If ever there was a year that called for bold global action on climate change, it was 2023.
In what will likely go down as the hottest year on record – a year of catastrophic flooding, scorching heat waves, devastating wildfires and persistent drought – leaders from nearly 200 countries came together to chart a path forward in the fight against climate change .
After more than two weeks of tense negotiations at the United Nations Climate Change Conference, known as COP28, in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, representatives of 198 countries agreed on Wednesday to “move off” fossil fuels.
It was a historic deal, but one that once again fell short for many climate activists, who saw it as further evidence that efforts to tackle climate change are moving too slowly and are being compromised by fossil fuel interests.
Former Vice President Al Gore called the agreement an “important milestone” but added that recognizing the role that burning fossil fuels has played in the climate crisis is “the bare minimum that we need and is long overdue.” to happen’.
“Whether this is a turning point that truly marks the beginning of the end of the fossil fuel era depends on the actions that come next and the mobilization of financial resources necessary to achieve them,” Gore wrote on Wednesday on the Social media platform
The skepticism about what comes next is understandable. The lack of a concrete plan in the COP agreement to eliminate fossil fuel use adds to growing concerns that the major steps needed to prevent drastic environmental impacts are falling short. Certainly, the rise of clean energy technology and broader social awareness of global warming have led to some optimism, but many environmentalists emphasize that these developments could mean little without a dramatic reduction in the amount of carbon dioxide pumped into the atmosphere.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres said on Wednesday that the age of fossil fuels “must end”, adding that science indicates it will be impossible to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2. 7 degrees Fahrenheit) without eliminating its use.
“Like it or not, the phase-out of fossil fuels is inevitable,” he wrote on X. “Let’s hope it doesn’t come too late.”
The COP28 climate summit was controversial from the start. The host country, the UAE, is an oil-rich nation, and the meeting’s chairman, Sultan al-Jaber, is CEO of the UAE’s state oil company, ADNOC.
Early in the conference, Al-Jaber came under fire for claiming during an online event in late November that there was “no science” supporting the need to phase out fossil fuels to limit global warming, as first reported by The Guardian.
The event came as confidence that oil companies are committed to cutting fossil fuel emissions has waned. While major oil and gas companies previously said they would transition to clean energy and do their part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, they have withdrawn many of those claims in the past year. Critics have accused the industry of ‘greenwashing’ as companies have ramped up exploration and hundreds of new oil and gas projects have been approved around the world.
During the meeting, which turned into overtime talks, critics questioned how much could be achieved on fossil fuels if it were held in Dubai and led by Al-Jaber. These fears emerged when it became clear that the final agreement would not lead to a phase-out of fossil fuels.
Although the terms “transition” and “phasing out” sound similar, there are important differences between the two. The phase-out means that its use in energy systems will eventually be eliminated, while the “transition away” means a compromise, implying that its use will be reduced but will still continue.
Nate Hultman, a former State Department official and founding director of the Center for Global Sustainability at the University of Maryland, said it was an open question at the start of the conference whether world leaders would seriously debate the future of fossil fuels .
“There was a risk that this was an exercise in avoiding a problem,” he said.
But Hultman said the final agreement — which calls on countries to transition equitably from fossil fuels, triple the amount of renewable energy installed by 2030 and support leaks of the potent greenhouse gas methane — makes it clear that world leaders did take into account with a future without fossil fuels.
“The outcome indicates that this issue has not only been substantially discussed, but also highlighted in the text. There are good, strong elements,” said Hultman, who attended his 21st COP this year. “It will be important that these kinds of signals are sent about the transition away from fossil fuels.”
Yet the agreement is non-binding and its critics – particularly leaders from poor developing countries and island nations disproportionately affected by climate change – say it does not go far enough to eliminate fossil fuels and keep global temperatures below 1 .5 degrees Celsius. pre workout.
Many climate scientists and activists have expressed frustration that calls to ‘phase out’ fossil fuels have weakened significantly.
“The agreement emerging from COP28 rightly emphasizes nature as the solution, but its failure to recognize the need to phase out fossil fuel use is disheartening,” said Mustafa Santiago Ali, executive vice president of conservation and justice at the nonprofit National Wildlife Federation. said in a statement on Wednesday.
Earlier this week, when drafts of the agreement appeared, emotions ran even higher. Gore wrote on X on Monday that “COP28 is now on the brink of complete failure.”
Ultimately, for the first time in nearly three decades of these UN summits, countries agreed that a shift away from fossil fuels was necessary to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by or around 2050 and to avert the worst effects of climate change. turn.
The mere mention of what the elephant in the room was at previous COP meetings was greeted as a major milestone.
“The fact that fossil fuel phasing out has taken center stage in an international arena would have been difficult to imagine five years ago and is significant progress,” said Michael Lazarus, a senior scientist and director of the Stockholm Environment Institute US. , based in Seattle. “It means that there is now an expiration date, an expiration date, for fossil fuels. We are at a point where we can imagine moving away from fossil fuels.”
Lazarus said the consensual nature of the international process – each country participating in the deliberations effectively has a veto – makes global progress hell.
“People talk about it being all words and no action, but the discourse that comes out of these international meetings has a remarkable resonance and the ability to change the conversation,” Lazarus said. “Unless we have an appetite for global action to phase out fossil fuels and reduce emissions across the board, countries will not have the same incentives to act in the ways they need.”
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com