COP28 live: presidency said to be preparing final package for delegates

Germany’s climate envoy, made this call on Sunday morning: “There is a real urgency of action to keep the planetary pain threshold of 1.5° in reach. Today is the day the presidency takes over primary responsibility for figuring out what the most ambitious version of an outcome package can be at this COP. The COP presidency has reiterated many times that they are here to facilitate an ambitious decision. This means there needs to be strong language on the phase out of fossil fuels in line with 1.5C. At the same time, it is clear that least developed countries will not be able to go at the same speed as G20 economic powerhouses. They have to meet development needs but also have the opportunity now to leapfrog unsustainable decisions. This is why we need a package that combines energy transition and energy access. As the presidency takes us into “Majlis” (elder council formats), the question is: can we rise to the occasion and bring up the balance of the package to enable acceleration across the board. Or will we allow a small group of actors to tear down the chance of a historic decision that would give our businesses and our markets clarity about the long-term direction of travel.” Her call for action heralds the crunch point of Cop28, with only two and a half official days of negotiations left. The presidency, as we’ve noted before, is now in the pivotal position to direct these talks to their conclusion. The Presidency is now said to be preparing a final package for delegates. There needs to be more progress in adaptation. Developing countries demand this, quite reasonably, for a “balanced package” – that is, one that addresses the needs of the poor world as well as the push by developed and developing countries, to keep 1.5 alive. Some are concerned that the presidency is being over ambitious by seeking to present this in one long take. But everyone knows where the key fault line is, so for the presidency to present this might not be the gamble it seems to some. This Cop is unusual in comparison to some others in that the most contentious issues are a matter for formal Cop decisions, not just the cover decision, which is a catch all outcome reflecting all the myriad discussions held during the fortnight and that has less formal force under the UNFCCC and Paris agreement. By contrast, the global stocktake (GST) process requires a formal Cop decision, as it is mandated under the 2015 Paris agreement. So the key question remains: will the final decisions of the Cop on the GST include a phase out of fossil fuels? There are some positive signs. China, previously a blocker, is now making clear it will accept some form of compromise (it can sometimes be difficult to interpret the gnomic utterances of China’s veteran delegation chief Xie Zhenhua, but what was clear from the small press conference the Guardian attended by him yesterday is that China is actively talking about forms of words that could be used). Other countries also appear to be engaging constructively, according to negotiators. But Saudi Arabia is still holding out. (Russia is too but has generally not liked to be the last holdout at previous Cops – and with next year’s Cop coming close to home, in Azerbaijan, that could keep Russia from too obviously wrecking this one). Sultan Al Jaber is the key figure here. UAE is a close ally of Saudi Arabia. The countries do not have identical interests – one insider described them to me as like brothers, and brothers don’t always see eye to eye but they still have strong ties. But they have close relations. Al Jaber has engaged intensively with Saudi – he told me just before this Cop that they were engaging with him “positively, constructively”. Now is his moment of truth. The whole point of having a Cop in an oil producing neighbour and close ally of Saudi Arabia is that this is the time for Saudi Arabia to show who they really are. Will they follow UAE and agree to strong language in fossil fuels? Or will they hold out as their Opec letter demanded? If there was ever a rationale to having Sultan Al Jaber as Cop president, this is that point. Developing countries bloc say fossil fuel phaseout must be fully financed and fair Nina Lakhani A spokesperson from a negotiating bloc that represents more than half the world’s populationsaid that any fossil fuel phase-out target must be fully financed and centred on the equity principles enshrined in the climate convention and the 2015 Paris agreement. “As a group we want to see the developed countries taking the lead on mitigation. In each session they are pushing and pressuring developing countries to do more and more, without providing the means of implementation, without accepting that a phase out has to be differentiated to be fair and equitable – and while they are still expanding fossil fuel production,” said Diego Pacheco, a Bolivian negotiator and spokesperson for the bloc of Like Minded Developing Countries (LMDC). The bloc of 20 nations – which includes India, China, Saudi Arabia, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Syria, Sudan and Vietnam – are politically, socially and economically diverse but like minded in terms of insisting that international climate action respect the convention and the Paris Agreement, particularly in relation to the principle of equity and Common But Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR) enshrined in the