --> 0:15:38.990 I'm gonna jump in on the face down with his 0:15:38.990 --> 0:15:42.680 face out. This one has really caught the imagination of 0:15:42.690 --> 0:15:43.360 everyone 0:15:43.440 --> 0:15:44.250 in the news 0:15:44.640 --> 0:15:46.740 thinking about what it means and it's quite clear what 0:15:46.740 --> 0:15:49.260 it means on the whole though, as you say, well, 0:15:49.270 --> 0:15:52.040 it may have been convenient to look at India and 0:15:52.040 --> 0:15:55.190 china as part of the reason as to why that 0:15:55.190 --> 0:15:58.250 was changed from a face out to face down. But 0:15:58.260 --> 0:16:02.040 overall though, what's your sense? I mean obviously people will 0:16:02.050 --> 0:16:05.060 criticize things for not being as ambitious as it was. 0:16:05.140 --> 0:16:08.450 But do you think the signal is strong enough that, 0:16:08.460 --> 0:16:10.360 you know, people do now know that the era of 0:16:10.360 --> 0:16:13.760 coal is going to end even if it's a face down. 0:16:13.770 --> 0:16:15.940 Is that where we're headed? You think it's strong enough 0:16:15.940 --> 0:16:18.770 language and as you say, fossil fuels have been mentioned 0:16:18.770 --> 0:16:22.200 and overall scene as a package is the right thing 0:16:22.200 --> 0:16:24.960 more on the wall for fossil fuel industries 0:16:25.040 --> 0:16:28.240 and subsidies and call in the long run, is it 0:16:28.240 --> 0:16:29.260 clear enough now 0:16:29.440 --> 0:16:32.550 it's pretty clear, I think we need to recognize that 0:16:32.560 --> 0:16:34.910 there were also a number of countries that signed up 0:16:34.910 --> 0:16:36.720 to the cold packed and even though they may not 0:16:36.720 --> 0:16:39.390 be the largest emitters in the world or they may 0:16:39.390 --> 0:16:42.230 not have, you know, the largest share of coal and 0:16:42.230 --> 0:16:46.150 their energy makes you have countries like south Korea, Indonesia, 0:16:46.150 --> 0:16:50.380 Vietnam Poland Ukraine that signed on to reduce coal and 0:16:50.380 --> 0:16:52.710 the use of coal. And I think that's important right? 0:16:52.710 --> 0:16:56.080 Because climate change is a global problem and it requires 0:16:56.080 --> 0:16:59.740 everybody to contribute. So I do think that India and 0:16:59.740 --> 0:17:03.830 china have been disproportionately blamed for this so called watering 0:17:03.830 --> 0:17:07.199 down of the face out. Turn right the language and 0:17:07.200 --> 0:17:10.470 the covering decision. The reality also is that we need 0:17:10.470 --> 0:17:14.109 to think about fossil fuels and phase out face down 0:17:14.109 --> 0:17:17.910 in the context of global equity. What are these coal 0:17:17.920 --> 0:17:21.710 power generators being used for? Is it being used for 0:17:21.710 --> 0:17:26.250 luxury emissions or is it being used towards development powering 0:17:26.250 --> 0:17:29.520 the poor villages, that sort of thing. I know I'm 0:17:29.520 --> 0:17:31.830 going to get shut down for this, but we need 0:17:31.830 --> 0:17:34.859 to add more nuance to the discussion. Right? It's not 0:17:34.940 --> 0:17:37.270 bifurcate that well anymore. Rich poor. 0:17:37.340 --> 0:17:39.260 There are so many countries in the world actually middle 0:17:39.260 --> 0:17:42.510 income and they can actually afford the transition, but not 0:17:42.520 --> 0:17:45.340 all countries can afford transition just yet. They certainly need 0:17:45.340 --> 0:17:47.590 to be held not necessarily only be helped by the 0:17:47.590 --> 0:17:48.869 richest countries 0:17:48.880 --> 0:17:51.470 since