“Fossil Fuel Producers and Green Energy Advocates”

– Juan Cole

This bloc is a combination of poor countries seeking to avoid any caps on growth and major fossil fuel producers. India and China are major coal producers, Saudi Arabia and Iran are major exporters of petroleum, and Bolivia is an exporter of fossil gas. Egypt is in the former category. India is driven by both considerations. Although many of these fossil fuel producers and users are in the global south, they are backed by northern countries such as Russia.

I note with dismay that several Middle Eastern countries are the bad guys here.

On the other hand, Harvey says many environmentally conscious countries won’t sign a statement that lacks this language.

That is, the retrograde states are in conflict with another bloc, led by Western European countries and by islands threatened by rising seas, who generally lack much in the way of fossil fuels and who fear the catastrophic effects of climate disasters. This bloc, too, is a mixture of global south and global north countries.

The battle royale between the two may prevent COP30, hosted by Brazil, from issuing any joint communiqué or “cover letter.” COP stands for “Conference of Parties” to the Kyoto Climate Accord, which began being negotiated in 1995.

Actually, the 2015 Paris Climate Accord demands that countries rejigger their power grids and other fuel uses to ensure that global heating remains under 1.5º C. (2.7º F.) above the preindustrial average. We are already at 1.3º C., and will likely blow past the 1.5º C. limit in the next few years. Climate scientists are afraid that heating the planet more than that will turn the climate system chaotic, so that we will experience not just climate disasters but weird, unpredictable and catastrophic weather phenomena on a regular basis.

If we don’t want that outcome, we have to limit the use of fossil fuels. I genuinely can’t understand the Indian position. Solar panels in India produce electricity more cheaply than coal, so why not just replace the one with the other? India doesn’t have much petroleum, so it would save billions of dollars in oil imports if it quickly electrified transport. There is a costly initial outlay, to be sure, but such green investments would save enormous amounts of money over the coming decades and might keep parts of India from becoming uninhabitable. A quick green transition would not limit Indian development but accelerate it. India has some excellent green energy goals and has made substantial progress, and now is not the time to slack off.

Indian politicians say, not without some justice, that advanced industrial countries that put most of the CO2 up in the atmosphere over the past 200 years, and got rich doing it, ought to help out with cost of the green energy transition and with adaptation to climate change in their former colonies and other countries of the global south. This principle is enshrined in Article 9.1 of the 2015 Paris Climate Treaty.

The same Western European countries that are demanding a reaffirmation of the goal of ending fossil fuels by 2050 don’t want to hear anything more about their responsibility to help fund the green energy transition or climate resiliency in the global south.