Will upcoming COP 29 engage in a frank, in-depth discussion of pressing climate issues?

By NS Venkataraman*

The forthcoming Climate Meet COP 29, scheduled to take place from November 9 to November 22 in Azerbaijan, has not generated much enthusiasm. On the contrary, there is significant skepticism regarding its outcome, especially given the results of the previous 28 climate summits held in various countries.

The reality is that little has changed over the years. Global warming continues to progress, resulting in severe and unpredictable weather changes, along with other adverse effects on the climate.

One cannot help but feel that these climate conferences have become an annual ritual—filled with lofty declarations, ambitious promises, and demands from developing countries for financial support from developed nations to implement eco-friendly measures aimed at protecting the global climate.

It is well known that to protect the global climate, the emission of harmful gases such as carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, sulfur dioxide, and methane must be curbed and eventually eliminated to achieve zero emissions. The first step towards this goal is the reduction and eventual cessation of fossil fuel consumption, such as coal and crude oil. Unfortunately, this is not happening.

Ambitious targets faltering

Many countries have set their own targets for achieving zero emissions within a specified timeframe. India, for instance, has pledged to achieve zero emissions by 2070, while China has set a target for 2050, with other countries establishing similar deadlines.

However, despite these ambitious targets, the reality is that these promises have not been accompanied by a corresponding reduction in the production and use of coal, crude oil, natural gas, or a decrease in methane emissions from livestock. Fossil fuel producers are not reducing their output, and consumers are not curbing their consumption. In fact, coal consumption has been steadily increasing, despite the commitments made during previous climate conferences. As a result, there is a growing sense that these pledges are hollow.

It is widely recognized that alternative, eco-friendly energy sources such as solar, wind, and hydro power, along with green hydrogen production and biofuels, are the substitutes for fossil fuels in energy generation. However, the development and production of these alternatives are progressing slowly and are far from the levels needed to meet global energy demands. Several issues are hindering their growth, including the high production cost of green hydrogen, limitations in solar, wind, and hydro power due to seasonal factors, and challenges with methane gas emissions since livestock populations cannot be easily reduced.

While alternative energy sources are essential and must be developed with the highest priority, they are unlikely to significantly reduce the demand for fossil fuels, especially as global energy demand continues to rise.

Why not reduce energy demand?

One area that the climate conferences have not adequately addressed is the possibility of reducing global energy demand, which could, in turn, decrease the demand for fossil fuels. Developing countries, in particular, would resist efforts to reduce energy demand, as it would negatively impact their industrial and economic growth.

Alternatively, energy demand could be reduced through the optimization of energy use via technological advancements and the development of less energy-intensive products and services. However, these efforts would likely have a limited effect on the overall demand for fossil fuels.

Another possible solution is to reduce the global population, as more people naturally lead to increased energy demand and fossil fuel consumption. While countries such as South Korea, Japan, and Russia are concerned about declining populations and are implementing measures to encourage population growth, countries like India and those in Africa are experiencing steady population increases. As a result, the global population continues to rise.

The COP 29 summit should address this issue and consider setting targets for stabilizing the global population to a sustainable level.

Impact of wars and conflicts

Even as countries express concern over climate issues and participate in global climate conferences, some are engaged in ongoing conflicts and wars, such as the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas conflict. Additionally, terrorist activities continue to occur around the world. These wars and acts of violence, involving the use of missiles, bombings, shootings, and drone attacks, release vast amounts of toxic gases into the atmosphere, significantly contributing to pollution. It seems that the climate conferences have largely ignored this issue.

The key question is whether the upcoming COP 29 will engage in a frank and in-depth discussion of these pressing issues, or if it will merely engage in superficial discussions, as in previous years. Given the outcomes of past conferences, there is a valid reason to view COP 29 with a sense of despair rather than hope.

---

*Trustee, Nandini Voice for the Deprived, Chennai