‘Historic’ COP28 deal to ‘transition away’ from fossil fuels adopted

Published

2 years ago

December 14, 2023

admin

Governments have agreed for the first time ever to “transition away” from fossil fuels to avert the worst effects of climate change, in an “historic” agreement from the COP28 climate summit.

The UN’s climate body, UNFCCC, published the draft text of the deal early on Wednesday morning after negotiations had run well into the small hours in Dubai.

Host nation the United Arab Emirates then quickly rushed it through a closing plenary session, facing no objections.

“Let us finish what we have started,” said COP28 President Sultan al-Jaber, as the room erupted in applause.

“We have language on fossil fuels in our final agreement for the first time ever.” He called it “historic”.

Follow latest: Standing ovation after ‘world first’ agreement at COP28

The deal is not legally-binding, but calls on all countries to move away from the use of fossil fuels, for the first time in almost 30 years of COP climate summits.

It does not satisfy the small island states like Samoa and the Marshall Islands who led an earlier push to “phase out” all fossil fuels, which would have been stronger than the “transition away” that was finally agreed.

It also contained loopholes that upset critics, such as allowing a role for “transitional fuels” like gas.

But it still is a big leap forward from anything previously agreed at a COP climate summit.

Sky News’ climate reporter Victoria Seabrook was inside the closing session of COP28 and said there were “emotional” scenes.

“There were hugs, there were tears. I saw the US climate envoy John Kerry hugging the German foreign minister Annalena Baerbock.

“There was a round of applause for the Marshall Islands who were really one of the leading voices calling for this transition away from fossil fuels.”

She added: “Of course, this document does not dictate our entire energy future, but it’s a turning point.

“It’s a very clear signal to countries, to markets, to financiers, about the direction we are going in.”

Mr Kerry has given a news conference where he said there were “times in the last 48 hours when some of us thought (efforts to reach a deal) could fail”.

Taking aim at some COP28 members, he said “not every country is stepping up” and he is “not convinced” a transition to a no-carbon economy will be done quick enough to avoid the “worst consequences” of climate change.

Mr Kerry earlier said the deal sends a “clear, unambiguous message” about “transitioning away from fossil fuels”.

However, he added it “doesn’t mean you have everything solved overnight”.

“I really feel like we’re turning a corner, it’s a big ship you have to turn,” Mr Kerry said.

Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, has welcomed the COP28 agreement, hailing it a “global turning point”.

She specifically praised the adopted special fund for poor nations hurt by climate change.

Meanwhile, the UN’s climate chief Simon Stiell said earlier that the COP28 deal is the “beginning of the end” for fossil fuels, adding there have been some “genuine strides forward” at the summit. However, he warned the initiatives are “not a finish line”.

Joab Okanda, senior climate adviser for Christian Aid, said: “We may not have driven the nail into the coffin here at COP28, but the end is coming for dirty energy.”

However, he said there is a “gaping hole” in the money needed to actually fund the transition from dirty to clean energy in developing countries, meaning the shift will be slower than needed.

The deal specifically calls for “transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner… so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science”.

The document recognises “the need for deep, rapid and sustained reductions in GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions in line with 1.5C pathways” and calls upon nations to take notice.

Saudi Arabia had fought hardest against a fossil fuel phase out, afraid for the future of its oil-based economy.

But developing nations like India and Bolivia were also afraid about making a commitment that could compromise their development, without the finance to make the leap to clean energy.

Eventually the calls from the likes of the small islands, the High Ambition Coalition of developed and vulnerable nations, the UK and the EU for an end to fossil fuels were so noisy overnight that they almost drowned out objections.

Climate deal signals fossil fuels era is coming to an end – but not fast enough

Tom Clarke

Science and technology editor

@t0mclark3

The deal passed almost immediately. It is quite remarkable.

I have been to a lot of these summits and I have never seen one end as quickly and as painlessly as that.

And it did, quickly. It is a remarkable agreement.

For the 30 years this climate summit process has been going on there has been no formal recognition of the fact if we are going to avoid the most dangerous climate change we have to phase out our use of fossil fuels.

That specific language – phasing them out – didn’t quite make it.

It was probably never going to in a region or in a text dominated by fossil fuels – but it did pass, with some slight watering down.

But the headline agreement was how we are going to continue efforts globally to get 1.5C of global warming – hopefully no more than that – by the middle of this century.

What was agreed today was a big step forward. It mentioned fossils fuels. It clearly said they have got to go if we are going to get there.

But there were big caveats – “cavernous loopholes” described by some NGOs, that really allow quite a lot of wriggle room.

