COP26 climate diplomacy briefing - Day 13

Extra time… then penalties?

There has been movement overnight on some crucial elements. The points of contention on Art 6 Carbon Markets have narrowed (US and Japan appear to have won on making cancellation of credits voluntary not mandatory). Developing countries seem to have secured the doubling of adaptation finance, though without the detail on delivery many were looking for. The goal of nailing down $600 billion in climate finance by 2025 has slipped back to a commitment of $100 bn a year, now in place since 2009 and as yet undelivered, but now exhorting developed countries to urgency. However, it’s not over and the absolute redline issues remain.

Lost and damaged

Once again, the issue of how climate vulnerable countries cope with increasingly savage impacts that wipe percentage points off their annual GDP looms over a UN climate summit. John Kerry and Frans Timmermans appear to have refused to accept anything tougher at COP26 than a series of 'dialogues'. In the words of Power Shift Africa director Mohamed Adow: "Not much progress particularly on loss and damage financing. Instead of agreeing to a loss and damage finance facility, vulnerable countries are being pushed to settle for a never ending talk shop."

Developing anger

Greenpeace boss Jennifer Morgan: "Even at this late hour President Biden should send a signal to his team in Glasgow that they shouldn’t block public adaptation funding and finance for loss and damage from richer nations to developing countries threatened by rapidly rising temperatures." Others like Saleemul Huq went further: "The sun is setting fast for the vulnerable communities and countries." All this while African nations spend up to 10% of GDP a year on adaptation.

Media huddle: Today at 11am UK time join Power Shift Africa's Mohamed Adow and Gilles Dufrasne from Carbon Market Watch to discuss the new draft texts. Register for the zoom link here. **Plenary currently scheduled for 12pm - countries expected to react strongly to issues above**

CMA text [13/11 - 0800]: paragraph analysis

*Para 18: Developed countries double collective adaptation finance from 2019 levels by 2025

*Para 27 New UN work programme to scale up GHG cuts, reporting at COP27 in 2022

*Para 28: 'Urges' [strong language] countries who have not landed new plans to do so by 2022

*Para 29: Requests all countries to raise climate targets in line with 1.5-2C by and of 2022

*Para 30: Commissions annual UN assessment of climate plans from 2022

*Para 36: Signal to countries to accelerate shift off fossil fuels, coal to renewable energy

*Para 44: Notes "deep regret" of developed countries for missing $100bn target

*Para 46: Urges countries' to 'fully deliver on the $100 billion goal 'urgently' through 2025

*Para 66: Welcomes the further operationalization of the Santiago network

*Para 67: Santiago network will be provided with funds to support technical assistance

*Para 70: Urges countries to provide funds to the Santiago network

*Para 73: [New] Establishes a dialogue to discuss the arrangements for funding [Deletes facility]

**This traffic-light text tracker will be assessing changes through the day**

Old text for comparison

*Para 27: New UN work programme to scale up GHG cuts, reporting at COP27 in 2022

*Para 28: 'Urges' [strong language] countries who have not landed new plans to do so by 2022

*Para 29: Requests all countries to raise climate targets in line with 1.5-2C by and of 2022

*Para 30: Commissions annual UN assessment of climate plans from 2022

*Para 32: Urges [strong] countries to deliver net zero mid century plans by 2022

*Para 36: Signal to countries to accelerate shift off fossil fuels, coal to renewable energy

*Para 44: Notes "deep regret" of developed countries for missing $100bn target

*Para 46: Urges countries' to 'fully deliver on the $100 billion goal 'urgently' through 2025

*Para 66: Welcomes further operationalisation of the Santiago Network on Loss and Damage

*Para 67: Decides [very strong] the Santiago Network will have a technical assistance facility to provide financial support for technical assistance on loss and damage

Subs watch

Countries who support stronger language on fossil fuels subsidies include Costa Rica, Belize, the EU and Panama.

Judgement

We’ll know the likelihood of this text being the final one based on how countries react in the plenary currently scheduled for later today. Alok Sharma wants to go home, we all want to go home, but expect fireworks as this text will have fired up developing and vulnerable countries.

Article 6

The text is improving, closing down some of the outrageous loopholes like including double counting, REDD+ not being in the text, mandatory cancellations of some credits provides small comfort that this will have reductions rather than trading/offset, and an independent grievance mechanism is established for those communities who are being taken advantage of. But we also see no movement on the adaptation finance under 6.2, likely due to US, Japan and Australia blocking and old Kyoto credits going back to 2013 can make it through into the new market. Overall, analysts reckon it’s a better text, but it's not tight enough to stop bad faith companies and countries gaming the system. With brackets still in place - it's not a done deal.

Finance text analysis

As $$ pops up in all corners of the agreement it can be hard to keep across it. It's a case of the good, the bad and the ugly and the downright mysterious with some issues treated differently across the three texts. According to experts, here’s some of the developments:

1) on the long term finance text, language on adaptation finance is still very weak. No collective increase, no timeline, no baseline, only "considering doubling", no explicit mentioning of public and grant-based sources - a specific reference to private sector does not have an own paragraph anymore, but still mentioned in relation to the gap - what’s been added, in line with what developing countries have asked for, is an explicit mention of public finance as "a substantial component of climate finance."

2) in the cover decision, there were no significant changes - it's positive the adaptation finance baseline was clarified so we know where we are starting from, and that the “collective at least doubling” was retained - the language on the $100bn isn't any stronger which remains a disappointment

3) on the collective goal, it sets out an inclusive way of working, providing for several meetings - which means it could be substantive, but the expert dialogues could turn into the kind of talk shop this process is sometimes beset by

Market watch

Outside the venue, green biz seems happy. That’s the case of debutant Rivian (for some, the next Tesla), that reached a market value of $116bn . That’s 32% and 47% more than General Motors and Ford are worth, respectively - even though Rivian never sold a vehicle until this year, and GM and Ford sell 7 million and 4 million each per year. The movements happened in the wake of China and the US’s joint statement on climate action. The two might not be connected, but, what are the chances?

Science warning

Growing numbers of scientists are alarmed by the lack of near-term, verifiable and ambitious climate solutions from governments at this vital COP. The group of academics behind the multiple Warning to Humanity letters over the years, garnering tens of thousands of scientist signatories, have just issued a new paper that lays out a six-part plan for delivering climate action in line with IPCC recommendations for a 1.5c world. Published on Friday 12 November, with over 1000 scientists already signing on in support, the paper outlines the scientists’ plans, and challenges global leaders to deliver it.

Assessing COP26

As the clock ticks down, we will all reflect on what this COP delivered. On top of the negotiated decision are of course Boris Johnson’s cars, cash, coal and trees deals. Many pronouncements have been made over their impact but as ever the truth will be in what policies countries now put in place as a result of their pledges. Read our takeaways on the good, the bad and the ugly here.

At the time I’m sending this, COP26 is in 12th position in the league table of COP closing times, about to overtake COP10 in Buenos Aires (which wrapped up at 10:58 on a Saturday morning). Will Glasgow beat Paris and Copenhagen, or break Madrid’s shameful record, by closing later than 13:55 on Sunday? Here are some of Glasgow’s finest for you, the Red Hot Chilli Pipers, with Don’t Stop Believing!