Paris agreement and the UNFCCC. Developing countries have for years called out wealthier countries for cherrypicking from the convention, Paris Agreement and the IPCC reports. According to Pacheco, global emission reduction targets should take into account CBDR and equity, but developing countries face a constant fight to get these core elements into the text. “The Paris agreement is based on a bottom-up approach, so each country will address issues according to their own national circumstances. The only acceptable qualifier would be a fossil fuel phase out financed by developed countries, based on equity and CBDR,” said Pacheco. In 2021, India and China were blamed by the US, UK and other developed countries for watering down the historic agreement to phase down – rather than phase out – coal at Cop26. The UK and US have already moved away from coal, but continue to expand oil and gas production. India, the world’s most populous country (1.4bn) and the fifth largest economy, is the driver behind equitable access to carbon space, pushing for historic CO2 contributions to be taken into account in any discussion about phase out and mitigation. Meena Meena, a climate policy expert and head of programmes at the Third World Network (TWN), said: “Many countries including India are energy poor, and while they are actively promoting solar and other renewable energies, they need more time and finance to transition away from coal, that is the reality. We need to be honest about what countries need to implement mitigation – finance, capacity building, technology – so they can achieve their NDCs and keep the hope of 1.5 alive, adapt to climate change and still meet the basic needs of their people. Otherwise any new target will just be playing to the gallery.” The US is this year’s number one producer of oil and gas, and the number one exporter of gas and petroleum products. A recent report by Oil Change International found that five countries – UK, US, Norway, Canada and Australia – account for all the planned oil and gas expansion between now and 2050. Meanwhile civil society groups are warning that the US, UK and other allied developed economies appear to be embracing fossil fuel phase language, while simultaneously blocking fair climate finance and pushing to erase any reference to equity and just transition from the final text. Rachel Rose Jackson from Corporate Accountability said: “The stage is set for the US to save the day again while blaming global south countries simply for demanding equity and fairness. At Cop28 the US is continuing its legacy of hocus pocus.” People walk near al Wasl Dome in Dubai. Photograph: Ali Haider/EPA Machines to magic carbon out of the air, artificial intelligence, indoor vertical farms to grow food for our escape to Mars, and even solar-powered “responsible” yachts: the Cop28 climate summit in Dubai has been festooned with the promise of technological fixes for worsening global heating and ecological breakdown, writes Oliver Milman. But this fixation has alarmed some scientists and climate activists, who warn that technologies are being used to distract from the primary task of stopping fossil fuels being burned. Total current technology-based CO2 removal, excluding nature-based means such as planting new forests, removes just 0.01m tonnes of CO2, according to recent research, which is more than a million times smaller than current fossil fuel CO2 emissions. Despite its small scale, voluminous carbon removal techniques are relied upon in many climate models and plans by countries and companies to avoid breaching a 1.5C rise in global temperatures since pre-industrial times and unleashing catastrophic heatwaves, droughts, floods and other impacts. Colombia’s environment minister Susana Muhamad has said she is helping to build a coalition of countries in favour of ambitious language on phasing out fossil fuels at Cop28 ahead of tense final negotiations. Muhamad, whose president Gustavo Petro announced Colombia was backing a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty in the climate summit, said the group would then speak with Saudi Arabia, India and other influential countries as a bloc. “We want a phase out of production and consumption. We want 1.5C. We want a 43% reduction [of fossil fuels] by 2030. If we don’t reach 2030, there is not another opportunity to do this,” she told the Guardian. “We should not be hostage to the economic plans of countries when this is the requirement. “ Muhamad has been a leading voice at the climate summit in plenaries calling for strong language on cutting emissions. El compromiso para alcanzar las metas del Acuerdo de París, debe ser de todas las naciones. Para lograrlo debemos avanzar en la reducción progresiva de los combustibles fósiles y mirar un nuevo modelo económico. Esta fue mi intervención en la Plenaria Oficial de la #COP28. pic.twitter.com/8o4hc33b0z “We are working on building a consolidated position and common thinking around these issues so we have a stronger voice. We’re trying to align a bloc of countries to land some text around [fossil fuels] that we can then use to start engaging with China, Saudi Arabia and India in the potential negotiations,” she said. “Adaptation is the most important thing for us. Some countries are putting a lot of obstacles into this so that they can negotiate on the other parts of the agreement. For us, adaptation goals have to be agreed at this Cop. Otherwise it’s a message