WEBVTT - It's Biden Time for Global Climate 0:00:00.160 --> 0:00:02.520 I'm Dana Perkins and you're listening to Switch It on 0:00:02.840 --> 0:00:05.400 the b n F podcast. So last week on the 0:00:05.440 --> 0:00:09.640 two and April, U S President Joe Biden invited forty 0:00:09.680 --> 0:00:12.400 world leaders to a summit to discuss the climate crisis. 0:00:12.560 --> 0:00:15.120 So on today's show, we've asked BNF's Global Head of 0:00:15.160 --> 0:00:20.200 Policy Research, Victoria coming to join us alongside Ali Zadi Najafabadi, 0:00:20.480 --> 0:00:23.400 head of Asia Pacific Research for b n EF. Vicky's 0:00:23.440 --> 0:00:26.040 with me here in London and Ali isn't soul, so 0:00:26.120 --> 0:00:28.800 we're trying to bring some different perspectives from different parts 0:00:28.800 --> 0:00:30.760 of the world. They're going to give us a summary 0:00:30.760 --> 0:00:32.320 of some of the main things that happened at the 0:00:32.360 --> 0:00:35.479 summit and put it into context during what is looking 0:00:35.560 --> 0:00:38.440 like a big year for dialogue and commitments on climate 0:00:38.760 --> 0:00:42.640 with the UN Climate Change Conference or COPY approaching this 0:00:42.760 --> 0:00:47.400 upcoming November in Glasgow. Among the reiteration of some existing commitments, 0:00:47.560 --> 0:00:49.879 there were a few new commitments and a few statements 0:00:49.920 --> 0:00:52.959 that bring us a step closer to understanding what some 0:00:53.000 --> 0:00:57.600 countries will actually be doing. And remember the five w's, who, what, when, 0:00:57.640 --> 0:01:02.000 where and why? Those are increasingly well trodden territory when 0:01:02.040 --> 0:01:05.039 we're talking about climate, but it's really the how that 0:01:05.160 --> 0:01:07.760 last question that doesn't fit with the five ws that 0:01:07.920 --> 0:01:10.600 is turning out to be the really tricky part. As 0:01:10.640 --> 0:01:13.560 a reminder, b n EF does not provide investment or 0:01:13.600 --> 0:01:16.520 strategy advice, and you can hear a more complete disclaimer 0:01:16.560 --> 0:01:18.480 at the end of the show. But now let's talk 0:01:18.520 --> 0:01:29.840 about the Biden Climate Summit from last week. Vicky Ali, 0:01:30.000 --> 0:01:32.440 thank you for joining today, Thank you for having us, 0:01:32.600 --> 0:01:34.800 Thank you very much. So we're here today to talk 0:01:34.880 --> 0:01:37.240 about the climate summit that took place at the end 0:01:37.240 --> 0:01:39.280 of last week. So it was a two day summit 0:01:39.319 --> 0:01:42.959 that the United States facilitated. There's a notable climate summit 0:01:43.040 --> 0:01:46.039 already happening this year, so copy is coming up just 0:01:46.120 --> 0:01:49.080 in November. And I really got me thinking when they 0:01:49.120 --> 0:01:51.200 announced that the summit was going to be taking place, 0:01:51.480 --> 0:01:53.880 what were they hoping to achieve? And what did they achieve? 0:01:53.920 --> 0:01:56.080 Potentially we'll get to that. What were they hoping to 0:01:56.120 --> 0:01:58.640 achieve at this summit that wasn't already going to be 0:01:58.680 --> 0:02:02.160 happening at copp in November. I think we can say 0:02:02.160 --> 0:02:05.160 that there are like were two main aims of the event. 0:02:05.920 --> 0:02:08.560 So the first one is that the US is back 0:02:08.600 --> 0:02:11.760 in Paris, is back in the Paris Agreement. So it 0:02:11.880 --> 0:02:14.960 was a chance for the US to re establish itself 0:02:15.000 --> 0:02:18.040 to say here we are, we are committed to tackling 0:02:18.080 --> 0:02:23.760 climate change, and we're raising our climate ambition. And then 0:02:23.800 --> 0:02:26.680 at the same time so we do indeed have COP 0:02:26.680 --> 0:02:28.960 twenty at the end of this year. One of the 0:02:28.960 --> 0:02:32.720 reasons why it is an important COP is that it's 0:02:32.760 --> 0:02:35.360 the beginning of this cycle that was this kind of 0:02:35.400 --> 0:02:39.000 reporting pledging cycle that was agreed in the Paris Agreement, 0:02:39.880 --> 0:02:44.440 where countries or parties they make their pledges, then there's 0:02:44.480 --> 0:02:47.399 a kind of comparison of all the targets together known 0:02:47.440 --> 0:02:50.360 as the Global stock take, and then on the basis 0:02:50.360 --> 0:02:53.400 of that assessment, parties are meant to increase their ambition. 