you mentioned equity are going to ceo of you 0:17:51.470 --> 0:17:55.160 Now on one issue, which again, there was some criticism 0:17:55.160 --> 0:17:57.709 on the fact I didn't go far enough. I didn't 0:17:57.720 --> 0:17:58.360 address it 0:17:58.440 --> 0:18:01.040 in any way that was satisfactory and that was the 0:18:01.040 --> 0:18:04.109 issue of loss and damage. As with all cops. This 0:18:04.109 --> 0:18:07.899 one again was quite majorly in focus this time around, 0:18:07.910 --> 0:18:11.560 but there was some disappointment there, explain to us what 0:18:11.560 --> 0:18:14.360 you would have expected and hoped for and loss and 0:18:14.359 --> 0:18:17.550 damage and in the final balancing decisions 0:18:17.640 --> 0:18:19.939 where it was that it sort of fell off and 0:18:19.940 --> 0:18:21.360 didn't meet expectations. 0:18:21.440 --> 0:18:25.720 Indeed, the top 26 agenda was supposed to help in 0:18:25.720 --> 0:18:28.689 the operationalization of loss and damage, but you're right, there 0:18:28.690 --> 0:18:31.510 was no specific action taken at the end. Um, there 0:18:31.510 --> 0:18:35.820 was a proposal for a loss and damage facility by 0:18:35.820 --> 0:18:38.560 a group of countries, but this was removed towards the end. 0:18:38.840 --> 0:18:41.730 There was already political dialogue actually on loss and damage 0:18:41.730 --> 0:18:44.149 to meet the needs of the most vulnerable. Of course 0:18:44.150 --> 0:18:47.930 in the world, there was some progress in Glasgow about 0:18:47.930 --> 0:18:51.920 the functions of the santiago network on loss and damage. 0:18:51.930 --> 0:18:55.100 So parties made some little bit of progress that yes, 0:18:55.100 --> 0:18:57.890 there was a lot of disappointment around loss and damage 0:18:57.890 --> 0:19:00.530 and I do agree with analysis that the car was 0:19:00.530 --> 0:19:02.780 a bit lopsided. Right? So there was so much focused 0:19:02.780 --> 0:19:05.660 on mitigation and really very little on adaptation, 0:19:05.940 --> 0:19:09.970 but as with all caught bandwidth of negotiators is limited. 0:19:09.980 --> 0:19:13.230 And I was told also that because of the pandemic 0:19:13.230 --> 0:19:16.150 and because of the requirements of the venue having to 0:19:16.150 --> 0:19:19.490 safe distance, there was not enough space for everybody to 0:19:19.490 --> 0:19:22.320 be represented. And I believe a lot of delegations also 0:19:22.320 --> 0:19:25.280 cut back on sending people. And so it could also 0:19:25.280 --> 0:19:28.420 have well been banned with issues not having enough negotiators 0:19:28.420 --> 0:19:31.600 on the ground going to these meetings and prioritizing the 0:19:31.600 --> 0:19:34.720 agendas on adaptation and loss and damage. So it could 0:19:34.720 --> 0:19:37.060 be any number of factors. But I was told also 0:19:37.060 --> 0:19:41.040 that Egypt will focus on adaptation, potentially lost damage as well. 0:19:41.040 --> 0:19:44.490 So perhaps countries if they can't wait of course can 0:19:44.490 --> 0:19:46.260 look forward to the next call for. 0:19:46.540 --> 0:19:49.170 One of the things that you mentioned earlier on was 0:19:49.170 --> 0:19:52.720 the issue of trust and inclusivity as well as part 0:19:52.720 --> 0:19:56.060 of the process that brings people on and it's very 0:19:56.060 --> 0:19:59.190 hard to not feel hard done by if I were 0:19:59.190 --> 0:20:04.350 developing country if I were a small island state that again, um, 0:20:04.350 --> 0:20:08.050 loss and damage has not been satisfactorily dealt with. 0:20:08.440 --> 0:20:10.609