What does the COP28 deal to ‘transition away’ from fossil fuels actually mean?

Published

2 years ago

December 14, 2023

admin

The latest UN climate change conference in Dubai has seen almost 200 countries commit to “transitioning away from fossil fuels” for the first time.

COP28 negotiators have described it as a “historic” and a “landmark” deal for global efforts to reach net zero by 2050.

But many climate scientists are questioning the impact it will have, with others sceptical about the COP process in general.

Here Sky News looks at what the deal means globally, for the UK and for you.

Fossil fuels, net zero and carbon capture

Despite being widely used, some of the key terms used in COP agreements such as the one struck in Dubai can feel ambiguous.

• Fossil fuels, such as coal, oil and natural gas, form naturally from dead plants and animals in the Earth’s crust. They contain hydrocarbon and can be extracted and burned as fuel for heat and electricity.

• Fossil fuel subsidies are defined as any action by a government to lower the cost of fossil fuel production or prices for energy consumers. In 2022 the International Monetary Fund estimated they were worth 7.1% of global GDP, the equivalent of $7trn (£5.6trn).

• Net zero is achieved when global greenhouse emissions balance out what we remove from the atmosphere. It’s not the same as ‘carbon neutral’, a label often used by businesses to imply a concerted reduction in carbon emissions and offsetting those they do produce.

• Carbon capture uses technology to trap carbon dioxide emitted from fossil fuels and store it underground to avoid any harmful effect to the environment.

• ‘Unabated fossil fuels’ refer to those where no attempt has been made to reduce their emissions through techniques such as carbon capture and storage.

What does the deal promise?

Transitioning away from fossil fuels in our energy systems, beginning in this decade, in a just, orderly and equitable manner so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science
Rapidly phasing down unabated coal and limiting the permitting of new and unabated coal power generation
Tripling renewable energy capacity globally and doubling the global average annual rate of energy efficiency improvements by 2030
Accelerating efforts globally towards net zero emissions energy systems, utilising zero and low carbon fuels well before or by around mid-century
Accelerating zero and low emissions technologies, including, inter alia, renewables, nuclear, abatement and removal technologies, such as carbon capture and utilisation and storage particularly in hard to abate sectors, and low carbon hydrogen production, so as to enhance efforts towards substitution of unabated fossil fuels in energy systems
Substantially reducing non-CO2 emissions, including, in particular, methane emissions globally by 2030
Accelerating emissions reductions from road transport through a range of pathways, including development of infrastructure and rapid deployment of zero emission vehicles
Phasing out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that do not address energy poverty or just transitions, as soon as possible

What does ‘transitioning away’ mean – aren’t we doing it already?

There was agonising debate over the phrasing of the agreement’s clause on fossil fuels, with “transitioning away” eventually chosen over “phase out” or “phase down”.

It means that renewable energy will increase and be gradually substituted for fossil fuels across all global energy systems, according to Professor David Reay, expert in carbon management at the University of Edinburgh and co-chair of the Just Transition Commission.

He tells Sky News that unlike “phase out” there is no determined end point to a “transition”, with the language chosen to cater for countries still heavily reliant on fossil fuels without the economic means to adapt as quickly as others.

Professor Ilan Kelman, an expert in disasters and health at University College London, adds that most countries, including the UK and the US, have been “transitioning away from fossil fuels” for decades.

“This is simply the international community saying we agree that we are transitioning and will continue to transition.

“But what does it mean? Not a lot unless we act on it. It’s just legal terminology. We’ve had similar wording in agreements before that haven’t been acted on.”

At COP26 in Glasgow, “phase out” was used for a clause on coal, but this year it has arguably been diluted to “phase down” and “unabated coal”, which implies coal production can continue.

Professor Kelman adds: “It’s really up to governments, companies, non-profits and individuals to enact it and ensure they go forward with it.”

Is COP legally binding?

COP places no legal obligation on its signatories to meet the terms of its agreements.

In response, countries are expected to update their own climate change legislation and ‘nationally determined contributions (NDCs)’, drawn up as part of the 2015 Paris climate agreement, accordingly.

Professor Reay says this year’s COP agreement is “really important to set the stage” as new NDCs are currently being devised ahead of the next set of targets in 2025.

“By the time we get to COP in Brazil in 2025, we’ve got a possibility of a major closing of the gap in terms of what nations are committing to do and how that adds up to limiting warming close to 1.5C,” he says.

Professor Kelman is more sceptical, saying the lack of accountability and enforcement for countries who fall behind on their promises makes the process “meaningless”.

What does it mean for me?

If the near-200 countries signed up to COP28 honour the idea of “transitioning away” from fossil fuels, fewer companies are likely to invest in them, Professor Reay says.

This means that at a consumer level, renewable alternatives like electric cars and heat pumps will become more commonplace – making it easier for us to make green choices, he adds.