0:02:53.680 --> 0:02:58.840 And so this summit was an opportunity for countries to 0:02:59.440 --> 0:03:02.880 make more ambitious pledges. That was the aim was to 0:03:02.960 --> 0:03:07.960 kind of galvanize efforts towards a tackling climate change. So 0:03:08.360 --> 0:03:11.519 those were the main goals of the summit, but yes, 0:03:11.760 --> 0:03:14.000 it may be a different matter as to whether they 0:03:14.040 --> 0:03:17.960 were actually realized. There's some pre COP energy here and 0:03:18.200 --> 0:03:21.840 trying to get everybody really ready for what will hopefully 0:03:21.840 --> 0:03:25.160 be a year very much focused on these issues. Were 0:03:25.200 --> 0:03:29.800 there any countries noticeably absent from the Biden Climate Summit 0:03:30.200 --> 0:03:34.080 from my perspective, Actually, it was noticeable about how many 0:03:34.120 --> 0:03:37.920 countries did attend. So even countries or leaders that have 0:03:38.160 --> 0:03:42.560 been less than ambitious about tackling climate change or vocal 0:03:42.600 --> 0:03:46.360 about the need to tackle climate change, say Saudi Arabia 0:03:46.800 --> 0:03:51.120 or Russia or Turkey, they were all there. So we 0:03:51.200 --> 0:03:56.280 had peuty In, Bosonaro, Rdigan, Amblo, Mexico was there. They 0:03:56.320 --> 0:03:59.880 weren't necessarily making more ambitious pledges, but there were certainly 0:04:00.000 --> 0:04:04.200 in the room. I think the only country among top 0:04:04.240 --> 0:04:08.160 ten emitters I was missing was Iran, and that's naturally 0:04:08.200 --> 0:04:12.200 expected why it wasn't invited. The only other major economy 0:04:12.240 --> 0:04:14.720 that was not the head of state was not invited 0:04:14.920 --> 0:04:20.320 was Thailand for the obvious political reasons, but Thailand did 0:04:20.360 --> 0:04:23.480 have representation at the event with having a minister attending. 0:04:23.839 --> 0:04:26.520 So we have a tremendous turnout. Not a ton of 0:04:27.360 --> 0:04:30.400 new commitments, but definitely everybody thinking about the yearhead but 0:04:30.440 --> 0:04:32.880 a few new commitments that were definitely notable, So why 0:04:32.880 --> 0:04:36.719 don't we go through those? Sure? Absolutely so, probably the 0:04:36.839 --> 0:04:39.120 one at the top of that. This would be the 0:04:39.240 --> 0:04:44.040 US is and your emission reduction target for thirty So 0:04:44.080 --> 0:04:47.919 this is as part of its NDC, that's its nationally 0:04:47.960 --> 0:04:51.559 determined Climate plan. So all parties have to put together 0:04:51.600 --> 0:04:54.960 these climate plans, covering them in the next decade or so. 0:04:56.160 --> 0:05:01.839 And they announced their new target, which was a certain 0:05:02.600 --> 0:05:06.320 amount of step in the right direction. We estimated that 0:05:06.440 --> 0:05:09.320 if the US had, say, maintained the same level and 0:05:09.720 --> 0:05:13.839 ambition as its five target, and it just extended it 0:05:13.839 --> 0:05:17.240 out thirty, then the target would have been in a 0:05:17.320 --> 0:05:22.400 thirty something about thirty eight percent reduction below two thousand 0:05:22.480 --> 0:05:26.280 five levels, whereas what they actually proposed was fifty to 0:05:26.400 --> 0:05:31.000 fifty two. So it is a step in the right direction, yes, 0:05:31.160 --> 0:05:33.480 But then which we may want to talk about later, 0:05:33.600 --> 0:05:37.359 there's a question markus to it's actually achievability. So another 0:05:37.440 --> 0:05:40.640 one that actually put forward a new target was Japan, 0:05:40.800 --> 0:05:44.600 but i'll hand that over Alley, thank you, Vickie. So 0:05:44.680 --> 0:05:48.359 in the case of Japan, the original target was to 0:05:48.760 --> 0:05:54.120 decrease emissions by twenty six percent in twenty thirty relatively 0:05:54.400 --> 0:05:58.800 to the two thousand thirteen basis, And this time around 0:05:58.839 --> 0:06:01.839 a prime minister just in the run up to the summit, 0:06:01.880 --> 0:06:04.560 announced that they would increase the target to fort sent 0:06:04.839 --> 0:06:09.120 emission reduction by twenty relatively to two thousand thirteen. There 0:06:09.120 --> 0:06:11.320 have been a bit of a debate in Japan around 0:06:11.400 --> 0:06:14.960 what to set the new target at the Ministry Environment 0:06:15.000 --> 0:06:20.160 apparently wanted to increase it by reduced emissions by whereas 0:06:20.240 --> 0:06:23.719 the Ministry of the Industry had been arguing for thirty 0:06:23.800 --> 0:06:26.839 nine percent and they were expecting data. Anything beyond that 0:06:26.880 --> 0:06:30.160 would be to challenging, and it appears that the Prime 0:06:30.160 --> 0:06:32.440 Minister has basically gone with the average of the two 0:06:32.720 --> 0:06:35.039 to keep both sides happy. Well, and then we've got 0:06:35.040 --> 0:06:37.280 one more country. So as we're listening here, you know, 0:06:37.320 --> 0:06:40.120 Ali is representing a pack as head of a research 0:06:40.160 --> 0:06:42.400 for APACK for US. But also you are a Canadian. 0:06:42.560 --> 0:06:46.000 So what is it that the Canadians committed to? Well, actually, 0:06:46.000 --> 0:06:49.320 maybe i'll first let Ricky explain that, and anology very 0:06:49.320 --> 0:06:53.520 happy to comment on the Canadian target. Okay, let's see. Well, 0:06:54.040 --> 0:06:57.040 so Canada, yes, it wasn't a big surprise that it 0:06:57.360 --> 0:07:01.520 announced to hire target because it has historically aligned itself 0:07:01.600 --> 0:07:05.200 with the US. So we Biden having announced its fifty 0:07:06.680 --> 0:07:11.000 target on two thousand five levels. Trudeau announced that Canada 0:07:11.080 --> 0:07:15.600 was increasing its target from reduction on two thousand and 0:07:15.680 --> 0:07:23.160 five levels too. Now, in comparison with say Japan and 0:07:23.320 --> 0:07:26.000 the US, we would say that this was a less 0:07:26.040 --> 0:07:31.200 ambitious move. We've recently published a report that compared the 0:07:31.280 --> 0:07:35.560 G twenty countries NDC targets based on four metrics. So 0:07:35.600 --> 0:07:38.440 it's it's really tricky to compare these targets because countries 0:07:38.520 --> 0:07:43.559 use different deadlines and different baselines. So we use four 0:07:43.760 --> 0:07:48.080 different metrics, say the reduction in absolute volumes, reduction in 0:07:48.120 --> 0:07:52.920 emissions per capita, and we also looked at emission intensity. 0:07:53.080 --> 0:07:57.840 And on this basis, the new Canada target is not 0:07:58.000 --> 0:08:02.160 that bold. In particular, if we compare what emissions would 0:08:02.200 --> 0:08:06.240 be with the target and without the target, we actually 0:08:06.280 --> 0:08:11.200 found that Canada will be able to substantially increases emissions 0:08:11.320 --> 0:08:14.600 and still achieve its twenty thirty target. So on that 0:08:14.640 --> 0:08:18.400 basis it was slightly disappointing. But I understand that Ali 0:08:18.480 --> 0:08:20.920 may have a different view. Well, this is how we 0:08:21.000 --> 0:08:24.680 measure emissions keeps coming up again and again because not 0:08:24.800 --> 0:08:27.600 only is it very much relevant to the targets that 0:08:27.640 --> 0:08:29.400 we're setting in whether or not we can compare Apple 0:08:29.400 --> 0:08:32.640 staffles across countries, but you see it across countries and 0:08:32.679 --> 0:08:35.640 how they're reporting previous podcast. But we've talked about the 0:08:35.640 --> 0:08:38.040 EU taxonomy and how they're trying to standardize this here. 0:08:38.120 --> 0:08:41.480 So this is definitely a challenging space and it does 0:08:41.679 --> 0:08:43.719 depend on how you look at it. So Ali, how 0:08:43.760 --> 0:08:46.920 are you looking at the commitments that Canada made to 0:08:47.000 --> 0:08:50.760 be for all these countries are looking at greenhouse gas 0:08:50.760 --> 0:08:52.920 emissions as a whole. They try to do a very 0:08:52.920 --> 0:08:56.840 good job of accounting for different types of greenhouse gasses 0:08:56.880 --> 0:08:59.600 and the convergent factors that they use are fairly consistent. 