COP30 will be held under self-deception. It is expected to approve documents related to the Brazilian-led Tropical Forest Fund, whose funding sources remain unclear. It is expected to approve a declaration linking climate action to the fight against poverty. The empty agreement allows for the passage of the inflammatory text on “environmental racism” that Lula provides to the identity matrix. Far less likely is a final leaders’ declaration addressing the failure of the objectives of the Paris Agreement (2015).
- COP30: Brazil bets on getting BRICS and G7 countries to join forest fund
The Paris Agreement, the legal basis for the COP, set the goal of preventing global average temperatures from rising by more than 2°C, and ideally by 1.5°C, above pre-industrial levels. The available evidence suggests that the final declaration will choose methods that hide the consequences of failing to achieve even the most modest objectives. The nations gathered in Bethlehem are turning a blind eye to the graph that tells them the hard truth.
- Coup plan: The First Committee unanimously rejects Bolsonaro’s appeal and upholds his 27-year prison sentence.
Civilian simulations are not controversial, but official modeling produced by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). The goal of 1.5℃ has passed. This goal will be exceeded over the next 10 years. Even if all countries’ emissions reduction targets were strictly met, the probability of achieving the 2oC target is only 25%. The Earth is heading towards warming at an accelerating rate of 2°C to 3°C.
This is due to greenhouse gas emissions and the slow pace of the energy transition. Emissions are currently at historic peaks, reaching nearly 60 billion tonnes (GT) of CO2. On the current trajectory, it will drop to 55GT in 2035 and just below 50GT if the national goal is achieved. However, a 1.5oC objective requires 25GT and a 2oC objective requires 35GT.
The energy transition faces the weight of the inertia of the fossil fuel-based economic structure built by the industrial revolution. At the forefront are European countries, which have significantly reduced emissions, but still at insufficient levels. Russia, whose emissions continue to rise, is a negative exception.
The United States is reducing emissions, but the pace is driven by regional market dynamics. While China has reached its peak and will start reducing in the coming years, India is increasing its emissions rapidly, negating the expected benefits from China’s investments in clean sources.
Expectations that the global energy transition would proceed rapidly were never based on realistic calculations. Carbon replacement is expensive. Budgets in rich countries face the challenge of aging populations, and not coincidentally, the Green Party has experienced electoral failure. The European Union was only able to approve a shaky renewal of its emissions reduction commitments on the eve of COP30. In poor countries, societies prioritize fighting current poverty over future global heat goals.
Geopolitical scenarios are useless. When a war actually breaks out in Europe or the Middle East, investment is directed to the arms industry. The “tariff war” concocted by President Trump is narrowing the scope of diplomatic cooperation. With the cancellation of the US emissions target, the planet’s average temperature is projected to increase by 0.1 degrees Celsius.
The environmental movement has become trapped in the cave of fundamentalism. The option of accelerating investment in nuclear power plants and adding them to the arsenal of clean resources was not popular in Western countries due to opposition from the Green Party. Bill Gates published an article suggesting redirecting investment to poverty reduction as a way to adapt to climate change. His thoughtful arguments were relentlessly attacked by “green people.” But as usual, activists are pushing for acts of holy indignation at government inertia.
Turning our backs on the graphics, COP30 will end without facing the political impasse that UNEP highlighted, moving environmental diplomacy into a parallel world of reality denial. Instead of a responsible declaration of admitting failure and rethinking goals and strategies, Belen will claim victory.
About The Author
