COP 27: Lack of progress in negotiations disappoints environmentalists

COP 27: Falta de avanço nas negociações decepciona ecologistas

The Egyptian presidency's second draft proposal for the final agreement of the COP 27 climate summit has disappointed environmentalists, for whom the text practically reproduces the last document presented at the Glasgow meeting, without increasing ambition.

The draft, which was made public this Saturday - during the climate summit taking place in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt - differs little from the one presented the day before, except for the points on adaptation and financing, while on mitigation the text of the agreement reached at the Glasgow summit (COP26) has been taken over, they argue.

"While the text underlines the need to urgently increase renewables through a just transition to reach the 1.5°C limit, it does not go beyond the Glasgow Pact's statements on phasing out coal and eliminating subsidies for inefficient fossil fuels," said Sven Harmeling, international climate policy expert at Climate Action Network Europe (CAN Europe).

Javier Andaluz, a climate policy expert at Ecologistas en Acción, agreed with this analysis. Speaking to EFE, he highlighted the fact that the language on the "most fundamental" issues, such as the mention of degree and means and fossil fuels, "remains exactly the same as in Glasgow".

Greenpeace, meanwhile, "called on EU countries to urge the presidency to include a conclusion on phasing out coal, gas and oil".

Without this, warned Greenpeace, "there will be no progress in relation to Glasgow and we will continue on the road to climate hell", as Pedro Zorrilla, the Spanish representative in the organization's delegation to COP27, put it.

In the parts that have changed compared to the first draft, such as those relating to the financing of climate action or adaptation, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) believe that the new proposal is even weaker.

Because, they argue, it no longer includes a roadmap to double adaptation funding by 2025, nor does it include efforts to "bridge the gap" resulting from the inability of developed countries to provide the 100 billion a year pledged to the Green Climate Fund by 2020.

Share this article

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.