0:08:59.679 --> 0:09:02.720 So from that perspective, when they're talking about these emission 0:09:02.760 --> 0:09:07.280 reduction targets, they are talking about the same thing. Where 0:09:07.320 --> 0:09:11.679 I think it's important to recognize is what do they 0:09:11.720 --> 0:09:13.960 need to do? So what where is the emissions is 0:09:14.000 --> 0:09:16.840 coming from and what exactly how do they have to 0:09:16.840 --> 0:09:20.160 do to be able to reduce this. And where US 0:09:20.280 --> 0:09:22.640 is today is very different than where Canada is and 0:09:22.640 --> 0:09:27.160 where Japan is. In the case of Canada, a significant 0:09:27.160 --> 0:09:29.800 portion of the emissions is coming from its oil and 0:09:29.840 --> 0:09:33.120 gas sector. So if you look at regionally, the province 0:09:33.120 --> 0:09:37.079 of Alberta alone accounts for over a third of Canada's emissions, 0:09:37.600 --> 0:09:41.920 and if you ignored Alberta, Canada's emissions are already actually 0:09:41.920 --> 0:09:45.120 declining at a rapid pace. So the challenge that Canada 0:09:45.200 --> 0:09:48.320 is going to have with reducing its emissions aggressively is 0:09:48.400 --> 0:09:51.640 how does it get under controlled emissions associated with oil 0:09:51.679 --> 0:09:55.679 and gas production. Unlike Japan and the US, Canada's power 0:09:55.720 --> 0:09:59.120 sector is already fairly clean. Over eight percent of the 0:09:59.200 --> 0:10:03.920 electricities erated from zero emission sources, dominated by hydro, so 0:10:04.000 --> 0:10:07.280 that opportunity of reducing emissions in the power sector is 0:10:07.320 --> 0:10:10.480 no longer available to Canada because they've already mostly done it. 0:10:10.600 --> 0:10:13.199 In the case of Japan, actually most of the opportunity 0:10:13.280 --> 0:10:16.280 is still in the power sector, So the emission factor 0:10:16.320 --> 0:10:19.880 for the Japan's power generation is still relatively higher compared 0:10:19.920 --> 0:10:22.400 to Europe, US and Canada. So there's a lot of 0:10:22.480 --> 0:10:24.560 work that they could do to be able to get 0:10:24.559 --> 0:10:27.240 emission reduction from there. A different way of looking at 0:10:27.320 --> 0:10:32.240 this is what's the cost of abatement and so how 0:10:32.320 --> 0:10:34.280 much does it cost you to be able to reduce 0:10:34.320 --> 0:10:37.640 that emissions? If you're talking about the power sector, the 0:10:37.640 --> 0:10:40.559 technologies are fairly known, and the cost of abatement and 0:10:40.920 --> 0:10:43.800 the power sector is actually fairly low. In some cases 0:10:43.840 --> 0:10:46.120 it can be even positive. So if you're a country 0:10:46.160 --> 0:10:49.320 like Japan where you have a very high import dependence 0:10:49.400 --> 0:10:53.760 on energy, you can potentially by relying on domestic renewables 0:10:53.760 --> 0:10:56.640 we can actually end up having a positive conomic impact. 0:10:57.160 --> 0:11:00.640 But if you have to actually abate exists think economic 0:11:00.679 --> 0:11:04.160 activity such as oil and gas production, that can be 0:11:04.240 --> 0:11:07.280 very expensive, particularly given that today we still don't have 0:11:07.480 --> 0:11:13.800 a commercial, available, liable carbon capture and storage technology. So 0:11:13.840 --> 0:11:18.000 Ali was impressed Vicky. So I would just say, I'm 0:11:18.040 --> 0:11:20.439 not disagreeing at all with what Ali says. It will 0:11:20.520 --> 0:11:24.480 be tough. We're tough for all three countries to to decarbonize, 0:11:24.600 --> 0:11:27.439 and for different reasons, but purely on the basis of 0:11:27.679 --> 0:11:32.240 level of ambition, I think the Canada's step up was 0:11:32.440 --> 0:11:35.839 slightly lower than say the US in Japan. So I mean, 0:11:35.840 --> 0:11:39.480 if we are looking at achievability, the US target is 0:11:39.480 --> 0:11:44.360 going to be very very challenging to actually achieve. As 0:11:44.360 --> 0:11:48.640 you say, in theory, the power system will be decarbonized 0:11:48.640 --> 0:11:52.959 by five so Buying has announced a separate target for that. 0:11:53.800 --> 0:11:58.199 But then in terms of looking at how to decarbonize 0:11:58.240 --> 0:12:01.640 building heating is very challenge as its industry, and it 0:12:01.720 --> 0:12:05.400 really does lack the policy support both at federal and 0:12:05.480 --> 0:12:08.040 state