that the lives of people in the Global South don’t matter. We are already in the process of adaptation. The climate is already changing. That’s why 1.5C is critical. After 1.5C, adaptation will be super expensive or impossible,” said Muhamad. “The Sultan is being very clear that he wants 1.5C to be alive and on a 2030 delivery. So, it’s obvious we need to talk about fossil fuels. I think we can get an agreement. We have to make future arrangements for a future phasing out,” she said. There is some more food-related news from the conference today, writes Fiona Harvey. The Alliance of Champions for Food Systems Transformation (ACF) launched on Sunday, a group that’s being called the “high ambition coalition for food”. It has Brazil, Sierra Leone and Norway as co-chairs, and other prominent members include Rwanda and Cambodia. The members will pledge to: Strengthen national visions and food systems transformation pathways, inclusive of 10 priority action areas and consistent with science-based targets. Update Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), Long-Term Low Emission Development Strategies (LT-LEDS),​​ and National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) in line with these updated National Food System Transformation Pathways and/or Implementation Plans, by 2025 at the latest. Report annually on targets and priority intervention areas Paulo Teixeira, minister of agrarian development and family farming, Brazil, and co-chair of ACF, said: “Peasant family farmers, Indigenous and local communities, forest collectors, pastoralists, fisherfolk, and agricultural workers, are among the populations most harshly affected by climate change worldwide. Yet they are also the central actors who can sustainably transform food systems. Supporting their livelihoods through specifically tailored public policies is essential to achieve an agroecological transition towards healthy, resilient and sustainable food systems.” UN security officer walks near country flags at Dubai’s Expo City during Cop28. Photograph: Thaier Al-Sudani/Reuters The subject of whether the Cop negotiations achieve anything, or whether the process itself can be improved, is hotly debated every year. Former US vice president Al Gore told Bloomberg last week that the summits needed to be reformed so that petrostates don’t wield so much power over the final outcome. The meetings are run by consensus, so any one country can block an agreement. Gore is pushing for decisions to instead be approved by a super majority of 75% of nations. Now the wonderful Guardian columnist George Monbiot has shared his views on how the process could be reformed. His opinion piece begins: He goes on to discuss various options: shutting out the lobbyists, replacing consensus decision-making with voting, and bypassing the Cop process by developing new binding treaties. Read the full piece here and do send us your feedback. Presidency said to be preparing final package for delegates Fiona Harvey Jennifer Morgan, Germany’s climate envoy, made this call on Sunday morning: “There is a real urgency of action to keep the planetary pain threshold of 1.5° in reach. Today is the day the presidency takes over primary responsibility for figuring out what the most ambitious version of an outcome package can be at this COP. The COP presidency has reiterated many times that they are here to facilitate an ambitious decision. This means there needs to be strong language on the phase out of fossil fuels in line with 1.5C. At the same time, it is clear that least developed countries will not be able to go at the same speed as G20 economic powerhouses. They have to meet development needs but also have the opportunity now to leapfrog unsustainable decisions. This is why we need a package that combines energy transition and energy access. As the presidency takes us into “Majlis” (elder council formats), the question is: can we rise to the occasion and bring up the balance of the package to enable acceleration across the board. Or will we allow a small group of actors to tear down the chance of a historic decision that would give our businesses and our markets clarity about the long-term direction of travel.” Her call for action heralds the crunch point of Cop28, with only two and a half official days of negotiations left. The presidency, as we’ve noted before, is now in the pivotal position to direct these talks to their conclusion. The Presidency is now said to be preparing a final package for delegates. There needs to be more progress in adaptation. Developing countries demand this, quite reasonably, for a “balanced package” – that is, one that addresses the needs of the poor world as well as the push by developed and developing countries, to keep 1.5 alive. Some are concerned that the presidency is being over ambitious by seeking to present this in one long take. But everyone knows where the key fault line is, so for the presidency to present this might not be the gamble it seems to some. This Cop is unusual in comparison to some others in that the most contentious issues are a matter for formal Cop decisions, not just the cover decision, which is a catch all outcome reflecting all the myriad discussions held during the fortnight and that has less formal force under the UNFCCC and Paris agreement. By contrast, the global stocktake (GST) process requires a formal Cop decision, as it is mandated under the 2015 Paris agreement. So the key question