06.04 GMT
Will all countries agree to the new text? Reactions from experts on social media continue to be divided.
Tom Evans, E3G policy advisorsaid:
If adopted, this text will reflect the collective recognition that we must move away from fossil fuels and towards a cleaner future. Proponents of this vision – both small island states and large economies – worked tirelessly overnight. However, it is clear that not everyone is ready to admit the truth about what is needed. This text alone could help prevent a disaster in Dubai, but it does not prevent a disaster for the planet.”
Bob Ward from the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economicssaid:
I suspect that the language in this new draft text on the Global Stocktake, which calls on countries to contribute to the transition away from fossil fuels to achieve net zero by 2050, will be too weak for some parties.
In the meantime, Mohamed Adow from Power Shift AfricaHe shared his reaction to the text – also pretty mixed:
For the first time in three decades of climate negotiations, the words “fossil fuels” have made it into a police finding. We finally give the elephant in the room a name. The genie will never go back in the bottle and future cops will only turn to the dirty energy more.
While on the one hand we are sending a strong signal, there are still too many loopholes in unproven and expensive technologies like carbon capture and storage that fossil fuel stakeholders will try to exploit to retain dirty energy for life support.
The transition could happen quickly, with the text calling for a move away from fossil fuels by the end of the decade. But the transition is neither funded nor fair. We still lack enough funding to help developing countries decarbonize, and there needs to be greater expectations for rich fossil fuel producers to get out first.
Some people may have had too high expectations for this meeting, but this outcome would have been unthinkable two years ago, especially at a police meeting in an oil state. It shows that even oil and gas producers can see that we are on the way to a fossil-free world.
Updated 06.04 GMT
05.42 GMT
Ed King, A veteran observer of climate diplomacy, listed the following key takeaways from the new text:
In terms of announcing the end of the fossil fuel era, this is an improvement over the last GST text, but the bar was so low that it could hardly be worse.
There are clear signals that countries agree on the need to replace fossil fuels with clean energy, with 2050 being the target year for global net zero.
References to the need for transition fuels could come from a major gas producer. The science is clear: gas is a methane-rich fossil fuel, not a transition fuel.
There is support for tripling clean energy by 2030 and doubling energy efficiency, as well as a recognition that the cost of renewable energy is falling rapidly
Cop26's language on coal is repeated and emphasizes that the new national climate promises should be implemented from the end of 2024
There is very little on finance and – frankly – worrying wording about the role of carbon offsets: many poor countries will see this as a text that throws them under the bus
As 2024 will be a very difficult year, it is crucial that a “Roadmap to Mission 1.5C” is published to improve international cooperation towards Cop30 in Brazil. The UN is counting on Lula as a leader.
Updated at 05:42 GMT
05.36 GMT
A few meters from me in the convention center, the Japanese delegation is crowding around a printout of the new text, he writes Patrick Greenfield. Your delegation brushes off questions. Nearby screens said there would be a plenary session at 9:30 a.m. local time, although it also said the text would appear at 6 a.m. and it came a little later.
However, it may take a while for countries to respond and silence is just as important as noise. When it was last drafted, Pacific island nations were among the first to speak out, dismissing the text as a death sentence for their countries. The EU, Brazil and other countries took much longer to comment publicly, but still refused. India and Saudi Arabia were among those who remained silent.
What are the Important things from countries to see?
First, is the language on fossil fuels and 1.5°C strong enough for small island states? They have made it very clear that these countries are here to fight for their survival in the face of rising sea levels, for which meeting the temperature target is crucial.
Next comes customization. Countries like Uganda, which expect billions in revenue from fossil fuel development, have made it clear they want financial support to transition away from coal, oil and gas. Are you content?
Finally, is the text too ambitious in terms of transitioning away from fossil fuels for existing coal, oil and gas producers? What do countries like Iraq, Saudi Arabia, India and others think about the signal to end the fossil fuel age? Can they bear it?
Updated at 05.37 GMT
05.22 GMT
While Norway's Minister for Climate and Environment, Espen Barth Eidesaid the new draft was the first time the world had united around “such a clear text on the need to transition away from fossil fuels.” Climate justice advocates were far more critical, largely due to the weak wording on the means of implementation. Nina Lakhani has produced a very useful guide to what is meant by implementation here: in short, “how countries struggling to eradicate poverty and provide basic services (including energy) to their populations finance the transition away from fossil fuels “.
