It may be hard to judge a two-week conference with decade-long ambitions so soon, but with a lot of the big decisions being made, many world leaders have gone home to deal with the domestic issues they are faced with. Some, including our own Prime Minister, will fly back on private jets – laughing in the face of the positive headlines they’ve generated.
With this being the 26th Conference of the Parties (COP), many might wonder how successful we can hope the Glasgow conference will be. In 1994, the first UN convention on climate change was signed and the 2015 Paris edition is seen as a watershed moment. Yet little has changed in daily life, especially since 2015 and it is hard not to approach the Glasgow version with a heavy dose of scepticism.
Take for example the food eaten in the Glasgow conference centre. For each meal on the menu there was a carbon dioxide rating detailing how much of the greenhouse gas was needed to produce the meal. On the face of it, this is a great concept and if it became a widely available resource, as many expect environmental labelling to, then we would all benefit. But with many of the options available being ‘high-carbon’ foods, some would question whether a conference on climate change should feature these foods or be better serving a low-carbon, plant-based menu where possible.
Despite this, there have been victories to celebrate. Countries, crucially including Brazil and Indonesia, have signed a pledge to reverse deforestation by 2030 with almost £14bn being made available. Planting trees is a complex process for reducing the effects of climate change, but it does offer some promise that regions like the Amazon will be better protected.
Another big 2030 headline agreement was the goal of cutting methane levelsby 30 per cent. However, some important countries including Russia have not yet signed up despite having a heavy methane footprint. Hope remains that they will sign up over the coming years, but it does feel like an opportunity missed to have everyone playing by the same rules.
A different set of 40 countries have agreed, by 2040, to gradually phase out the use of coal. More importantly, as money makes the world go round, many banks have agreed to stop financing the mining of more coal. Once again there are some big countries missing from the list, including some of the world’s biggest polluters such as the U.S.
Since the 2015 Paris Agreement Trump infamously left, Biden has opted to re-join while other leaders have barely acknowledged the agreement before Covid-19 shifted the global conversation. More single-use plastics and next-day deliveries have only added to the climate crisis, with scientists now saying that global carbon dioxide levels are back at their pre-pandemic levels, showing it gave us little respite.
With other competing priorities and a lack of an emotional sell, the climate crisis can often drift to the backs of our minds. With such a big conference, it is inevitable that we are all talking about it and pushing our government to do more. When our politicians are competing for our votes again come 2024, how many of our questions will relate to the climate and whether COP26 was a success? Or will it return to questions of economics and health; of trade and immigration; of education and investment?
There have been positive promises and agreements and it is now hoped that global temperature rise will be limited to less than 1.8C by 2100, down from previous estimates . But this is COP26 and change is still painfully slow, prompting Greta Thunberg to remind us that “the world is literally burning, on fire, and while the people living on the front lines are still bearing the brunt of the climate crisis.”