But Professor Kelman argues that while COP reinforces the need to reduce our electricity consumption, it is “up to governments local through to national to enact the legislation so people are not hurt” by climate initiatives.

“COP processes and these agreements don’t really have much of an impact on individuals,” he says.

“But as individuals, if we want cheaper electricity, to breathe cleaner air, and for our taxes not to go towards subsidising fossil fuels we have to tell our politicians we want those things.”

How does the UK stand?

The UK Climate Change Act was passed in 2008 and has been updated regularly by successive governments according to global warming estimates and COP agreements.

Like most countries, it has always had the goal of contributing to net zero by 2050.

But earlier this year, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was heavily criticised for delaying the ban on new petrol and diesel vehicles, weakening targets to phase out gas boilers, and issuing new gas and oil drilling licences in the North Sea.

While Professor Kelman describes the original UK climate legislation as “world leading”, he says the new North Sea licences are the “antithesis” of climate targets and the transition to a green economy.

Professor Reay chairs the Just Transition Commission, which advocates for progressive long-term sustainability strategies that do not come at a cost to individuals.

He warns that the UK government is using the concept of a ‘just transition’ as an “excuse to go slower on climate action”.

“We’re losing climate leadership not just morally, but it will also damage us economically if we carry on this line of essentially hiding from climate action,” he says.

Is COP28 strong enough for net zero by 2050?

Net zero targets depend first on whether countries adhere to the agreement, but also on how net zero is defined and calculated, Professor Kelman says.

“There are climate experts who say that net zero is so ambiguous and vague that it doesn’t mean much.

“So there’s a chance that countries might not meet their target or they’ll calculate it in such a way that doesn’t help in extensively reducing all greenhouse gases.”

But although we are “way off” the Paris target of limiting warming to 1.5C by the end of the century – instead on track for 3C – Professor Reay still believes COP28 “gets us closer” to net zero 2050 goals.

“This will provide a context for nations to ramp up their ambitions and move us closer,” he adds.

World

‘Nobody likes Trump’: Sky News finds defiance on the streets of Tehran

Published

4 hours ago

July 5, 2025

admin

'Nobody likes Trump': Sky News finds defiance on the streets of Tehran

To the sound of mournful chants and the slow beat of drums, they march, whipping their backs with metal flails.

It is an ancient ceremony going back almost 14 centuries – the Shia commemoration of Ashura.

But this year in particular has poignant significance for Iranians.

The devout remember the betrayal and death of the Imam Hussein as if it happened yesterday.

We filmed men and women weep as they worshipped at the Imamzadeh Saleh Shrine in northern Tehran.

The grandson of the Prophet Muhammad was killed by the armies of the Caliph Yazid in the seventh century Battle of Karbala.

Shia Muslims mark the anniversary every year and reflect on the virtue it celebrates – of resistance against oppression and injustice. But more so than ever this year, in the wake of Israel and America’s attacks on their country.

The story is one of prevailing over adversity and deception. A sense of betrayal is keenly felt here by people and officials.

Many Iranians believe they were lured into pursuing diplomacy as part of a ruse by the US.

Iran believed it was making diplomatic progress in talks with America, which it hoped could lead to a deal. Then Israel launched its attacks and, instead of condemning them, the US joined in.

“Death to Israel” chants resounded outside the mosque in skies that for 12 days were filled with the sounds of Israeli jets.

There is a renewed sense of defiance here.

One man told us: “The lesson to be learned from Hussein is not to give in to oppression, even if it is the most powerful force in the world.”

A woman was dismissive about the US president.

“I don’t think about Trump. Nobody likes him. He always wants to attack too many countries.”

Pictures on billboards nearby link Imam Hussein’s story and current events. They show the seventh century imam on horseback alongside images of modern missiles and drones from the present day.

Other huge signs remember the dead. Iran says almost 1,000 people were killed in the strikes, many of them women and children.

Officially Iran is projecting defiance, but not closing the door to diplomacy.

Government spokeswoman Dr Fatemeh Mohajerani told Sky News that Israel should not even think about attacking again.

“We are very strong in defence, and as state officials have announced, this time Israel will receive an even stronger response compared to previous times. We hope that Israel will not make such a mistake.”

But there is also a hint of conciliation. Senior Iranian officials have told Sky News back-channel efforts are under way to explore new talks with the US.

Israel had hoped its attacks could topple the Iranian leadership. Those hopes proved unfounded. The government is in control here.

For many Iranians it seems quite the opposite happened – the 12-day war has brought them closer together.

World

Two security workers injured after grenades thrown at aid site, Gaza Humanitarian Foundation says

Published

7 hours ago

July 5, 2025

admin

Two security workers injured after grenades thrown at aid site, Gaza Humanitarian Foundation says

Two American security workers in Gaza were injured after grenades were thrown during food distribution in Khan Younis, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) has said.

