He notes that it is “enough to keep accelerating in time to come, but obviously well below our expectations.”
In a summit that already appears among the longest in historywhose final plenary session has been rescheduled several times throughout Saturday and in the early hours of Sunday, the results that can be expected point to an agreement that does not raise the ambition from the Glasgow Pactproduct of the last climate summit held in Scotland.
According to what the Spanish Ecological Transition Minister, Teresa Ribera, told a group of journalists, the last negotiated document to which the delegations had access is “much better & rdquor; in the field of mitigation of climate change compared to the one proposed a few hours ago by the presidency of the summit, which announced a possible setback in climate action regarding the Glasgow Pact.
“We stayed as we were in mitigation at the beginning, with very little else on the table. Enough to keep accelerating in time to come but obviously well below our expectations,” said Ribera.
According to the minister, some of the demands of the negotiating bloc of the European Union have not been reflected in this latest text, as is the case, for example, of reflecting in the document the need to achieve peak greenhouse gas emissions in 2025as recommended by the scientific community.
Neither did they win in the negotiations the battle to include a request to the countries of phase out power plants from fossil fuels that do not have carbon capture technologies, starting with coal but continuing with oil and gas.
Another of the major requests of the EU in the discussion on how to contain the heating below degree and a half with respect to pre-industrial levels was to establish in the document the obligation to annually review the emission reduction commitments established at the national level (NDCs).
heating
Ribera regretted that a firmer obligation in this sense had not been included in the text, since the proposal for a decision proposed by the presidency affirms that “This can be done but only by those who are willing to do it and not of a general nature by all parties& rdquor;, which “gives coverage to large issuers that are not willing to review their commitments more than every five years& rdquor;.
“For us it was essential to consolidate that need to remove the fossil fuels sooner, and that commitment to continue increasing ambition and reviewing it annually & rdquor;, said the minister, who criticized the proposal in terms of mitigation, although “it does not take a step back & rdquor; With respect to what was agreed in Glasgow, “it is not moving forward either & rdquor ;.