Was COP26 a Success? Simulating & Examining the Outcomes of the World’s Most Prominent Climate Summit
“To drive the penetration of renewables into the energy market of India, subsidies must be transferred from fossil fuels to non-fossil sources. Conversely, the government continues to increase domestic coal production and consumption, recently opening coal mining to private investors. While India’s 2030 goals concerning the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions could be achieved with current policies, the country’s climate policy is rated highly insufficient when compared with the terms of the Paris Agreement.”
Representing the United States in the Byram Hills Sustainability Initiative’s COP26 climate summit simulation, I counter the India representative’s sentiment that their environmentally friendly stimulus packages will offset India’s reliance on fossil fuels. A representative of Saudi Arabia chimes in next, arguing that India has set aside the equivalent of three billion USD focused on green recovery through enhancing battery development and solar photovoltaic cell technology. After another round of discussion, we come to a consensus: while the ambitious renewable energy policies of India must be recognized, ramping up wind and solar initiatives to provide widespread affordable access to renewables and phase out the dominance of the coal pipeline remains imperative.
As a group leader in this activity, I anticipate the 26th Annual United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26), occurring in Glasgow from October 31st to November 13th. The Sustainability Initiative’s simulated conference, with students representing world leaders of prominent countries discussing common strengths, weaknesses, and future paths for each country’s climate policy, is a simplified version of COP26, which brought together 120 world leaders and over 40,000 registered participants, to serve two main purposes. First, to review the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol (adopted in 1997, 191 current parties), and the Paris Agreement (adopted in 2015, 194 current parties). Second, to decide on further courses of climate action regarding current agreements and the adoption of new legal instruments that build upon them.
Several world leaders at the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference. Source: Yale News
This year’s COP culminated in the Glasgow Climate Pact, a political compromise negotiated and agreed upon by all participating parties. The following topics were the main points of discussion in the creation of this pact.
Fossil fuel emissions pledges and trading agreements. As of 2020, countries’ commitments to emissions reduction by 2030 would put us on track for a global temperature increase of 3°C; yet, the Paris Agreement proposes confining the temperature rise to 1.5°C and reaching net-zero emissions by 2050. Therefore, the Glasgow Pact encourages countries to “revisit and strengthen” their emissions targets by the end of 2022 to align with the Paris Agreement goals. In terms of emissions trading, the Glasgow Pact prioritizes cutting costs at a global level when reducing emissions–for instance, certain countries could pay to phase out fossil fuel usage at lower costs in other countries and count this reduction toward reaching their own target. The pact also acknowledges the growing popularity of reaching net zero through “negative emissions”, such as the large-scale restoration of nature, while recognizing the difficulty of monitoring the true sustainability of these projects.
Deforestation and land degradation. 141 leaders signed a Declaration on Forests and Land Use in which they “commit to working collectively to halt and reverse forest loss and land degradation by 2030.” This declaration is a beneficial step; however, it must be considered that combatting deforestation depends primarily on monitoring and enforcement at the country level.
Reducing methane emissions. 100 leaders committed to the Global Methane Pledge, “a collective goal of reducing global methane emissions by at least 30 percent from 2020 levels by 2030”, a proposal with the expected impact of reducing warming by 0.2°C. The language of this pledge draws criticism, as sharing a “collective goal” does not illustrate a concrete plan of action.
Climate finance and funding. In the 2009 Copenhagen accord, developed countries pledged to devote $100 billion each year to climate finances by 2020 in hopes of allowing developing economies to depart from excessive fossil fuel usage; yet, this goal may not be met until 2023. The Glasgow Pact urges richer countries to own up to their responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions and mobilize funds to address inequities in global impacts and responsibilities for climate change.
Ultimately, COP26 yielded mixed results. Significant and strategic action must be made by countries worldwide to adhere to the Glasgow Pact–additionally, even if the terms of this agreement are followed, policies still fall short of the Paris Agreement’s goal of restricting global warming to 1.5°C. In spite of this, the developments of this year’s climate conference do indicate progress, with pledges on deforestation, methane, and coal showing a step in the right direction. The words of conference President Alok Sharma offer a good summation: “We can now say with credibility that we have kept 1.5 degrees alive. But, its pulse is weak and it will only survive if we keep our promises and translate commitments into rapid action.”