For example, they describe the importance of transition fuels, and what does that mean? Well, that’s natural gas – a little offering there for the rich and gas-rich countries to continue their work.

As things currently stand this agreement only takes us about 30% of the way to getting to avoiding 1.5C of global warming, according to the independent International Energy Agency.

So we are definitely not there yet, but it’s a big step forward.

Historic? Yes, the deal mentions fossil fuels.

But possibly historic for the wrong reasons: this was a missed opportunity to phase them out fast enough to avoid that dangerous global warming this process is all about.

The text also makes a nod to “differentiated” responsibility for countries with different means.

The actions in the deal include:

• Tripling renewable energy capacity globally and doubling the global average annual rate of energy efficiency improvements by 2030

• Rapidly phasing down unabated coal and limiting the permitting of new and unabated coal power generation

• Accelerating efforts globally towards net zero emissions energy systems, utilising zero and low carbon fuels well before or by around mid-century

• 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

• Accelerating zero and low emissions technologies, including 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

• Accelerating and 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.

Then, the United Arab Emirates-led presidency, fronted by Sultan al Jaber presented delegates from nearly 200 nations a new central document – called the global stocktake – just after sunrise in Dubai.

Some of the language in previous versions of the draft that most upset nations calling for dramatic action to address climate change was altered.

Actions that had previously been presented as an optional “could” changed to a bit more direct “calls on parties to”.

After a quick debrief, Union of Concerned Scientists climate and energy policy director Rachel Cleetus said it was “definitely an improvement” over earlier versions that environmental advocacy groups like hers had massively criticised.

The aim of the global stocktake is to help nations align their national climate plans with the Paris Agreement.

World

Donald Trump announces 30% tariff on imports from EU

Published

3 hours ago

July 12, 2025

admin

Donald Trump announces 30% tariff on imports from EU

Donald Trump has announced he will impose a 30% tariff on imports from the European Union from 1 August.

The tariffs could make everything from French cheese and Italian leather goods to German electronics and Spanish pharmaceuticals more expensive in the US.

Mr Trump has also imposed a 30% tariff on goods from Mexico, according to a post from his Truth Social account.

Announcing the moves in separate letters on the account, the president said the US trade deficit was a national security threat.

In his letter to the EU, he wrote: “We have had years to discuss our trading relationship with The European Union, and we have concluded we must move away from these long-term, large, and persistent, trade Deficits, engendered by your tariff, and non-Tariff, policies, and trade barriers.

“Our relationship has been, unfortunately, far from reciprocal.”

In his letter to Mexico, Mr Trump said he did not think the country had done enough to stop the US from turning into a “narco-trafficking playground”.

The president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, said today that the EU could adopt “proportionate countermeasures” if the US proceeds with imposing the 30% tariff.

Ms von der Leyen, who heads the EU’s executive arm, said in a statement that the bloc remained ready “to continue working towards an agreement by Aug 1”.

“Few economies in the world match the European Union’s level of openness and adherence to fair trading practices,” she continued.

“We will take all necessary steps to safeguard EU interests, including the adoption of proportionate countermeasures if required.”

Ms von der Leyen has also said imposing tariffs on EU exports would “disrupt essential transatlantic supply chains”.

Meanwhile, Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof said on the X social media platform that Mr Trump’s announcement was “very concerning and not the way forward”.

He added: “The European Commission can count on our full support. As the EU we must remain united and resolute in pursuing an outcome with the United States that is mutually beneficial.”

Mexico’s economy ministry said a bilateral working group aims to reach an alternative to the 30% US tariffs before they are due to take effect.

The country was informed by the US that it would receive a letter about the tariffs, the ministry’s statement said, adding that Mexico was negotiating.

Trump’s tariff threats and delays

On his so-called “liberation day” in April, Mr Trump unleashed “reciprocal tariffs” on many of America’s trade partners.

The US president said he was targeting countries with which America has a trade imbalance.

However, since then he’s backed down in a spiralling tit-for-tat tariff face-off with China, and struck a deal with the UK.

The US imposed a 20% tariff on imported goods from the EU in April but it was later paused and the bloc has since been paying a baseline tariff of 10% on goods it exports to the US.

In May, while the US and EU where holding trade negotiations, Mr Trump threated to impose a 50% tariff on the bloc as talks didn’t progress as he would have liked.

However, he later announced he was delaying the imposition of that tariff while negotiations over a trade deal took place.

As of earlier this week, the EU’s executive commission, which handles trade issues for the bloc’s 27-member nations, said its leaders were still hoping to strike a trade deal with the Trump administration.