Why “implementation” is important in the global fight against the climate crisis
Here is a selection of reactions to the new text dealing with this topic:
Lidy Nacpil, Asian Peoples' Movement on Debt and Development:
“The governments of the world's richest countries shamelessly refused to recognize the Global North's historic and ongoing responsibility for the climate crisis, while making outrageous claims of ambition. Without justice there can be no ambition, and without meeting all climate finance commitments there can be no justice. The likely failure of this COP is not simply a lack of progress, but will actually set the world back and the Global North, particularly the US, must be held accountable.”
Meena Raman, Program Manager, Third World Network:
“We are deeply disappointed that the outcome of the global stocktake in Dubai did not recognize the need for developed countries to provide developing countries with the support they need to make the urgent transition away from fossil fuels and to meet adaptation needs, including losses and climate change, require damage funds. Instead, we see a variety of decisions creating escape routes to water down their commitments and focus attention on the private sector and multilateral development banks for providing climate finance. This is extremely unfortunate. To ensure high ambition in developing countries, greater financial ambition is urgently needed. Otherwise, all ambitious global goals will remain just a pipe dream.”
Asad Rehman, Managing Director of War on Want:
“COP28 was time to walk the walk and not just talk the talk. The signal that the era of fossil fuel pollution is over will come not through weak words in a text or empty statements here in Dubai, but when the UK, US and others not only announce an immediate halt to their huge rollout, but even more deadly fossil fuels, stop betting on deadly false solutions and put cash on the table.”
Teresa Anderson, ActionAid International:
“While the new text signals that the fossil fuel industry’s days are numbered, the richest countries have clearly refused to offer new financing to help developing countries achieve these goals on the ground. Rich countries want to have their cake and eat it too. But you should remember: There is no such thing as a free climate target. This text means that lower-income countries, already trapped by the costs of climate disasters, could be forced to make impossible choices between economic security and climate protection.”
Updated at 05:22 GMT
05.08 GMT
Leo Hickman from Carbon Brief Is point out that the document “calls” Parties should “contribute to the following global efforts,” writes Bibi van der Zee. “In UNFCCC legal jargon, as we know, this means an ‘invitation’ or ‘request’,” he says. “And more importantly, it is the *weakest* of all the various terms used for such admonitions.”
“calls…”
That is the key term here.
In UNFCCC legal jargon, this is understood as an “invitation” or “request”.
And more importantly, it is the *weakest* of all the various terms used for such admonitions#COP28 pic.twitter.com/KOfPIblSY5
– Leo Hickman (@LeoHickman) December 13, 2023
He links to an older post where his colleague Simon Evans shows that the UN has officially set these conditions.
Updated at 05.08 GMT
05.03 GMT
When the analysts/activists were asked to give the new text a grade of “F,” the analysts/activists gave a grade of “B” to “C,” he writes Nina Lakhani.
Catherine Abreu, founder and CEO of Destination Zerosaid:
“The text sends a clear signal about the need for a just and equitable transition from fossil fuels and calls on parties to start doing so. However, in this critical decade, this does not represent the highest level of ambition that we were looking forward to here.
“The text provides an indication of the amount of financial resources required to make the energy transition possible. But it also recognizes that countries will advance this energy transition at different paces.” However, it does not yet give us a sufficient idea of who needs to take the lead in the energy transition, and that is the developed countries, particularly those that are former producers fossil fuels are. And it should be clearer who is providing the necessary financial resources for the energy transition, and here too the money must come from developed countries.”
Some are very critical of the influence of lobbyists on the process. We've reported extensively on this – the record number of fossil fuel lobbyists at Cop28, but also those from the big meat and dairy industries and the carbon capture industry, and the billionaires in attendance who made their fortunes from polluting industries.
Catherine Abreu, Andreas Sieber and Jean Su speak to the media in Dubai this morning. Photo: Amr Alfiky/Portal
Rachel Rose Jackson, director of climate research and policy at Corporate Accountabilitywho has been involved in lobbying, said:
“A cop swamped by more than 2,400 fossil fuel lobbyists and overseen by a fossil fuel executive delivered a text that might contain some key words, but upon closer inspection, is filled with their polluting garbage, false solutions and dangerous distractions is littered with guarantees of the continuation of the age of fossil fuels. The United States, the United Kingdom, the EU, Norway and others are calling themselves climate “champions,” but are again distorting the outcomes of these talks so that they do not have to turn away from their dependence on fossil fuels. They have bullied and blocked efforts to provide the public finance, technology and capacity we need to actually achieve a just phase-out of fossil fuels, and they are once again orchestrating their grand escape from the obligation to do their fair share by depriving them of equity, the text says.