level for that to happen. Let's talk about that 0:12:08.080 --> 0:12:10.280 for a second. The US's role in this. So they're 0:12:10.280 --> 0:12:13.800 making much bigger commitments to climate during this administration as 0:12:13.840 --> 0:12:16.840 compared to the last administration. So the last administration saw 0:12:16.920 --> 0:12:19.240 the United States pull out of the Paris Climate Agreement, 0:12:19.600 --> 0:12:22.960 and now we have the US back in. How are 0:12:23.240 --> 0:12:26.800 the other countries making commitments or perhaps not making commitments, 0:12:26.880 --> 0:12:29.760 Viewing the US's role in the commitments are making now, 0:12:29.840 --> 0:12:33.080 given that they may very well be reversed in less 0:12:33.080 --> 0:12:35.959 than four years time, it's a fair point. The OS 0:12:36.200 --> 0:12:40.640 was in some ways successful in rebuilding some of its 0:12:40.840 --> 0:12:45.319 credibility with this summit and with the announcements it made, 0:12:46.000 --> 0:12:50.640 but that target hasn't been passed through into legislation paths 0:12:50.640 --> 0:12:54.800 through Congress, and really it won't be able to kind 0:12:54.800 --> 0:12:58.679 of solidify its credibility fully until it's put in place 0:12:58.720 --> 0:13:02.360 the concrete policy measure to achieve those targets and actually 0:13:02.720 --> 0:13:08.320 taken steps towards meeting that target. So I mean one 0:13:08.320 --> 0:13:11.080 of the reasons why it was so simple for Trump 0:13:11.120 --> 0:13:15.040 to exits the paras groute was because it hadn't been 0:13:15.440 --> 0:13:18.360 enshrined in legislation. So it would be interesting to see 0:13:18.880 --> 0:13:22.640 if and what a steps Biden takes to to change that. 0:13:23.000 --> 0:13:25.280 One other area that's notable is the amount of money 0:13:25.320 --> 0:13:29.280 that was committed or maybe not committed to tackling climate 0:13:29.360 --> 0:13:32.440 change in countries outside of the US and specifically some 0:13:32.520 --> 0:13:34.960 developing countries. Can we talk a little bit about how 0:13:35.080 --> 0:13:37.679 much was raised and whether or not that was impressive 0:13:37.800 --> 0:13:41.400 or not impressive. The final amounts is not super clear. 0:13:41.559 --> 0:13:43.880 So so the US did make a pledge to to 0:13:43.960 --> 0:13:46.480 increase more than five billion, but if you want to 0:13:46.480 --> 0:13:48.520 tell you up all the announcements during the summing, it's 0:13:48.520 --> 0:13:50.960 a little bit unclear. There were a couple of bilateral 0:13:51.240 --> 0:13:54.760 new partnerships also announced, for example between US and India 0:13:54.800 --> 0:13:57.000 and US in Japan and the U S and Japan. 0:13:57.240 --> 0:13:59.840 Was interesting because they also said that they would focus 0:13:59.880 --> 0:14:02.760 the on the Indo Pacific region. So it wasn't completely clear. 0:14:03.000 --> 0:14:07.480 If you go back to climate change negotiations, developed economies 0:14:07.559 --> 0:14:11.200 had already made the pledge that by twenty twenty they 0:14:11.200 --> 0:14:15.360 would increase climate finance support to developing economies two hundred 0:14:15.360 --> 0:14:19.000 billion dollars. It doesn't appear that they have met that 0:14:19.120 --> 0:14:23.560 target unless you start counting private investment as well, which 0:14:23.640 --> 0:14:27.200 is something that's was not supposed to be countered towards 0:14:27.200 --> 0:14:29.680 and so this is supposed to be coming from governments 0:14:29.720 --> 0:14:33.440 and multilateral entities. The other issues that there's a bit 0:14:33.480 --> 0:14:36.520 of a mismatch between countries who have been recipients of 0:14:36.640 --> 0:14:39.240 this funding whereas the ones that have asked for the funding. 0:14:39.640 --> 0:14:43.560 So places like India and some parts of Southeast Asia 0:14:43.560 --> 0:14:46.560 have done relatively well, but on the hotter hand, a 0:14:46.560 --> 0:14:49.840 lot of the lower developing economies, for example parts of 0:14:49.880 --> 0:14:53.040 Africa I have not done as much in attracting the 0:14:53.360 --> 0:14:56.320 financing that they had requested. The summit it may have 0:14:56.400 --> 0:14:59.400 been a positive, small step towards that issue, but it 0:14:59.520 --> 0:15:02.800 didn't see into bridge the gap. We did have several 0:15:02.840 --> 0:15:06.240 countries during the summit, starting with the biggest one, China, 0:15:06.440 --> 0:15:11.920 pointing out the fundamental principle of common but differentiated responsibilities 0:15:11.920 --> 0:15:15.120 in climate change negotiation. So this is the whole idea 0:15:15.200 --> 0:15:18.480 that if you look at the challenge of emissions, we 0:15:18.560 --> 0:15:22.120 have to look at who has emitted since the Industrial 0:15:22.160 --> 0:15:27.280 Revolution and since European countries as well as North America 0:15:27.440 --> 0:15:30.240 and Japan, so basically mostly oly City members, they have 0:15:30.320 --> 0:15:34.640 been more responsible for emissions. Historically, they bear the responsibility 0:15:34.680 --> 0:15:38.920 of helping a non annex one countries reduce their emissions 0:15:39.240 --> 0:15:41.520 and they have to sort of carry the load at 0:15:41.520 --> 0:15:45.280 the beginning. This is a tricky one because while yes, 0:15:45.320 --> 0:15:48.240 if you look at commulative emissions, it's through that those 0:15:48.240 --> 0:15:52.120 countries very responsibilities, but if you look at who's emitting 0:15:52.160 --> 0:15:54.840 more these days and who's on a growing trajectory, and 0:15:55.520 --> 0:15:57.600 a lot of these non annex one countries are becoming 0:15:57.640 --> 0:15:59.560 an issue. And this has been a debate for some 0:15:59.640 --> 0:16:02.480 time as to how we go about figuring out who 0:16:02.520 --> 0:16:04.880 needs to do what and when and back and forth. 0:16:04.920 --> 0:16:06.880 Yet so it's this is a bit a bit retro 0:16:07.080 --> 0:16:10.240 in terms of the emissions discussion, but it's back again 0:16:10.400 --> 0:16:13.800 and they are making strides. So actually, well, China didn't 0:16:13.800 --> 0:16:18.240 create a new target that they committed to during this summit. 0:16:18.480 --> 0:16:20.440 What was it that they did outline and make a 0:16:20.480 --> 0:16:24.640 little more transparent positive announcement from Prisoner was omitting to 0:16:25.240 --> 0:16:30.760 achieve coal peak consumption within the fifteen five year planned 0:16:30.800 --> 0:16:35.480 period that refers to. Previously China have talked about that 0:16:35.520 --> 0:16:39.000 the peak would be what he has now alluded to 0:16:39.160 --> 0:16:41.280 is that they will be achieving that earlier than that. 0:16:41.760 --> 0:16:44.400 And we saw an immediate reaction where a lot of 0:16:44.440 --> 0:16:48.480 the coal companies, those that were publicly listed, actually there 0:16:48.560 --> 0:16:52.000 was a real negative reaction to their prices. And there's 0:16:52.000 --> 0:16:54.440 now a lot more talk by state owned entities in 0:16:54.520 --> 0:16:58.960 China around how they can achieve peak coal earlier and 0:16:58.960 --> 0:17:01.280 I try to reduce him aasitions for um whole generator. 0:17:01.360 --> 0:17:03.480 So that was definitely a positive step. We're going to 0:17:03.560 --> 0:17:08.200 take a quick break. Stay with us. Let's talk about 0:17:08.240 --> 0:17:10.840 some of the other interesting things that came from some 0:17:10.920 --> 0:17:13.040 of the statements that were made by other countries that 0:17:13.119 --> 0:17:16.320 have a particularly big role to play in the climate discussion, 0:17:16.400 --> 0:17:19.359 so namely Brazil and Russia. What were their statements at 0:17:19.359 --> 0:17:22.760 this summit. One of the interesting ones was came from 0:17:22.920 --> 0:17:29.520 a Bosnar from Brazil. So he reiterated that the country 0:17:29.560 --> 0:17:33.040 would be willing to reach the next zero emissions and 0:17:33.240 --> 0:17:36.680 he actually brought forward the deadline for that from which 0:17:36.640 --> 0:17:41.200 has been previously mentioned to, but he made it clear 0:17:41.240 --> 0:17:45.320 that that would rest on substantial support from other countries, 0:17:45.480 --> 0:17:50.040 specifically developed countries UM, so where my about half of 0:17:50.240 --> 0:17:54.840 that reaching next zero would be achieved through reducing emissions itself, 0:17:54.960 --> 0:17:57.760 that the other half would be through some kind of 0:17:57.760 --> 0:18:02.040 forestry offset um to make use of its natural resources. 0:18:02.080 --> 0:18:05.280 And this is one of the first times that a 0:18:05.320 --> 0:18:09.560 major economy has announcement at zero target but put it 0:18:09.600 --> 0:18:14.720 up conditional on support from from elsewhere, and as yet 0:18:14.840 --> 0:18:18.320 there have not been any kind of concrete responses from 0:18:18.480 --> 0:18:20.879 developed countries that they would be willing to do that. 0:18:21.440 --> 0:18:24.719 The other one may be interesting was Russia. We're President 0:18:24.760 --> 0:18:28.720 Putting actually talked about getting methane emissions under control, which 0:18:28.720 --> 0:18:32.919 was rather surprising given Russia's significant oil and gas operations 0:18:32.920 --> 0:18:37.280 and and unlikely challenges with with controlling methane emissions. Methane 0:18:37.280 --> 0:18:42.040 is a bit tricky because it's actually it's impact on 0:18:42.920 --> 0:18:45.800 warming is much more significant than CEO two, although it 0:18:45.840 --> 0:18:48.080 doesn't last as long as you two in the atmosphere. 0:18:48.480 --> 0:18:51.400 So there's been a lot of discussions around getting better 0:18:51.440 --> 0:18:55.040 control around methane leaks, and it was quite positive to 0:18:55.040 --> 0:18:58.560 actually see President Putting bring that up and talk about 0:18:58.720 --> 0:19:01.000 in a positive manner around how there should be international 0:19:01.000 --> 0:19:03.840 cooperation on getting that under control. So there's a sense 0:19:03.880 --> 0:19:07.560 here that there is some momentum in these discussions and 0:19:07.800 --> 0:19:11.320 that maybe we will see some really very interesting things 0:19:11.359 --> 0:19:14.080 take place at cop later in this year as we 0:19:14.119 --> 0:19:16.200 look ahead to that. I think one of the things 0:19:16.280 --> 0:19:18.760 that really has stood out to me over the course 0:19:18.800 --> 0:19:21.520 of this past year, with Project light Speed and with 0:19:21.600 --> 0:19:26.560 the advancements that we've made in vaccine technology, is that sciences, 0:19:26.960 --> 0:19:29.879 when they really put their mind and quite a bit 0:19:29.920 --> 0:19:34.240 of money behind advancing something, we make incredible strides. Now 0:19:34.359 --> 0:19:37.000 in the climate space, there is money being committed, there 0:19:37.040 --> 0:19:41.600 are targets and years and momentum, And my question is, 0:19:42.000 --> 0:19:43.879 you know, what does this all mean? What do you 0:19:43.960 --> 0:19:47.439 anticipate in particular for the spaces that then EF covers 0:19:47.560 --> 0:19:51.040 very closely. So let's say, for example, clean energy and transportation, 0:19:51.680 --> 0:19:54.879 you know, what do we expect might happen in the 0:19:55.000 --> 0:19:58.159 nearer term in these areas. As a result of some 0:19:58.200 --> 0:20:00.680 of the announcements at the summit last week, one of 0:20:00.720 --> 0:20:03.840 the kind of less covered results from last week's summit 0:20:04.119 --> 0:20:07.520 was the fact not these kind of emission reduction targets 0:20:07.520 --> 0:20:11.480 made by likes of US and Japan, but the announcements 0:20:11.520 --> 0:20:15.200 made by other countries of these more concrete projects, all 0:20:15.240 --> 0:20:19.760 the kind of partnerships or initiatives for example between US 0:20:19.800 --> 0:20:22.520 and India with regard to clean energy. What I would 0:20:22.520 --> 0:20:27.119 anticipate coming out of the copy is more progress made 0:20:27.119 --> 0:20:32.840 on say these concrete initiatives around for the energy transition, 0:20:33.000 --> 0:20:36.680 moving towards clean power and clean road transport. Those are 0:20:36.680 --> 0:20:39.439 two of the priorities for the UK government which is 0:20:39.440 --> 0:20:44.280 hosting COP and we could see more announcements come out 0:20:45.040 --> 0:20:48.440 centering around initiatives that already exists, for example the powering 0:20:48.440 --> 0:20:53.560 Past whole alliance or the electric vehicle alliances. That is 0:20:53.600 --> 0:20:56.119 one of my kind of expectations from the COPS. But 0:20:56.200 --> 0:20:59.600 the other one is also finance. So while that was 0:20:59.640 --> 0:21:05.080 saying somewhat disappointing outcome of the summit last week, the 0:21:05.240 --> 0:21:08.960 UK government is committed to discussing there's a hundred billion 0:21:09.040 --> 0:21:13.320 a year target when it comes to the Glasgow events 0:21:13.440 --> 0:21:18.800 and maybe making more commitments from developed countries for five 0:21:19.480 --> 0:21:22.520 So we would anticipate more progress being made on that side. 0:21:22.840 --> 0:21:25.480 And Ali, what would you say that perspective is regarding 0:21:25.760 --> 0:21:30.480 the Asia Pacific region specifically EPOCH side. If you look 0:21:30.520 --> 0:21:36.240 at power sector the carbonization, it's still relative to North 0:21:36.240 --> 0:21:40.080 America and Europe, the region is relatively behind, even though 0:21:40.160 --> 0:21:43.280 of course a park which China, it is the largest 0:21:43.760 --> 0:21:46.680 market for deployment of renewables as well as they're manufacturing. 0:21:47.119 --> 0:21:51.280 But still in terms of the emission intensity of power generation, 0:21:51.320 --> 0:21:54.919 the region needs to accelerate. And I think all in 0:21:54.960 --> 0:21:57.200 all of what we heard at the summit, even though 0:21:57.200 --> 0:21:58.960 some of it was not new, it was a good 0:21:58.960 --> 0:22:01.960 sign that this has happened in so hopefully way before 0:22:02.000 --> 0:22:05.000 twenty third we're gonna see emissions from the power sector 0:22:05.040 --> 0:22:07.200 in the region to reach its peak, which would be 0:22:07.240 --> 0:22:11.640 a positive development. When we go beyond these sectors though, 0:22:11.760 --> 0:22:15.960 this is where your vaccine analogy becomes really important. So 0:22:16.040 --> 0:22:19.280 there are areas um such as carbon capture and storage 0:22:19.920 --> 0:22:24.480 or hydrogen in general. When we talk about industry de carbonization, 0:22:24.960 --> 0:22:28.080 these are areas that significant more R and D needs 0:22:28.080 --> 0:22:31.240 to happen, but also significant more regulation needs to come 0:22:31.240 --> 0:22:36.800 into place to signal to investors and companies that at 0:22:36.880 --> 0:22:41.000 some point these sectors will be covered by significant restrictions. 0:22:41.800 --> 0:22:46.120 We are seeing those signals primarily in Europe today, we're 0:22:46.160 --> 0:22:49.760 starting to see those signals elsewhere. So Canada, for example, 0:22:49.800 --> 0:22:52.840 does now have a fairly strange and carbon price in 0:22:52.880 --> 0:22:57.320 mechanism in place, but many other economies, particularly when you 0:22:57.359 --> 0:23:02.920 look at US, China in DA, those signals are still 0:23:03.000 --> 0:23:05.720 not there and this is where it will be interesting 0:23:05.760 --> 0:23:08.720 to see whether the US will follow through with with 0:23:08.960 --> 0:23:13.280 some type of a current pricing mechanisms. China has started 0:23:13.560 --> 0:23:18.840 this older, so they have a carbon trading mechanism operational 0:23:18.920 --> 0:23:21.879 starting from this year, but the prices are not allowed 0:23:22.320 --> 0:23:24.800 right now. There's too much free allowances. Essentially, enterprices are 0:23:24.840 --> 0:23:27.600 not rising, so it will be interesting to see whether 0:23:27.640 --> 0:23:31.040 we see more policy direction that Yeah by twenty thirty, 0:23:31.119 --> 0:23:36.000 for example, we're looking at covering emissions from petrochemicals steal 0:23:36.040 --> 0:23:39.960 and aviation as an example. These are what we need 0:23:40.000 --> 0:23:43.800 to see happened within this decade so that there's enough 0:23:43.880 --> 0:23:47.280 investment going in uh these new new areas for technology 0:23:47.320 --> 0:23:51.399 development as well as gender deployment in the twenty thirties. Okay, 0:23:51.480 --> 0:23:54.320 so let's play the acronym game, since it seems like 0:23:54.359 --> 0:23:56.280 there are a lot of them. We actually wrote a 0:23:56.320 --> 0:23:59.000 research note I believe at one point that was called 0:23:59.400 --> 0:24:02.399 making Sense of the Sustainability alphabet soup or something along 0:24:02.400 --> 0:24:08.120