Vanuatu’s big plea does little to stop climate change

There is a firm belief in some quarters that the next climate summit is just days away Sharm El Sheikh in Egypt this year (COP27) Climate change mitigation cannot be discussed at large due to the ongoing energy tensions in Europe. It is felt that the Russia-Ukraine crisis and the resulting global energy supply crunch has affected everyone’s ability to reduce emissions. This may be a valid approach, but the discussion on coal at the UN General Assembly in September points to an opposite possibility. President of Vanuatu, a small Pacific islandWanted the General Assembly to adopt a universal non-proliferation treaty to ban the use of fossil fuels around the world.

Typically, such calls by a nation whose contribution to global energy supply and emissions are negligible go unnoticed. but Vanuatu represents a strong and assertive group of small island-developing states Whose voice is heard with attention and sympathy in the United Nations. Even more so, when it is a matter that will affect the global discussion on climate change.

The small island group has moved around seeking support from various sectors – governments, the corporate world and civil society. Interestingly, the mayor of Kolkata, the capital of one of India’s largest coal producing states, has lent his voice of support.

A similar call on the use of coal

Vanuatu’s petition comes in the wake of a similar call at last year’s Glasgow climate conference to phase out coal. Following strong opposition from Indian negotiators, the language of the decision in Glasgow was reduced to a phased-out of coal power and inefficient fuel subsidies. There was panic among climate enthusiasts when India argued that a phasing out for countries highly dependent on coal power in the medium term was unfair. In view of this background, Coalition of Small Island States (AOSIS) That may be setting the ground for making the elimination of fossil fuels a part of national climate plans at COP27.

various implications

Some ask why India, which agreed to the phasing out in Glasgow, would object to a non-proliferation treaty, even if it provided a flexible timeline for phasing out. The reason for this may well be linked to the fact that the call at the United Nations to eliminate fossil fuels through a mandate has a very different effect than that presented under the United Nations Climate Change Convention. UN mandates of this nature are separated from the legal responsibility of polluting countries to reduce their emissions based on the responsibility, capacity and national circumstances required by the Climate Change Convention. It also makes no provision for technological and financial innovations that are required to ensure transition.

A few months ago, a similar attempt was made at the United Nations to treat climate change as a global security issue and the UN Security Council was requested to resolve it. It was shelved due to opposition from much of the global South, which saw it as an attempt to impose the will of a select few on others, not through international cooperation and consensus.

Coal phasing is not the only way to reduce global emissions. In many countries like India, coal is the mainstay of primary energy supply and a basic and essential component of their energy systems. On the other hand, a large part of rising global emissions are due to volatile levels of consumption of natural resources and lavish lifestyles led by consumers in developed economies. Even in developing economies, certain sections of the society are responsible for this grand and irresponsible behaviour. A plan to drastically reduce coal-fired electricity will actually do little to stop the problem of climate change globally, but could pose insurmountable difficulties in achieving the progress of developing economies towards key Sustainable Development Goals. Is. If the transition to a low-emissions world is to be sustainable, it must also be just and equitable. It must ensure equitable access to energy and a secure energy supply for all, not just a few. While developed economies have full access to alternative sources of energy, developing nations are handicapped, due to their strength in terms of technology and resources. Therefore, there is a need for a just transition on the promise of having green energy and a green future available to all. It is in this context that the call for Lifestyle for the Environment (LiFE) recently jointly issued by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the UN Secretary General in India has become important. Consumers in countries that consume at a sustainable pace and contribute to rising emissions have a greater responsibility to clean up the planet and support the development of green energy.

The world today is suffering from the adverse effects of climate change, which has destroyed homes and livelihoods of large populations in different parts of the vulnerable world. Addressing these impacts and preparing the world for an uncertain future should be a priority. Unfortunately for developing countries the question of coal always takes prime time at such conferences. The time has come to give the same importance to building climate-resilient infrastructure in developing and developing countries as to phasing out coal and investing in energy innovations and alternative technologies.

RR Rashmi is a Distinguished Fellow and former Civil Servant at The Energy and Resources Institute, New Delhi