Updated at 05.37 GMT
04.48 GMT
Initial findings from non-profit analysts are available, it is said Nina Lakhaniand the general consensus is that it is the draft text for a new global inventory significant improvement The latter mainly concerns the change from “should” to “requires” – although still not as strong as hoped a few days ago. There is too much emphasis on unproven technological solutions – what one analyst calls “false solutions” – such as carbon capture and hydrogen, which climate scientists have long said can only ever play a niche role in reducing greenhouse gases.
“Overall, we get a clear signal to phase out fossil fuels… It's not the most ambitious result we could have achieved in this cop, given the momentum of over a hundred countries demanding clear language on this, but it is a step forward,” he said Amos Wemanya, Senior Advisor, Renewable Energy and Just Transitions. “But we still have a lot of wrong solutions in the text.”
Caroline Brouillette, Executive Director of the Climate Action Networksaid:
“This text truly represents the paradox that is Cop28. On the one hand, we've seen the most visible capture of the process by oil and gas lobbyists ever, and on the other, you've seen record momentum to finally address the root cause.
We recognize in the text the need to move away from fossil fuels, which on the one hand represents a significant improvement over the last text and, on the other hand, opens the door not only to dangerous technological distractions such as blue hydrogen and nuclear power, but also to references to traditional fuels being acceptable , which is a myth promoted by the LNG industry and not based on science.”
To the draft Global adaptation target Brouillette said: “The global target in the adaptation text is still an empty commitment because there are no means of implementation associated with the targets,” Brouillette said. A perhaps positive small step forward is that the reference to Article 2.1C [linking adaptation to private finance] has been removed.”
Updated at 04.48 GMT
04.37 a.m. GMMedia representatives are waiting for the reaction to the new text at Cop28. Photo: Peter Dejong/AP
Our reporters are up early in the UAE. Here is the first dispatch from Patrick Greenfield.
Good morning from Dubai, where we finally received the second SMS after a very long wait. The key wording on fossil fuels was changed from the previous version following uproar from island states, the EU, NGOs and many others. It now reads:
“Divesting from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a fair, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade to achieve net zero by 2050, consistent with science.”
I'm back on site at Cop28, where it's still very quiet. The sun rises over the giant dome at the center of the Expo Center and returning delegates are greeted with the news that coffee shops are open in some areas. That's good news: Today could be a long day.
Some people spent the night here waiting for news of the text, sleeping in the corridors and pavilions of the massive convention center. The last few days have been particularly stressful for the negotiators and, I am sure, also for the Presidency of the United Arab Emirates, whose task it is to bring together the world's opinions for the final text package.
Delegations will examine the documents ahead of a final plenary session in the next few hours. Is that enough for small island states struggling to survive, for whom 1.5°C is life-threatening, or will they reject it? Can petrostates accept this suggestion that the age of fossil fuels is coming to an end? Are developing countries satisfied with the text on adapting to a new economic system? That's what we're going to find out today.
We do not yet know whether this is a final text, a take-it-or-leave-it offer to the world, or whether another round of negotiations will be required. These conversations are known to drag on. We have been informed that the hearing venue will be closed on Friday, so the parties will have to move.
Updated at 04.37 GMT
04.30 GMT
Hello and welcome to the Guardian's live coverage of what we hope will be the final leg of the Cop28 climate conference. After the UAE presidency's first text on the global stocktake – the main document discussed at the summit – was widely condemned as not ambitious enough, a second draft has now been published.
The proposed deal calls for nations to transition away from fossil fuels to avert the worst effects of climate change, my colleague writes Adam Morton.
The latest draft text, released early Wednesday in the United Arab Emirates, does not contain a commitment to phase out or reduce fossil fuels, as many countries, civil society groups and scientists have called for.
Instead, it called on countries to contribute to global efforts to phase out fossil fuels in energy systems “in a fair, orderly and equitable manner” and to accelerate action in this critical decade to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, in line with science. to reach zero point”.
Read the whole story here:
Cop28: Second draft text of the climate agreement calls for a “move away” from fossil fuels
The first version of this text was widely criticized. Reactions to the second second have been mixed so far. We will follow the latest developments here.
I'm Natalie Hanman and you can contact me at [email protected] if you have any feedback or comments. Thank you for reading the Guardian.
Check out our full coverage of Cop28 here.
Updated at 04.30 GMT