COP29: few concrete commitments, the draft ignores fossil fuels and disappoints the Planet

COP29 in Baku is heading towards a disappointing conclusion. The draft document on climate change mitigation, released on November 22, contains no reference to the need for reduce the use of fossil fuelsthe main cause of global warming.

An omission that risks compromising global efforts to fight the climate crisis and keep the increase in temperatures within the 1.5°C threshold, as established by the Paris Agreement. Let’s see what could happen if the document is approved.

The text, instead of tackling the problem at its root, limits itself to indicating generic measures to reduce emissions, focusing on technological innovationsincluding carbon capture, and energy saving

These are solutions which, despite having a role in the decarbonisation process, cannot replace the urgent need to progressively abandon oil, gas and coal.

On the financial front, the draft agreement presents controversial aspects. While calling for increased climate finance from all sources, public and private, up to at least 1,300 billion dollars per year by 2035the draft “decides to set an objective in extension” compared to the Paris Agreement, with developing countries taking on the burden of mobilize $250 billion per year to 2035 for climate action.

In this regard, the Presidency of COP29 declared:

As a first reflection on the indications of the Parties, the decision on New Quantified Collective Goal contains a call for all Parties to work together to increase financing for developing countries for climate action from all public and private sources to at least $1.3 trillion per year by 2035. It also , reflecting the proposal of the developed country parties, includes the decision to set a target of extending the goal of jointly mobilizing USD 100 billion per year, with the developed country parties at the forefront, to USD 250 billion by 2035 for developing country parties for climate action.

This approach raises at least two critical issues: on the one hand ambiguity regarding the sources of financing and on the other the insufficiency of resources. In the first case, from developed countries or from other sources, such as private investments or loans. In the second case, even reaching the 1,300 billion target, the figure may be insufficient compared to the real needs of the most vulnerable countrieswho suffer the most serious effects of the climate crisis.

The indignant reactions

The lack of a clear commitment on the reduction of fossil fuels and the ambiguities on the financial front have sparked indignant reactions from activists and environmental organizations.

“It is a shame that, despite full awareness of the devastating climate crises facing developing countries, developed countries have only proposed a paltry $250 billion per year,” he said Harjeet Singhclimate activist and supporter of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Also Mohamed Adowdirector of the think tank Power Shift Africaharshly criticized the Azerbaijani presidency of COP29, calling it “one of the worst in recent history” and denouncing the chaos and lack of leadership that characterized the negotiations.

A wasted opportunity?

COP29 in Baku risks being remembered as a wasted opportunity. As scientists issue increasingly urgent calls for decisive action to avoid climate collapse, world leaders appear unable to make concrete, binding commitments. The absence of a clear reference to the reduction of fossil fuels in the draft agreement It’s a worrying signwhich highlights the strong influence of industry lobbies and the lack of political will to tackle the problem at its root.