Sharm el-Sheikh: With the issue of ‘loss and damage’ finance raised during the final phase of negotiations at the United Nations climate talks (COP27), whether even a large current emitter like India should to pay To this, Indian negotiators on Wednesday termed the demand of some interest groups as a ploy to unfairly shift responsibilities from developed countries to developing countries.
The European Union (EU) fueled the whole debate by explicitly saying that China should contribute money to ‘loss and damage’ finance to help vulnerable countries cover the costs of climate damage. “I think we should take the position we have today. China is one of the largest economies on the planet with a lot of financial strength. Why shouldn’t they be made co-responsible for the wealth? … In 1992, a There was logic behind it I could follow. But not now in 2022,” said The European Union Climate policy chief Frans Timmermans answers a question on China and India.
However, he chose not to name India – which is being seen here as an attempt to differentiate India from China on this front. But at the same time, Timmermans made it clear that money for loss and damage should only go to the most vulnerable countries, not all developing countries, as the G77 group proposed in its resolution on ‘loss and damage’ financing . ,
While demands for India’s contribution came mostly from small and vulnerable countries such as Mauritius, Jamaica, Uganda and Mali, Indian negotiators responded to such demands by saying that the country has a false narrative of being the biggest emitter. It is propagated by those who owe the world a huge carbon debt and developing countries should not fall for this false discourse.
“The question of India’s mandatory contribution towards funding the loss and damage does not arise,” said an official on condition of anonymity.
Officials here said that the IPCC’s AR6 report clearly states that the responsibility for warming is directly proportional to the contribution to the cumulative emissions of CO2. As noted in the report, India’s share in the historical cumulative emissions from the pre-industrial period (1850) to 2019 is less than 4%.
As far as per capita emissions are concerned as it provides an objective yardstick for comparison, India’s current emissions are about one-third of the global average. “If the whole world emitted at the same per capita level as India, the best available science tells us there would be no climate crisis,” the official said. India ranks 129th in terms of average per capita cumulative emissions as of 2019, while it ranks 126th in terms of average annual per capita emissions.
On the argument among the less developed countries about India that the country has made a lot of progress economically and has emitted a lot in the process in the last three decades and therefore should be included as one of the contributors, the officials pointed out that India’s share of cumulative emissions of CO2 since 1990 is only 5% and these low shares are despite India being home to more than one-sixth of the world’s population.
Arguing why India should not mandatorily pay for ‘loss and damage’ finance, Indian officials flag carbon fair share budget Which was widely consumed by developed countries over the years.
“Taking into account countries’ appropriate share of the global carbon budget, and calculating their carbon debt and credits, Annex-I (developed) countries owe the world a carbon debt of 790 GtCO2 from cumulative emissions between 1850 – 2019 Monetized, even at a nominal carbon price of $100 per ton of CO2, Annex-I countries owe the world a carbon debt of $79 trillion. This is the right way to set the benchmark for calculating losses and damages. And in an equitable way. By the same benchmark, India has carbon credits of over 248 GtCO2 worth trillions, said an official.
On the question of alienating India and China on this issue as there should probably be some differences among the G77 (developing countries) group, Indian officials claimed that all the G77 countries are actually together on ‘loss and damage’ and other issues. Huh. , and this was also well reflected in the BASIC-group meeting of Brazil, South Africa, India and China on Tuesday.
“This thread of unity is due to the common conditions faced by all these countries as a result of excessive emissions from developed countries. Various false narratives are run by those who continuously oppose this unity. We believe that the G77 and Various sections of China, a just and equitable settlement will be reached,” the official said.
The European Union (EU) fueled the whole debate by explicitly saying that China should contribute money to ‘loss and damage’ finance to help vulnerable countries cover the costs of climate damage. “I think we should take the position we have today. China is one of the largest economies on the planet with a lot of financial strength. Why shouldn’t they be made co-responsible for the wealth? … In 1992, a There was logic behind it I could follow. But not now in 2022,” said The European Union Climate policy chief Frans Timmermans answers a question on China and India.
However, he chose not to name India – which is being seen here as an attempt to differentiate India from China on this front. But at the same time, Timmermans made it clear that money for loss and damage should only go to the most vulnerable countries, not all developing countries, as the G77 group proposed in its resolution on ‘loss and damage’ financing . ,
While demands for India’s contribution came mostly from small and vulnerable countries such as Mauritius, Jamaica, Uganda and Mali, Indian negotiators responded to such demands by saying that the country has a false narrative of being the biggest emitter. It is propagated by those who owe the world a huge carbon debt and developing countries should not fall for this false discourse.
“The question of India’s mandatory contribution towards funding the loss and damage does not arise,” said an official on condition of anonymity.
Officials here said that the IPCC’s AR6 report clearly states that the responsibility for warming is directly proportional to the contribution to the cumulative emissions of CO2. As noted in the report, India’s share in the historical cumulative emissions from the pre-industrial period (1850) to 2019 is less than 4%.
As far as per capita emissions are concerned as it provides an objective yardstick for comparison, India’s current emissions are about one-third of the global average. “If the whole world emitted at the same per capita level as India, the best available science tells us there would be no climate crisis,” the official said. India ranks 129th in terms of average per capita cumulative emissions as of 2019, while it ranks 126th in terms of average annual per capita emissions.
On the argument among the less developed countries about India that the country has made a lot of progress economically and has emitted a lot in the process in the last three decades and therefore should be included as one of the contributors, the officials pointed out that India’s share of cumulative emissions of CO2 since 1990 is only 5% and these low shares are despite India being home to more than one-sixth of the world’s population.
Arguing why India should not mandatorily pay for ‘loss and damage’ finance, Indian officials flag carbon fair share budget Which was widely consumed by developed countries over the years.
“Taking into account countries’ appropriate share of the global carbon budget, and calculating their carbon debt and credits, Annex-I (developed) countries owe the world a carbon debt of 790 GtCO2 from cumulative emissions between 1850 – 2019 Monetized, even at a nominal carbon price of $100 per ton of CO2, Annex-I countries owe the world a carbon debt of $79 trillion. This is the right way to set the benchmark for calculating losses and damages. And in an equitable way. By the same benchmark, India has carbon credits of over 248 GtCO2 worth trillions, said an official.
On the question of alienating India and China on this issue as there should probably be some differences among the G77 (developing countries) group, Indian officials claimed that all the G77 countries are actually together on ‘loss and damage’ and other issues. Huh. , and this was also well reflected in the BASIC-group meeting of Brazil, South Africa, India and China on Tuesday.
“This thread of unity is due to the common conditions faced by all these countries as a result of excessive emissions from developed countries. Various false narratives are run by those who continuously oppose this unity. We believe that the G77 and Various sections of China, a just and equitable settlement will be reached,” the official said.