In a statement, the US and Israeli-backed aid group said a targeted terrorist attack was carried out at one of its sites in southern Gaza on Saturday morning.

The two Americans injured “are receiving medical treatment and are in stable condition,” it said, adding that the delivery of aid was “otherwise successful” and that “no local aid workers or civilians were harmed”.

GHF didn’t say exactly when the incident happened but claimed Hamas was behind the attack, adding: “GHF has repeatedly warned of credible threats from Hamas, including explicit plans to target American personnel, Palestinian aid workers, and the civilians who rely on our sites for food.

“Today’s attack tragically affirms those warnings.”

Later, the aid group posted a picture on social media, which it said showed “fragments of a grenade packed with ball bearings” that was used in the attack.

Asked by Sky’s US partner network, NBC News, whether the two injured individuals were responsible for handing out aid or were responsible for providing security, GHF said they were “American security workers” and “two American veterans.”

The aid group did not provide specific evidence that Hamas was behind the attack.

The US and Israeli-backed group has been primarily responsible for aid distribution since Israel lifted its 11-week blockade of the Gaza Strip in May.

It comes after Sky News analysis showed GHF aid distributions are associated with a significant increase in deaths in Gaza.

According to Gaza’s health ministry, 600 Palestinians have been killed while seeking aid from GHF sites as of 3 July, which charities and the UN have branded “death traps”.

Meanwhile, the Associated Press has reported that Israeli-backed American contractors guarding GHF aid centres in Gaza are using live ammunition and stun grenades.

GHF has vehemently denied the accusations, adding that it investigated AP’s allegations and found them to be “categorically false”.

Israel’s military added that it fires only warning shots and is investigating reports of civilian harm.

It denies deliberately shooting at any innocent civilians and says it’s examining how to reduce “friction with the population” in the areas surrounding the distribution centres.

World

Hamas gives ‘positive’ response to ceasefire proposal but asks for amendments

Published

13 hours ago

July 5, 2025

admin

Hamas gives 'positive' response to ceasefire proposal but asks for amendments

Hamas has said it has “submitted its positive response” to the latest proposal for a ceasefire in Gaza to mediators.

The proposal for a 60-day ceasefire was presented by US President Donald Trump, who has been pushing hard for a deal to end the fighting in Gaza, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu set to visit the White House next week to discuss a deal.

Mr Trump said Israel had agreed to his proposed ceasefire terms, and he urged Hamas to accept the deal as well.

Hamas’ “positive” response to the proposal had slightly different wording on three issues around humanitarian aid, the status of the Israeli Defence Forces inside Gaza and the language around guarantees beyond the 60-day ceasefire, a source with knowledge of the negotiations revealed.

But the source told Sky News: “Things are looking good.”

Hamas said it is “fully prepared to immediately enter into a round of negotiations regarding the mechanism for implementing this framework” without elaborating on what needed to be worked out in the proposal’s implementation.

The US said during the ceasefire it would “work with all parties to end the war”.

A Hamas official said on condition of anonymity that the truce could start as early as next week.

But he added that talks were needed first to establish how many Palestinian prisoners would be released in return for each freed Israeli hostage and to specify the amount of humanitarian aid that will be allowed to enter Gaza during the ceasefire.

He said negotiations on a permanent ceasefire and the full withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza in return for the release of the remaining hostages would start on the first day of the truce.

Hamas has been seeking guarantees that the 60-day ceasefire would lead to a total end to the nearly 21-month-old war, which caused previous rounds of negotiations to fail as Mr Netanyahu has insisted that Israel would continue fighting in Gaza to ensure the destruction of Hamas.

The Hamas official said that Mr Trump has guaranteed that the ceasefire will extend beyond 60 days if necessary to reach a peace deal, but there is no confirmation from the US of such a guarantee.

Speaking to journalists on Air Force One, Mr Trump welcomed Hamas’s “positive spirit” to the proposal, adding that there could be a ceasefire deal by next week.

Hamas also said it wants more aid to flow through the United Nations and other humanitarian agencies, which comes as the UN human rights officer said it recorded 613 Palestinians killed in Gaza within a month while trying to obtain aid.

Most of them were said to have been killed while trying to reach food distribution points by the controversial US- and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF).

The spokeswoman for the UN human rights office, Ravina Shamdasani, said the agency was not able to attribute responsibility for the killings, but added that “it is clear that the Israeli military has shelled and shot at Palestinians trying to reach the distribution points” operated by GHF.

Ms Shamdasani said that of the total tallied, 509 killings were “GHF-related”, meaning at or near its distribution sites.

The GHF accused the UN of taking its casualty figures “directly from the Hamas-controlled Gaza health ministry” and of trying “to falsely smear our effort”, which echoed statements to Sky News by the executive director of GHF, Johnnie Moore.

Mr Moore called the UN figures a “disinformation campaign” that is “meant to shut down our efforts” in the Gaza Strip.