Without one, the EU said it was prepared to retaliate with tariffs on hundreds of American products, ranging from beef and auto parts to beer and Boeing airplanes.

World

‘At least 798 killed’ at Gaza aid points – as medical charity warns acute malnutrition at all-time high

Published

22 hours ago

July 11, 2025

admin

'At least 798 killed' at Gaza aid points - as medical charity warns acute malnutrition at all-time high

At least 798 people in Gaza have reportedly been killed while receiving aid in the past six weeks – while acute malnutrition is said to have reached an all-time high.

The UN human rights office said 615 of the deaths – between 27 May and 7 July – were “in the vicinity” of sites run by the controversial US and Israel-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF).

A further 183 people killed were “presumably on the route of aid convoys,” said Ravina Shamdasani, from the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Its figures are based on a range of sources, including hospitals, cemeteries, and families in the Gaza Strip, as well as non-governmental organisations (NGOs), its partners on the ground, and Hamas-run health authorities.

Aid agency Project Hope said on Thursday that 10 children were among at least 15 people killed as they waited for its clinic in Deir al Balah to open.

The GHF has claimed the UN figures are “false and misleading” and has repeatedly denied any violence at or around its sites.

Meanwhile, Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) – also known as Doctors Without Borders – said two of its sites were seeing their worst-ever levels of severe malnutrition.

Cases at its Gaza City clinic are said to have tripled from 293 in May to 983 in early July.

“Over 700 pregnant or breastfeeding women and nearly 500 children are now receiving emergency nutritional care,” MSF said.

The humanitarian medical charity said food prices were at extreme levels, with sugar at $766 (£567) per kilo and flour $30 (£22) per kilo, and many families surviving on one meal of rice or lentils a day.

It’s a major concern for the estimated 55,000 pregnant women in Gaza, who risk miscarriage, stillbirth and malnourished infants because of the shortages.

The GHF began distributing food packages in Gaza at the end of May, after Israel eased its 11-week blockade of aid into the coastal territory.

It has four distribution centres, three of which are in the southern Gaza Strip.

The sites, kept off-limits to independent media, are guarded by private security contractors and located in zones where the Israeli military operates.

Palestinian witnesses say Israeli forces have repeatedly opened fire towards crowds of people going to receive aid.

The Israeli military says it has fired warning shots at people who have behaved in what it says is a suspicious manner.

It says its forces operate near the aid sites to stop supplies from falling into the hands of militants.

After the deaths of hundreds of Palestinians trying to reach the aid hubs, the United Nations has called the GHF’s aid model “inherently unsafe” and a violation of humanitarian impartiality standards.

In response, a GHF spokesperson said: “The fact is the most deadly attacks on aid sites have been linked to UN convoys.”

The GHF says it has delivered more than 70 million meals to Gazans in five weeks and claims other humanitarian groups had “nearly all of their aid looted” by Hamas or criminal gangs.

World

At least 798 people have been killed at Gaza aid points, the UN says

Published

1 day ago

July 11, 2025

admin

At least 798 people in Gaza have been killed while receiving aid in six weeks, the UN human rights office has said.

A spokesperson for the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights said 615 of the killings were “in the vicinity” of sites run by the controversial US and Israel-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF).

A further 183 people killed were “presumably on the route of aid convoys,” Ravina Shamdasani told reporters in Geneva.

The office said its figures are based on numbers from a range of sources, including hospitals, cemeteries and families in the Gaza Strip, as well as NGOs, its partners on the ground and the Hamas-run health authorities.

The GHF has claimed the figures are “false and misleading”. It has repeatedly denied there has been any violence at or around its sites.

The organisation began distributing food packages in Gaza at the end of May, after Israel eased its 11-week blockade of aid into the enclave.

It has four distribution centres, three of which are in the southern Gaza Strip. The sites, kept off-limits to independent media, are guarded by private security contractors and located in zones where the Israeli military operates.

Palestinian witnesses say Israeli forces have repeatedly opened fire towards crowds of people going to receive aid.

The Israeli military says it has fired warning shots at people who have behaved in what they say is a suspicious manner.

It says its forces operate near the aid sites to stop supplies falling into the hands of militants.

In response, a GHF spokesperson told the Reuters news agency: “The fact is the most deadly attacks on aid sites have been linked to UN convoys.”

The GHF says it has delivered more than 70 million meals to Gazans in five weeks and claims other humanitarian groups had “nearly all of their aid looted” by Hamas or criminal gangs.