remains: will the final decisions of the Cop on the GST include a phase out of fossil fuels? There are some positive signs. China, previously a blocker, is now making clear it will accept some form of compromise (it can sometimes be difficult to interpret the gnomic utterances of China’s veteran delegation chief Xie Zhenhua, but what was clear from the small press conference the Guardian attended by him yesterday is that China is actively talking about forms of words that could be used). Other countries also appear to be engaging constructively, according to negotiators. But Saudi Arabia is still holding out. (Russia is too but has generally not liked to be the last holdout at previous Cops – and with next year’s Cop coming close to home, in Azerbaijan, that could keep Russia from too obviously wrecking this one). Sultan Al Jaber is the key figure here. UAE is a close ally of Saudi Arabia. The countries do not have identical interests – one insider described them to me as like brothers, and brothers don’t always see eye to eye but they still have strong ties. But they have close relations. Al Jaber has engaged intensively with Saudi – he told me just before this Cop that they were engaging with him “positively, constructively”. Now is his moment of truth. The whole point of having a Cop in an oil producing neighbour and close ally of Saudi Arabia is that this is the time for Saudi Arabia to show who they really are. Will they follow UAE and agree to strong language in fossil fuels? Or will they hold out as their Opec letter demanded? If there was ever a rationale to having Sultan Al Jaber as Cop president, this is that point. Nina Lakhani has reaction from Mohamed Adow, director of the climate and energy think tank Power Shift Africa, to the global goal on adaptation text. He says it’s great that we have it, but that the “text is weak”. It’s great we finally have the global goal on adaptation text with adaptation targets included. But overall, the text is weak and doesn’t sufficiently address the aspiration for setting the required adaptation measures and indicators and mobilising adaptation financing. On the important question of setting these indicators to measure adaptation progress towards achieving the targets, it kicks the can down the road for another two years. Two years is too long and misses the opportunity to set the long-term finance goal (known as the New Collective Quantified Goal). The adaptation goal is a playbook for how the world is going to adapt to the climate change that is already happening and will continue to happen, even if we stopped using fossil fuels today. Ending fossil fuels is about how to stop climate change – the adaptation goal is how we help people who are suffering from its impacts. We also remain far too low on funding. The goal for 2023 was to raise $300m for the adaptation fund, but at COP28 we’ve only seen $169m in pledges, a mere 56% of the intended amount. This is particularly galling considering that only last month, the UN’s environment programme published its adaptation gap report which calculates the difference between the world’s adaptation need and the amount of finance that has been committed. It found that this gap stands at around $387 billion. This is 10-18 times the actual finance flows to the countries and 50 per cent more than the previous estimate.” Agriculture and livestock farming are also major sources of greenhouse gas emissions, contributing roughly a 10th of global carbon output directly, and more than double that if the conversion of natural habitat to farming is included. Until now, however, the UN has held back from setting out in detail how the world can both meet the nutritional needs of a growing population, which is forecast to reach 10 billion by 2050, and reduce global greenhouse gases to net zero by the same date, which is required to limit global temperature rises to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels. Maximo Torero, chief economist for the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), told the Guardian: “We need to act to reduce hunger, and to stay within 1.5C. This is about rebalancing global food systems.” Michael Evertz, 64, who bicycled from Germany to Dubai to attend Cop28 Climate Conference in a journey he has dubbed Expedition Hope. Photograph: Sean Gallup/Getty ImagesBrazil’s minister of the environment and climate change Marina Silva attends a press conference. The country’s bid to style itself a climate leader has been undermined by joining Opec. Photograph: Ali Haider/EPAActivists protest against fossil fuel extraction. The UNFCC has been criticised for restricting the right to protest at the conference. Photograph: Sean Gallup/Getty ImagesA demonstrator attending the conference wears badges, some advocating for climate justice. Photograph: Kamran Jebreili/AP What is adaptation? Adaptation means building resilience to the impacts of climate change, such as extreme weather. It complements mitigation efforts that attempt to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and limit the risks from the climate crisis. The role of adaptation has grown in climate policy negotiations in recent years, and was key to the Paris Agreement. However, it is still massively under financed. “The world has already warmed by 1.1-1.2C above pre-industrial levels, and some of the impacts of the current heating are irreversible, so even if we succeed in cutting emissions drastically, we will still need to adapt to the impacts of more extreme weather. Infrastructure, including transport, telecommunications networks, housing and rural areas will need to be adapted and protected, for instance by building railways less likely to buckle in the heat or roads less likely to melt, and building houses that will not overheat.” The global goal on adaptation (GGA) – a collective commitment proposed by the African group in 2013 and established under the Paris agreement – is meant to serve as a framework to drive political action and finance for adaptation on the same scale as mitigation, and is also due to be completed in Dubai. Key questions about the design, scope, implementation, tracking and who should pay have stymied progress for the last eight years – and also at Cop28, where a final report defining the GGA has been promised. On Saturday we published a story on concerns from the Africa group about the lack of progress on adaptation, which the chief negotiator described as a “life and death” issue for the continent. Draft text was finally published this morning, and as always it’s a mixed bag. Here are some of the key takeaways from Harjeet Singh, head of global political strategy at the Climate Action Network, a coalition of almost 2000 climate groups. The finance gap is highlighted, and developed countries are urged to double finance from 2019 levels by 2025 but the text doesn’t reflect the urgency or mention the latest UN adaptation gap report which said finance for adaptation needed to reach $194-366bn (£155-290bn) a year. Equity and Common But Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR) – which are core issues for developing historically low emission countries and form part of UNFCCC framework and Paris agreement – is being fought by some developed countries, which inserted a ‘no text’ option into the draft Setting specific measurable targets for global adaptation is key for the GGA to be meaningful, but it looks like this could be further delayed with another two-year work program to develop metrics to measure progress on adaptation related to water scarcity, water-related hazards, health, food, agriculture, and ecosystems, There are important references to human rights, intergenerational rights, social justice, vulnerable groups, cascading risks and social protection measures. Singh said: “The document acknowledges the significant gap in adaptation finance, however, the crucial issue remains the prompt and effective bridging of this gap by developed countries, in line with their financial obligations under UN climate agreements.” Teresa Anderson, global lead on climate justice for ActionAid international, said: “The new draft is disappointing. It still has only soft language that politely encourages developed countries to play their part, but doesn’t go far enough in actually requiring wealthy countries to provide the finance needed to make the adaptation goal a reality on the ground. Given developed countries’ reluctance to do anything they aren’t obliged to, we all know this is code for ‘only if you feel like it, but no worries if you don’t.’ This is unlikely to provide the reassurance that developing countries need. “The hotter the planet becomes, the more costs countries on the frontline of the climate crisis will bear. Developed countries therefore also have to do their bit to make this global goal happen, which means providing finance.” The air quality is particularly bad in Dubai this morning at the Cop28 venue, with PM2.5 particle pollution levels currently 22 times above the daily recommended levels under the World Health Organisation’s air quality guidelines, according to one monitor. IQAir classifies today’s air quality as unhealthy and encourages people to stay indoors, avoid outdoor exercise and run an air purifier. There is a haze over the city skyline this morning, including the Cop28 venue. My colleague Nina Lakhani has written about how the United Arab Emirates’ vast fossil fuel production is contributing to dangerously high air pollution levels, creating health risks for its people and migrant workers in addition to heating the planet, according to a recent Human Rights Watch report. Good morning. This is Natalie Hanman, on the tenth day (if we don’t count Thursday’s rest day) of the 28th Conference of the Parties climate change summit, or Cop28. The Guardian is liveblogging the negotiations throughout, and we look forward to your contributions: please email me on natalie.hanman@theguardian.com with thoughts and suggestions. Jonathan Watts (jonathan.watts@theguardian.com) will be taking over later on. Today’s theme is food, agriculture and water. This is supposed to be the year when food finally comes into focus at the summit, with the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) launching its Global Roadmap for Agriculture report later this morning. Until now, the UN has not set out in detail how we can both feed the world and radically reduce global greenhouse gases – food production is a major source of emissions. The Guardian reported last month that ex-officials at the FAO say its leadership censored and undermined them when they highlighted how livestock methane is a major greenhouse gas. At the same time, the negotiations – over fossil fuels, climate finance and more – continue at pace as we enter the final days of the summit and we’ll have any updates for you on those. Here’s a summary of yesterday’s main developments in Dubai: