That’s all from the liveblog today, folks. We’re waiting to hear when the text lands and will bring you the news then. It’s been a pleasure.
As the negotiations stretch past the 6pm deadline and into the ineffable beyond, the remaining delegates in the SEC are developing their best thousand-yard stares.
Beige food is being consumed while standing, floor huddles abound and a lot of people are wearing coats yet not actually going anywhere.
It could be a long night.
Human rights have been stripped or watered down from most of the Cop26 negotiations despite bold promises by world leaders at the start of the summit, according to a panel of NGO representatives.
Amid growing anger among developing nations, civil society groups and indigenous communities at the lack of progress of cutting emissions and climate finance for adaptation and loss and damage, the panelists slammed the UK for failing to ensure human rights were included meaningfully in the rules being negotiated. “The UK has been silent on human rights…. We’ve missed that progressive voice in the room,” said Deepaya Basu Ray from Climate Outreach which organised the press conference.
Obed Koringo, CARE’s civil society advocacy coordinator in Kenya, spoke passionately about the real life impacts of rich nations like the US blocking climate finance desperately needed by people like his grandmother, a peasant farmer, unable to plant crops due to prolonged drought. “More than 2m are facing starvation in Kenya… if we cannot do what’s required to address the needs of the most vulnerable, then what are we doing here?”
Koringo accused leaders from the world’s biggest polluting countries of trying to shirk their responsibilities by insisting on “slippery language”. “There’s a big difference between what wealthy countries are saying in front of the cameras and what they’re saying behind closed doors,” he said.
As the draft text on the all important Article 6 currently stands, there will still be no financing to directly help communities recover and rebuild from the climate breakdown that is causing an erosion of human rights including the loss of housing, food, land, and livelihoods. The US has been a key blocker of the loss and damage fund, according to Teresa Anderson from ActionAid.
Greenpeace managed a nice last little bit of protest - sending up balloons and a ‘Not for sale’ in front of the giant earth.
Greenpeace International Executive Director Jennifer Morgan said: “Right now this COP is yet to meet the moment. We’ve witnessed a deliberate and cynical effort by a few nations to create a charter for cheating, offsets and loopholes. Hundreds of fossil fuel lobbyists are here and their fingerprints are all over this conference. They want to buy their way out of responsibility for the climate crisis, this place is flooded with greenwash and we’re here to say our planet is not for sale.”
“Loss and damage” becoming a make-or-break issue at COP26
The issue of “loss and damage” is becoming a make-or-break issue for a deal in Glasgow as the negotiations enter Friday night. The issue is money for poor and vulnerable nations to rebuild after the now inevitable impacts of the climate crisis hit. The issue has long been controversial, with the US as a huge historical emitter fearing it will open itself to unlimited claims for damages.
“Vulnerable countries want a loss and damage facility launched here but the EU and the US have been blocking any mention of this,” said Mohammed Adow, from Power Shift Africa. “If it’s about environmental justice and providing solidarity, particularly to the climate vulnerable countries, Joe Biden’s administration is perhaps as worse as Donald Trump’s.”
Adow said a loss and damage facility would be a “delivery vehicle” for funds to be raised in future, and was clearly supported in the negotiations by 130 nations, representing 85% of the world’s population. “But rather than reflecting where the majority of the world was on a loss and damage facility, [UK COP26 president Alok Sharma] chose to reflect the position of the [rich nations] in the [draft text] they put out this morning.”
“If [Sharma] want us to leave Glasgow, with a good outcome, and without undermining the multilateral process, then he needs the need to reflect where the majority stand on issues,” Adow said.
Alden Meyer, at the think tank e3g and a COP veteran, said: “This is a particularly cliffhanger moment in this process. There has been a drama between the US and the small island states and others around the issue of loss and damage.”
“The people on the frontlines of suffering loss and damage are not the ones that caused the problem,” he said. “Collectively, they add up to maybe a few percent of global emissions historically. So we have an ethical and moral responsibility as human beings to help them confront this problem.”
“Second, it’s in the strategic interest of the US, Europe, Japan and other developed countries to help them because recent analysis has shown, if we don’t, the result is mass migration, failed states, hotbeds of terrorism, instability, food shortages, etc,” Alden said.
Alden said the most immediate reason why more progress on loss and damage is needed is because, without it, an ambitious Glasgow deal encompassing vital emissions cuts, better adaptation: “The result is we get a lowest common denominator output.”
“When it comes to the COVID pandemic, developed countries mobilised trillions of dollars literally overnight to protect their citizens and stabilise their economies,” he said. “And yet we’re having a hard time coming up with the billions of dollars needed to start to address [the climate crisis] in an equitable way. This has to change. We have to have a whole new mindset in these halls in the next 24 to 48 hours, or we’re not going to get the kind of agreement we need.”
Extinction Rebellion protesters poured fake blood over themselves outside the gates of COP26 as the 6pm deadline for talks to finish passed without an agreement.
“It’s a visual representation of all the people who have died because of the climate crisis and all the people who will die because of the inaction of those inside Cop,” said protester Eleanor Harris who was coated in the fake blood - made of golden syrup and red food colouring.
Extinction Rebellion protesters poured fake blood over themselves outside #COP26 as the 6pm deadline for talks to finish passed without an agreement - “It’s a visual representation of all the people who will die because of the inaction inside,” they said pic.twitter.com/5JtX9dsmIJ
— Jessica Murray (@JournoJess_) November 12, 2021
“They’ve come up with a few empty promises. But we need actual system change, there are people dying all over the world and frankly the promises that have come out of this conference are more of the same,” the 23-year-old, who lives in Glasgow, said.
Australia named 'colossal fossil' of the climate talks
Australia has been named the “colossal fossil” of the Glasgow climate talks for its “appalling performance” at the summit, with activists castigating the country for its ongoing embrace of fossil fuels.
At a mock ceremony held at the Cop26 summit, activists at the Climate Action Network gave the unwanted first prize of the worst country at the talks to Australia, which had previously been named “fossil of the day” five times during the two-week UN conference.
An audience roundly booed as activists, one dressed as a dinosaur skeleton, announced that Australia had secured the dubious achievement though its “breathtaking climate ineptitude” that saw it arrive in Glasgow with a plan to get to net zero emissions that’s been widely criticized as lacking any credible policy to do so.
“Their subsequent performance has resembled parts of the Australian outback, a barren wasteland devoid of any strategy, policy or idea on fossil fuels, energy or transport,” announced the activists, adding that Australia was guilty of a series of “epic fails” in its continued reliance upon coal and its defense of ongoing fossil fuel exports.
“(Prime minister) Scott Morrison and his merry band of fossil fools made announcements better suited to an oil, gas and coal convention,” said the organizers. “We are truly speechless Australia, the only good thing about Australia being at Cop is they have the best coffee at their pavilion.”
Second place was given to the US for its “grossly inadequate levels of aid” to developing countries and continued expansion of oil and gas drilling, while the UK was third for presiding over a “shambolic” Cop26 that saw long queues, lack of access for civil society and Boris Johnson flying back to London on a private jet.
Talks deadline passes without agreement
The 6pm deadline for the talks to finish at Cop26 has passed without an agreement being announced.
Alok Sharma all but confirmed that the deadline would be missed earlier this afternoon [See 16:29]. Sharma said then that he still hoped to produce a revised text today that can then be agreed and adopted tonight. He said there would be another round of stocktaking later tonight, with the exact time to be confirmed later.
Climate talks are notorious for over-running [See 13:58]. So don’t be surprised to find they carry on into tomorrow or even Sunday.
As we all prepare for a long weekend, I’m handing over to my colleague Bibi van der Zee to pick up final updates for you this evening.
Updated
This is a useful summary of what’s happened today at the Cop26 talks, by Michael Jacobs, a Professor of political economy at the University of Sheffield, who once worked for Gordon Brown.
The current climate pledges made by countries are insufficient to keep the world to 1.5C of global heating, he says, adding that we don’t yet know if the US, China and other large nations will oppose strengthening pledges in 2022.
Jacobs says that the EU, US and Japan don’t want to commit more money, especially on loss and damage. Saudi Arabia and Russia want no references to fossil fuels.
OMG it’s Friday already! Now what’s happening at #COP26? For the dazed and confused here’s a thread which I hope might help explain the issues on this last day of the conference (except it won’t be - it’s obvious now this will go into Saturday). 🧵 /1
— Michael Jacobs (@michaelujacobs) November 12, 2021
More than 300 coal plants will be closed as a result of announcements and pledges made at Glasgow Cop26, according to analysis by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), a think tank. It said:
- 370 more coal plants (290 GW) given a close-by date
- 90 new coal power projects (88 GW) are likely to be cancelled
- Another 130 new projects (165 GW), most importantly in China and Indonesia, are called into question as there is no room for them to operate under the country’s new zero-carbon targets.
- With Germany’s expected 2030 phase-out decision and assuming the United States’ 2035 Clean Power Plan will mean a coal phase out by 2030, the number of coal power plants with a Paris-aligned phase-out date would increase to 510 (460 GW).
Lauri Myllyvirta, lead analyst, Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air:
The pledges made at and in the run-up to the Glasgow summit have an unprecedentedly large and a direct impact on coal-fired power generation: they mean the cancellation of 90 new coal power plants, and a commitment to phase out 370 existing plants that didn’t have a close-by date before. Furthermore, 95% of the world’s coal power plants are now covered by carbon neutrality targets - targets that can’t be met without closing essentially all of the coal fired power plants.
Updated
The EU has been among the most ambitious actors at previous COPs but has been criticised in Glasgow for a low-key showing. But vice-president Frans Timmermans got personal as the summit entered its final hours, and hinted at providing more funding, which could help get an agreement over the line.
An hour ago, my son Mark sent me a picture of my grandson, Kees, who is one year old. Kees will be 31 when we’re in 2050, and it’s quite a thought to understand that if we succeed, he’ll be living in a world that’s liveable. He’ll be living in an economy that is clean, with air that is clean, at peace with his environment.
If we fail, and I mean fail now within the next couple of years, he will fight with other human beings for water and food. That’s the stark reality we face. So 1.5C is about avoiding a future for our children and grandchildren that is unliveable.
I might not reach 2050, probably won’t. But he will be there as a young man, and I want him to live a peaceful prosperous life, like I want it for everybody’s children and grandchildren in this room. This is personal. This is not about politics.
Timmermans noted that the situation was even worse for those in the most vulnerable countries, before addressing the question of money, a key issue at COP26.
On finance, developed countries have not delivered enough. Much has been said about the $100 billion [for clean energy in poorer nations] committed for 2020. Only reaching that objective by 2023 is frankly disappointing. The European Union already gives $27 billion and is ready to explore the possibility of further efforts.
Updated
China climate specialist Sam Geall says the long-standing relationship between the US and China climate envoys John Kerry and Xie Zhenhau, helped secure this week’s agreement on climate change between the two countries.
Sam writes:
The establishment of a joint “working group on enhancing climate action in the 2020s” is also more interesting than it sounds at first blush. In 2014, a bilateral climate announcement from Barack Obama and Xi Jinping was not only an important symbolic gesture that the world’s two largest carbon polluters were willing to work together towards a new treaty, it also kicked off a substantive programme of joint technical work on clean energy cooperation and more.
“The hope in this new agreement is that it is possible to create spaces for contention and rivalry, without taking the planet hostage.” https://t.co/ncCeI6G5i5
— Sam Geall (@samgeall) November 12, 2021
Updated
Rich countries are polluters not donors, say campaigners
Saleemul Huq, a leading climate specialist from Bangladesh, angrily urged journalists and Cop negotiators not to describe rich, industrialised countries as “donors” when it came to loss and damage reparations.
“Don’t call them donor countries. They are polluters! They owe this money,” Huq told a final day briefing on the Cop talks hosted by the climate action network.
Gabriela Bucher, executive director of Oxfam International, said it was very hard to quantify the reparations figures required to address loss and damage to the global south, because the final bill depended on how well the globe met the 1.5c temperature target. If that target was missed, the bill could be far higher.
Huq said the loss and damage bill of climate heating for the rich world was likely to run into the trillions: that cost would cause immense shock for industrialised economies, who were stunned by the deaths of 1oo Germans during flash flooding earlier this year. By contrast, flooding events killed hundreds of thousands in the developing world.
Updated
Campaigners in the Climate Action Network have called on Cop26 negotiators to agree a properly-funded deal to pay towards the loss and damage already being suffered by the global south from climate heating, as the talks entered their final phase.
Tasneem Essop, executive director for Can, said on Friday afternoon it was extremely disappointing the latest draft document had failed to include requests from the G77 for a “loss and damage” facility to be included and financed by the world’s richest nations.
The G77 had produced a draft text for a “Glasgow facility” on Thursday night , and presented it to the presidency. It had been blocked by the US and EU, said Saleemul Huq, director of the international centre for climate change and development (ICADD).
Essop said it was essential that Cop produced concrete decisions to alleviate the suffering of millions of people worldwide suffering the double impacts of Covid and climate heating.
“We will continue fighting for this because this is the litmus test for the success of Cop26,” she said.
Gabriela Bucher, executive director of Oxfam International, urged rich countries to follow Scotland’s lead by allocating funds to “loss and damage” facilities. “It’s not over til it’s over: every fraction of a degree costs lives,” she said.
Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, confirmed earlier this week the Scottish government would double its funding of ‘loss and damage” reparations to £2m. Climate campaigners believe many billions of pounds are needed.
“The US is offering zero dollars. Germany is offering zero Euros. Others are offering zero money. Surely that is not right,” Huq said.
Updated
Talks set to continue past 6pm deadline
The “informal stocktake” on the floor of the COP26 summit, where nations get to air their problems with the draft decision text, has now concluded.
Alok Sharma has all but confirmed that talks will continue past today’s 6pm deadline. He said that he still hopes to produce a revised text today that can then be agreed and adopted tonight.
There will be another round of stocktaking later tonight, with the exact time to be confirmed later.
Updated
My colleague Fiona Harvey has just produced a helpful analysis of the wording - and what it means - in the latest draft text produced by the Cop26 talks.
Fiona writes:
‘Key provisions are still in there, including one calling for countries to return to the negotiating table next year because current targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions are inadequate to limit global heating to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, the tougher of two goals in the 2015 Paris climate agreement.
There is also a reference to phasing out coal and fossil fuel subsidies, which has not been substantially weakened, though some civil society groups have complained that it should be stronger.’
Note, this is not expected to be the final text. Although the conference was due to end today, more revisions are expected with an end point possibly not reached until Saturday or Sunday.
Updated
Continued subsidies for fossil fuels remains a sticking point in discussions at the Cop26 talks in Glasgow, due to finish today.
Opposition to fossil fuels subsidies
The “informal stocktake” on the floor of the Cop26 summit, where nations get to air their problems with the draft decision text, has veered from encouraging to emotional to deeply technical this afternoon.
Numerous nations have kicked back against the softening of the statement to end fossil fuel subsidies by adding the controversial qualifier “inefficient”. The EU’s Frans Timmermans worried his one-year-old grandson would be fighting for food and water if the climate crisis does not end, but said the bloc could “explore” increased finance pledges. Kenya’s delegate raised the 2 million people facing starvation in his country due to a climate change-induced drought.
The G77 + China bloc of developing nations – which represents 85% of humanity – is unhappy about current plans for “loss and damage” – the compensation for climate disasters it says rich nations have a moral duty to pay to its members. The Guinea delegate, speaking for the bloc, wants the establishment of a “loss and damage facility”, which is likely to mean an actual fund. The current text talks of a process towards establishing funding.
Canada’s delegate confessed that his tar sands-rich nation “had not always been exemplary in the past”, but had changed. He raised “special drawing rights” – essentially money created by the IMF – as a possible source of new finance for poorer nations, but only if additional to existing pledges. He also emphasised the need to recognise human rights and Indigenous rights in carbon trading rules, as did others.
Norway, another fossil-fuel rich state, wanted “insufficient” deleted in reference to fossil fuels, as did Costa Rica. The Marshall Islands said: “Fossil fuel subsidies are paying for our own destruction.”
Peru, speaking on behalf of the Independent Association of Latin America and the Caribbean states, backed the G77’s “loss and damage facility” and said it was very disappointed that a reference to nature-based solutions had been removed from the text. Costa Rica’s delegate said: “The science is clear: if we want to reach 1.5C we need healthy ecosystems.”
Saudi Arabia, which has frequently tried to block action on climate change at Cops, said the draft text was “workable” and that keeping 1.5C alive was a “no-brainer”. But the Saudi delegate said the summit had to “ensure nothing in the text would skew the balance in the [2015] Paris agreement”. That may be a reference to the call to end fossil fuel subsidies, which has not appeared in a Cop text before.
Kenya’s delegate pointed out that a 1.5C global temperature rise meant 3C in Africa, as heating is faster over land than the ocean. “1.5C is not a statistic, it is a matter of life and death,” he said. Developing nations want some of the proceeds of carbon trading to go into an adaptation fund and he said he was disappointed there was still “haggling” about this. He welcomed the expression of “utmost regret” in the text that the long promised $100bn a year of climate finance has not been delivered but said: “Our trust has been shattered.”
The US delegate, John Kerry, was passionate: “We believe this is existential and for many of you existential today. People are dying today.” He called fossil fuel subsidies “a definition of insanity” and that the US was acting to end them.
Antigua and Barbuda said the new date for a doubling of adaptation finance of 2025 was too late – it should be 2023, it said. Money for loss and damage was a matter of climate justice. “We are alarmed at the scale of opposition.”
One delegate – South Korea’s – was optimistic about sealing a Glasgow deal: “I strongly believe we are very close to consensus.”
All the delegates thanked the Cop26 president, Alok Sharma, and his team for their work. It is Sharma’s task now to find a compromise between all the different positions, both those stated openly and those behind closed doors.
Updated
Observers have said there is a risk that talks in Glasgow will conclude with insufficient pledges. This could end up pushing things back a year to give time for countries to come back with something better [See 15:11].
China for one does not like this idea. China’s environment minister Zhao Yingmin has just said countries should be allowed space and time to implement their climate targets.
China's environment minister Zhao Yingmin says countries should be allowed "space and time" to implement their climate targets - pushback against an extra round of NDCs next year #COP26
— Megan Darby (@climatemegan) November 12, 2021
Updated
Confused about what two weeks of talks have achieved? Well, this is a very helpful visual guide from some of my colleagues that has just been published.
It’s based on data produced by the world’s most respected climate analysis coalition Climate Action Tracker that found the world was still heading for climate catastrophe.
In summary, some progress has been made at Glasgow, but no major country’s pledges are yet in line with holding global heating to 1.5C.
Updated
You can read the full story on the civil society walkout earlier today now from my colleague Libby Brooks.
The Indigenous activist Ta’Kaiya Blaney of the Tla A’min Nation, said:
Cop26 is a performance. It is an illusion constructed to save the capitalist economy rooted in resource extraction and colonialism. I didn’t come here to fix the agenda – I came here to disrupt it.
Some more reaction to the progress of Cop26 talks.
Prof Michael Grubb, Professor of Energy and Climate Change & Deputy Director of the UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources, UCL, said:
COP26 is revealing the paradox at the heart of the Paris Agreement. It established ambitious global goals based on science, but implementation based on sovereignty and a lack of specific, negotiated or binding national commitments.
The resistance to unambiguous statements on phasing out coal or ending fossil fuel subsidies underlines some national political realities, and the offered Nationally Determined Contribution are clearly inconsistent with the global goals.
The risk now is that pressure to come back next year with stronger offers may reduce the ‘ambition gap’ by increasing the gap between stated national ambition and implemented policy – particularly if the international financing falls short.
Sky News have some footage of protesters attempting (and failing) to scale the fence outside the Cop26 talks in Glasgow.
Police stop two protestors attempting to scale the fence. Video here of the first @SkyNews #cop26 pic.twitter.com/9L168LRpKd
— James Matthews (@jamesmatthewsky) November 12, 2021
Amazon on brink of “catastrophic potential tipping point'
The Amazon is on the brink of a “catastrophic potential tipping point” from deforestation, degradation, wildfires and climate heating an expert study based on work by 200 scientists has warned.
The Amazon assessment report, released on Friday at the climate summit, found that “crossing such a tipping point could result in a permanent loss of rainforest and a reapid shift from rainforest to degraded dry ecosystems with lower tree cover.”
Echoing an agreement at the summit to halt and then reverse deforestation, which has been endorsed by the Brazilian government – blamed for enabling the destruction of the Amazon, the report said the Amazon could be protected and revived in ways that produced economic value.
The science panel for the Amazon, the report’s authors, recommended an immediate ban on deforestation in parts of the region already at a tipping point, with a goal of achieving zero deforestation and degradation by 2030 in the entire Amazon region.
It said the Amazon biome was “one of the most critical elements of the earth’s climate system”, playing a key role in moisture flows across the southern hemisphere. Its basin is the largest river discharge on earth, stored between 150 and 200 bn tonnes of carbon.
It said around 17% of Amazonian rainforests had been converted to other land uses, with at least 17% more degraded; experts estimated around 366,000km2 of forest were degraded between 1995 and 2017.
Updated
On the issue of fossil fuels, US climate envoy Kerry has said the final text must include an end to “unabated coal” (i.e. if it doesn’t include carbon capture and storage technology and releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere) and “inefficient” fossil fuel subsidies (allowing subsidies where it supports winter heating). He says President Biden has put in legislation to get rid of those subsidies in the US.
Note: The latest draft proposal from the Cop26 chair, released this morning, calls on countries to accelerate “the phaseout of unabated coal power and of inefficient subsidies for fossil fuels.” So Kerry is confirming the US supports this.
My colleague Fiona Harvey helpfully explained some of this language earlier:
The point about inefficient subsidies is that it allows countries who have fuel discounts for the poor or vulnerable – important in some countries [not sure if UK winter fuel allowance counts but might do – to continue to have them.]
This is a red line for some countries who argue they would face social unrest if they didn’t reduce high fuel prices for vulnerable people. Unfortunately it could provide a loophole for others but it’s hard to see how you could actually justify tax breaks as subsidies for oil and gas majors as “efficient”, and the text was not going to get through without this qualification.
More from US climate envoy John Kerry, who says world leaders can’t hope for miraculous technology to save us from the climate crisis:
We have to reduce emissions by 45% in the next 10 years to keep 1.5C [of global heating] alive. And if we don’t, we can’t do net zero by 2050 unless we have some miraculous invention that sucks it all out of the atmosphere or technology that advances us beyond where we are today. And we can’t bank on that.
Updated
US climate envoy John Kerry has just been speaking at the conference.
He said 20 countries including the US, who account for 80% of emissions, bear the greatest responsibility [for the climate crisis] and that US President Joe Biden has been determined to live up to that responsibility.
Climate change is an existential threat today and people are dying today. All around the world the impacts are being felt today. We have to live up to the expectations of young people that don’t want this to just be a place of words. It has to be in the next hour a place of action.”
Updated
After the recent update on negotiations (See 13:14) from “no drama” Sharma, we’re expecting more press conferences this afternoon from countries and regions, including the EU.
Tom Levitt here taking over the live blog throughout the rest of the afternoon. You can email me at tom.levitt.casual@theguardian.com, or send me a message on Twitter at @tom_levitt.
Il be here to keep you up-to-date with updates from Glasgow as they come in. The conference was due to finish today, but we’re not expecting the final text signed-off before closing time... on Sunday!
Here is the list of closing times for every previous COP conference dating back to 1995 in Berlin, in order of lateness.
So: if I apply the standard 2-week rule to COP3, then Kyoto ended on the Saturday at 1530, which puts it after COP10 and before COP6 in terms of over-running: pic.twitter.com/RYkvmTw6ot
— CarbonReporter (@CarbonReporter) November 11, 2021
Updated
Morning summary
- Second draft text released which saw a “softening of language” but retained many core demands faced criticism by campaigners who called for world leaders to be much more ambitious.
- Overnight we heard from key architects of the Paris climate deal that Cop26 targets too are too weak to stop disaster
- Campaigners and civil society groups staged a walkout at the Cop26 venue this morning condemning the legitimacy and lack of ambition of the 12 day conference
- Civil society groups have put forward a People’s Declaration, outlining 10 demands from global north countries paying their climate debt to global targets on adaptation and loss and damage.
I am going to handover to my colleague Tom Levitt [tom.levitt.casual@theguardian.com] who will guide you through the rest of the day.
Updated
The session is now hearing from Russian and South Korean delegations.
Sharma - Injection of that can do spirit to get this shared endeavour over the line
“I need your pragmatic and workable solutions to come forward... we need that final injection of that can do spirit to get this shared endeavour over the line.”
Cop26 president Alok Sharma is speaking now giving an update on the negotiations
Cop26 president Alok Sharma is speaking now giving an update on the negotiations.
He thanks negotiators for their tireless work. He says this is the chance to forge a cleaner healthier more prosperous world. “We must rise to the occasion.”
He requests that they continue in the same positive spirit that has made progress so far.
He said negotiators have worked through the night. He says a lot of progress has been made - particularly on climate finance.
For those hoping Cop26 might finish on time at 6pm this evening [or even before 12 midnight] this poll will not be happy reading.
When is #COP26 going to end?
— Earth Negotiations Bulletin (@IISD_ENB) November 11, 2021
Here are a few more videos of the civil society walkout earlier.
"We are unstoppable, another world is possible!" ✊💥#COP26 #PeopleToTheFront
— 350 dot org (@350) November 12, 2021
🔊ON👇 pic.twitter.com/BfgqwyHZ5p
Huge protest stretching from the plenary halls to the entrance of #COP26 calling for climate justice as time for negotiations is running out pic.twitter.com/xnoB51jcd5
— Tom Prater (@tomoprater) November 12, 2021
My colleague Libby Brooks has more on the walkout from Cop venue by civil society groups.
Whooping and cheering, representatives of Indigenous People, farmers, youth, women, academics, trade unions, disabled people and environmental NGOs processed through the conference centre to be greeted by chants of climate justice now from the throng of activists outside the gates.
Chanting ‘climate justice now’ and ‘power to the people’, the snaking line of activists still carrying the red ribbons exited the secured area where activists holding fluttering Extinction Rebellion flags were listening to speakers.
Jigging to the call ‘We are unstoppable’, activists further up the mixing crowd replied ‘another world is possible’.
Well, who says protests do not work. Less than two hours after activists staged a protest about Scottish Ballet’s BP deal [see here] Scottish Ballet have just responded saying they are reviewing all their partnerships.
Hi, we recognise the importance of this. As part of our green action plan we are reviewing all our partnerships to ensure they're fully aligned with our carbon neutral goal. We'll be sharing more updates soon.
— Scottish Ballet (@scottishballet) November 12, 2021
Here is another video of the walk-out by civil society groups at Cop26 earlier from my colleague Elena Morresi.
Delegates stage walk out at #COP26 pic.twitter.com/MPQgb9JkVa
— Elena Morresi (@elenaukc) November 12, 2021
A bit of light relief in the form of an update on the Darth Vader impersonator who has been singing outside the Cop26 venue everyday.
Darth Vader update: This morning outside #COP26 he was singing the Simple Minds classic, Don't you forget about me - but instead of "la, la la la la", it was "blah, blah blah blah blah ...."https://t.co/MFfEyPfOZZ pic.twitter.com/V2FmaYRl8U
— Damian Carrington (@dpcarrington) November 12, 2021
The High Ambition Coalition is pleased with many aspects of the text but fears it will come under fire. Tina Stege, climate envoy of the Marshall Islands, said: “From my perspective, the presidency has reflected elements of the HAC’s input well in this text. The most ambitious elements are about to come under fire.
“We need to level up, not fall back, in this final stretch. We’re going to fight hard for the ambition in here, and to build on this text and fight for greater ambition, particularly on loss and damage.
“We will continue to champion 1.5, which is our coalition’s north star. Fossil fuel subsidies must end. We must double adaptation finance from current levels. Loss and damage is too central for us to settle for workshops. We must strengthen action on loss and damage. We need an article 6 resolution that results in real reductions. The zero-sum offsetting era must end.”
Updated
Civil society representatives walk out at protest at 'illusion' of Cop
Carrying blood red ribbons to represent the crucial red lines already crossed by Cop26 negotiators, hundreds of representatives of global civil society have walked out of the convention centre on the final day of the summit in protest.
The audience at the People’s Plenary in the conference blue zone heard speakers condemn the legitimacy and ambition of the 12-day summit before walking out to join protesters gathered on the streets beyond the security fencing.
“Cop26 is a performance,” the indigenous activist Ta’Kaiya Blaney, Tla A’min Nation told the meeting before the walk-out. “It is an illusion constructed to save the capitalist economy rooted in resource extraction and colonialism. I didn’t come here to fix the agenda – I came here to disrupt.”
Civil society groups walking out of the final day of #cop26 en mass after the Peoples Plenary condemned the summit as a performance @COP26_Coalition pic.twitter.com/C11XhpyNHS
— Libby Brooks (@libby_brooks) November 12, 2021
Updated
A bit more on the BP protests in Glasgow this morning from my colleague Severin Carrell.
Climate activists with the anti-oil protest group BP or Not BP have staged a mini-arts festival outside the Theatre Royal in Glasgow, to challenge BP’s sponsorship of Scottish Ballet.
A ballet dancer with a tutu in BP’s corporate colours pirouetted outside the venue, the ballet’s main venue, as activists staged a die-in, while the New York-based performance artists Reverend Billy Tallen and the Stop Shopping choir sang in brightly coloured plastic ponchos and cagoules to ward off Glasgow’s rain.
BREAKING! We’re with the Stop Shopping Choir on the last day of #COP26 calling on the @scottishballet to cut its ties to its polluting oil sponsor @bp_plc outside of Theatre Royal Glasgow! #dropbp #climatecrisis pic.twitter.com/mfOTVTfP6S
— BP or not BP? (@drop_BP) November 12, 2021
After shedding the BP-sunflower from her tutu, our ballerina dances free of dirty oil sponsorship as the Stop Shopping Choir sing! ✊️🎶🙌
— BP or not BP? (@drop_BP) November 12, 2021
@scottishballet #dropbp pic.twitter.com/5E2yFSSIbn
Scottish Ballet, which tours worldwide, tweeted on Thursday they aimed to be fully carbon-neutral by 2030 “in line with the aims and aspirations of our home city of Glasgow.”
BP or not BP, which has targeted the large London arts and cultural venues previously associated with the oil giant, said Scottish Ballet remained one of the few arts companies still linked to the firm. BP is listed as the ballet’s “sustainability partner”.
Scottish Ballet, which tours worldwide, tweeted on Thursday they aimed to be fully carbon-neutral by 2030 “in line with the aims and aspirations of our home city of Glasgow.”
BP or not BP, which has targeted the large London arts and cultural venues previously associated with the oil giant, said Scottish Ballet remained one of the few arts companies still linked to the firm. BP is listed as the ballet’s “sustainability partner”.
In line with the aims and aspirations of our home city of Glasgow, our target is to be a carbon neutral ballet company by 2030 🌿
— Scottish Ballet (@scottishballet) November 11, 2021
Read more about our Green Action Plan 👇https://t.co/tIe6Fn1gRV
Back in Glasgow and 50 performance activists and supporters have staged a surprise musical protest outside Glasgow’s Theatre Royal to challenge BP’s sponsorship of Scottish Ballet.
The action was organised by activist theatre group BP or not BP? and New York performance activists Reverend Billy and the Stop Shopping Choir and is part of a growing movement in the UK that is demanding an end to fossil fuel sponsorship across cultural institutions.
BREAKING! We’re with the Stop Shopping Choir on the last day of #COP26 calling on the @scottishballet to cut its ties to its polluting oil sponsor @bp_plc outside of Theatre Royal Glasgow! #dropbp #climatecrisis pic.twitter.com/mfOTVTfP6S
— BP or not BP? (@drop_BP) November 12, 2021
Updated
Away from Cop26 for a moment this is a fascinating and thought-provoking piece by author and poet Ben Okri about the challenges of writing in a time of existential climate threat.
Updated
People's declaration put forward by civil society groups
As government negotiations continue, civil society groups have put forward a People’s Declaration, outlining 10 demands from global north countries paying their climate debt to global targets on adaptation and loss and damage.
People are tired of waiting for governments to prioritize people and the planet over profits while so many lives are being impacted and lost. We are out of time and out of patience.
In an unprecedented move - global civil society at #cop26 has come together to issue a People’s Declaration. This is what we expected from our Govts who refused to listen to us https://t.co/hg7J4R3uEB
— asad rehman (@chilledasad100) November 12, 2021
Updated
Climate scientist Ed Hawkins, responsible for the Warming Stripes visualisation of a warming planet, has a good brief summary of what is at stake in the next few hours.
We are at a crossroads. The developing nations most at risk are urging us to change direction and turn off our current path. The major fossil fuel producing economies are resisting. These decisions require unanimity meaning difficult choices & compromises lie ahead today. #COP26 https://t.co/f5MRndQIvX
— Ed Hawkins (@ed_hawkins) November 12, 2021
Updated
“The text really shows the UK presidency chose to go with higher ambition, and then make [countries] fight to water it down, rather than choosing the cautious path of putting in loads of brackets and options to choose from,” says Jennifer Tollmann at the e3g think tank. She said progress was being made on the critical issue of money.
On the $100bn annual finance long promised by rich nations for clean energy development in poorer nations but never delivered in full, Tollmann said of the new draft text: “It’s a step up in the sense that we’ve not only acknowledged the shortfall in the $100bn, but we actually have a strong call to fully deliver it.”
On the money to help vulnerable nations to adapt to climate impacts, she said: “The finance side of adaptation is strengthened. Now finally have a clear date [of 2025] and a call for us to double global provision of adaptation finance from current levels.” That might mean about $40bn a year, she said.
On “loss and damage”, the funding for rebuilding after unavoidable impacts hit, Tollman said: “Stepping back, it is very notable that this is the time outside of Paris [text in 2015] that loss and damage actually gets its own section in a text. That really shows how the compensation [issue] has shifted at this Cop.”
Loss and damage is extremely controversial at Cop. Vulnerable and poorer nations insist it is a moral duty as compensation for a climate crisis they largely did not cause. Rich nations are fearful of being held legally accountable for vast compensation.
“But outside of the [new draft text], there’s still a tonne that has to be decided [on rules on carbon markets and emissions reporting]. This is definitely going to be a long night and potentially a long weekend,” Tollmann said.
Updated
These cartoons probably sum up the mood of a lot of people at Cop26 right now.
Plenty of bleak humour at the COP26 cartoon gallery - here are my favourites https://t.co/19hvYvpo40 pic.twitter.com/7CsgyMbIc1
— Rebecca Willis (@Bankfieldbecky) November 12, 2021
This from my colleague Fiona Harvey is an interesting take on the insertion of “inefficient” as a qualifier for fossil fuel subsidies in the new text.
The point about inefficient subsidies is that it allows countries who have fuel discounts for the poor or vulnerable – important in some countries [not sure if UK winter fuel allowance counts but might do – to continue to have them.]
This is a red line for some countries who argue they would face social unrest if they didn’t reduce high fuel prices for vulnerable people. Unfortunately it could provide a loophole for others but it’s hard to see how you could actually justify tax breaks as subsidies for oil and gas majors as “efficient”, and the text was not going to get through without this qualification.
Updated
The changes to the draft text on coal and fossil fuel subsidies are splitting opinion. On the one hand, the fact any reference remains in the text is really important - nations like Russia and Saudi Arabia have lobbied hard to get it removed and many here in Glasgow thought they would win. None of the previous 25 annual Cops has had a mention of fossil fuels, as crazy as that sounds.
But adding “unabated” in relation to coal-fired power stations provides a loophole – James Murray at Business Green says it is calling the coal industries bluff, i.e. “if you can do carbon capture and storage, go ahead”. There are no major CCS plants to date.
Adding “inefficient” as a qualifier for fossil fuel subsidies – $11m a minute according to the IMF – is a bigger loophole. But in my opinion, the fact the fossil fuel text remains is a bigger win than the caveats are a loss.
Here’s the take of the Australia Institute’s Richie Merzian – a former COP negotiator: “Fortunately, we still have some reference to getting rid of fossil fuel subsidies, and we have some reference to coal. That’s good. So let’s start there. Many expected there to be strong push back and for that to leave completely. But having said that, there have been multiple caveats placed on that - enough that you could run a coal train through it.”
Updated
Major institutional investors have welcomed changes in the new draft text released this morning and called on countries to go further on the final day of the summit.
In the lead up to Cop26, 733 major investors worth more than $52tn - more than half all the assets under management globally - called on governments to use Cop26 to end fossil fuel subsidies, phase out coal and make climate risk disclosure mandatory.
Erwin Jackson, director of policy with the Investor Group on Climate Change, said there had been an improvement in commitments at Cop26 and called on governments to do what was necessary to avoid a catastrophic temperature rise of more than 1.5C. He suggested a process under which countries agreed to ratchet up 2030 targets next year was crucial.
“We still have to close the gap between current commitments and 1.5C. Investors would support, with capital, a process to strengthen 2030 targets.”
Updated
Greenpeace is raising concerns about the draft text in relation to the murky world of carbon markets and their role in cutting emissions under article 6 of the Paris accord.
The climate group says the new text would give the go ahead to “entrenching carbon offsetting, which opens up major loopholes for double counting of emissions that risks blowing the 1.5C limit by offering a way out of real emissions reductions.”
Louisa Casson, climate campaigner at Greenpeace UK, added:
The new article 6 text gives polluters the right to scam by allowing indefinite double counting of an emission reduction that has only happened once – or may not have happened at all.
The invitation to greenwash through carbon offsetting risks making a farce of the Paris agreement. If this goes ahead, governments are giving big polluters a free pass to pollute under the guise of being ‘carbon neutral’, without actually having to reduce emissions. We’re calling on the negotiators to stand firm against greenwash scams. We cannot leave Glasgow with an article 6 agreement that will blow the 1.5C limit.
The world is watching. These backroom deals made overnight in corridors filled with 500 fossil fuel lobbyists are a betrayal to the youth, Indigenous peoples who will continue to fight to stop offsetting scams and keep 1.5C alive.
Updated
A bit more from Ed King giving an insight into the weird world of UN climate negotiations with a snapshot of the UNFCC style guide. Who knew?
Active verbs, commas and colons. This is apparently how we save the planet at #COP26. Here's a screenshot from the @UNFCCC style guide a contact has sent... I'll try and get the UN to post a link. I urge you to read it ;-) pic.twitter.com/l41Tpqwk24
— Ed King (@edking_I) November 12, 2021
Updated
This is a more positive take from climate analyst Ed King.
An attempt to decipher the new #COP26 draft political text. Seems more balanced with stronger elements on adaptation, finance and loss & damage - coal + ratchet are there, albeit couched in deep UN legal speak. pic.twitter.com/eWG6ZvmDEJ
— Ed King (@edking_I) November 12, 2021
Back to reaction to the new draft text released this morning. Murray Worthy from Global Witness is focusing on what he sees as the weakening of the commitment to phase out fossil fuels and makes an interesting point about the inclusion of the word “unabated” in relation to coal power.
While the words ‘coal’ and ‘fossil fuels’ have remained in the new draft decision, huge new loopholes have been introduced that see these efforts significantly weakened.
The aim to phase out all fossil fuel subsidies has now been rowed back to just ‘inefficient’ subsidies – which begs the question of what an efficient use of public money to bankroll the fossil fuel industry could possibly be. This term has been used at the G7 and the G20, but never been properly defined, and leaves an enormous space for countries to claim their subsidies aren’t ‘inefficient’.
The phase out of coal power has now been watered down to a phase out of ‘unabated’ coal power – leaving the door open to keep running climate-wrecking coal-fired power stations on the future promise of carbon capture and storage (CCS) cutting their emissions. The fossil fuel industry has always promised that CCS has already been just over the horizon, but has never materialised at scale. The false promise of CCS should not be used as an excuse to keep the coal industry alive.
Updated
Friends of the Earth has put out a statement and it is not positive about the likely outcome of these negotiations, arguing the Cop26 agreement is set to be the “Glasgow get-out clause”, as developed countries “shirk their responsibility and put the world on track for a rise in emissions and devastation of countries already hardest hit by climate change.”
Dipti Bhatnagar, climate justice and energy co-coordinator for Friends of the Earth International, based in Mozambique said: “With so little global south representation, it is no surprise that wealthy countries are pushing through false solutions that will allow them to continue climate-trashing, business-as-usual.
“Rich countries are forcing an agreement full of escape hatches: carbon markets, nature-based solutions and ‘net zero by the middle of the century’ are all ways for them to get out of making the real emissions cuts we need to prevent climate catastrophe.”
Sara Shaw, climate justice and energy co-coordinator for Friends of the Earth International, added: “We are witnessing the ‘great Glasgow get-out’. After making a series of flashy announcements full of caveats and loopholes, rich countries and the UK Cop presidency are rushing to close a deal that heaps responsibility for emissions cuts on developing countries, without providing the money they need to move away from fossil fuels.
“At Cop25 in Madrid, big polluters like Shell, Total and BP launched offsetting schemes for so-called ‘nature based solutions’. Now, at Cop26 we see nature-based solutions in all but name bang in the middle of the draft agreement. But there simply aren’t enough land and trees in the world to soak up the emissions that big polluters are planning.”
Jamie Peters, from the UK arm of the charity, criticised the UK government’s hypocrisy.
“As the minutes tick down, responsibility and how to ramp up climate finance should be the theme of negotiations. But instead, it looks like rich countries are preparing their escape hatch.
“There is a worrying gap between existing commitments and the deeper cuts needed to get to the key Cop goal of 1.5 °C. Additionally, the hypocrisy of the UK as hosts remains clear because of ongoing support for damaging fossil fuels projects like the Cambo oilfield, a new coalmine in Cumbria, and the gas mega-project in Mozambique.
“We need to leave oil and gas where it is, accelerate emissions reductions, and increase financial support from richer countries responsible for climate chaos. It’s that simple.”
Mary Church, Friends of the Earth Scotland’s head of campaigns, said the real hope resided with climate justice campaigners on the streets of Glasgow.
“Cop26 has failed to close the gap on 1.5 °C, but outside in the streets we’ve seen the biggest climate justice demonstration in the UK ever.
“We’ve come together as a powerful and diverse movement that recognises the root cause of the climate crisis is an economic system which is also driving multiple other injustices we are struggling against – poverty, racism, sexism, nature destruction to name but a few.
“Everywhere around the world people are rising up against this system that prioritises profit over people. We will not give up until we have created the better world we know is possible.”
Updated
Tracy Carty, head of Oxfam’s Cop26 delegation says the new draft text is “still missing some vital elements.”
Most glaring is the lack of any mention of the finance plan for loss and damage that was proposed last night by the G77 group of developing countries. ‘Acknowledging’ loss and damage will not bring back the submerged homes, poisoned fields and lost loved ones. Rich countries must stop blocking progress and commit to doing something about it.
Emission reduction targets over the next decade have us careering towards climate catastrophe. We need an unambiguous deal in Glasgow that commits governments to coming back next year, and every year after that, with improved targets that will keep the goal of 1.5 degrees alive.
This is the final countdown. Negotiators should come back to the table armed with commitments that are equal to the challenge that millions of people around the world are facing every day.
Updated
A few important bits to note about the intention in the text to revisit countries’ plans on cutting emissions, known in the Paris jargon as nationally determined contributions (NDCs).
First, Cops happen every year under the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, so it’s not that countries are being asked to hold a special conference – it’s just that for every Cop there is an agenda and if a revisit of the national plans was not on the agenda there would be no requirement to discuss it next year. So having a reference to it in this year’s text ensures that it will come up for discussion next year and cannot be ignored.
Secondly, in the text about the call to revisit national emissions-cutting targets next year, a key add is that it should take place while “taking into account different national circumstances”.
That add is important to many countries, not least the US and China. The US does not want to have to do a full overhaul of its NDC each year, which would be tricky. Note also what China’s head of delegation Xie Jinping told the Guardian in an exclusive interview earlier in the week: whether the NDCs should be updated annually depends on what content is in it. Xie contrasted China’s detailed action plans for implementing its NDC with the “lip service” paid by some other countries.
And indeed some countries that have produced NDCs or pledges on net zero are regarded as barely credible by many. Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Australia regularly top the list of the least credible, if you ask experts here in Glasgow.
So here’s the tricky bit for next year, if this text stays in and countries are asked to come back for further scrutiny next year: some caveat on national circumstances is probably inevitable, to ensure that countries which have taken trouble over their NDCs are not penalised. But how do you ensure that countries with inadequate NDCs can’t take advantage of this loophole? That conundrum has not yet been solved.
Updated
Here is the Guardian’s news story on the new “draft text”, released earlier this morning. Expect it to be updated as the day goes on.
“Hopeful compromise” – Experts from the World Resources Institute are positive overall about the new draft of the Cop26 text.
“Our overarching judgement is that this is not bad. We’ve actually made some progress in terms of balance in the text,” said Helen Mountford, vice-president for climate and economics at WRI. The first draft was seen as unbalanced because it was pretty strong on measures to cut emissions, but weak on the provision of finance for vulnerable and poorer nations.
Mountford said it was good that text on issues that had been hotly debated had not been axed, most importantly on nations returning in 2022 to increase their pledges – even if the verb was downgraded in UN-speak from urges to requests. Keeping a focus on the 1.5C target, rather than just 2C was important too, she said.
“Some elements look like they could be stronger, particularly adaptation, finance and loss and damage, that was really very much needed,” she said. These issues are the funding for clean development, adapting to climate impacts and paying for unavoidable damage. “It is now giving specific dates, requesting countries to double adaptation finance by the end of 2025.”
But she said: “On the $100bn [promised] from 2020 annually, there’s still no reference to making up the shortfall since we know countries failed to meet that goal in 2020 and 2021. So that’s definitely a gap.” The $100bn was promised back in 2009, to be delivered in 2020 and the failure has damaged trust between rich donor nations and poorer recipient nations.
Yamide Dagnet, director of climate negotiations at WRI, said: “Some of the critical [finance] elements to respond to the needs of vulnerable countries have remained in the text and the text is generally more balanced, but whether this is going to be enough for developing countries remains to be seen.”
Loss and damage – payments for unavoidable climate damage in poor nations – is highly controversial at Cop26, with rich nations very reluctant to pay. But the new draft contains new text on setting up technical procedures to make progress on the issue. “That’s the start of a breakthrough in the demands of vulnerable countries,” said Dagnet.
“[The new draft] doesn’t tick all the boxes of the requests from developing countries, but it definitely goes beyond some of the limitations we have seen,” she said. “So this is why I describe it as a hopeful compromise.” However, finalising the rule book for the Paris agreement, on monitoring national emissions and carbon markets, is still to be done.
Updated
Bob Ward, from the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change at the London School of Economics, is a bit more positive but warns there is a lot of work still to do:
This text appears to deal with many of the major issues that need to be resolved, but some important aspects still need to be finalised and may take some time to conclude. The text “requests”, rather than commits, countries to deliver updated and more ambitious pledges by the end of next year, recognising that the planned emissions cuts collectively are still not consistent with holding warming to no more than 1.5C degrees. The call for countries to phase-out unabated coal power and inefficient fossil fuel subsidies is very important and historic. Unabated coal power releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and all subsidies for fossil fuels are inefficient. The text is also right to emphasise the need for rich countries to honour their pledge to deliver $100 billion a year to help developing countries, and to begin urgently a process of mobilising finance from all sources, both public and private, to deliver a significant increase in investment in the transition to zero-carbon and climate-resilient economies.
Updated
Reaction starting to come in now as people get to grips with the new text. Greenpeace International executive director, Jennifer Morgan, has just put out a statement saying: “It could be better, it should be better, and we have one day left to make it a lot, lot better.”
Right now the fingerprints of fossil fuel interests are still on the text and this is not the breakthrough deal that people hoped for in Glasgow.
The key line on phasing out coal and fossil fuel subsidies has been critically weakened, but it’s still there and needs to be strengthened again before this summit closes. That’s going to be a big tussle and one we need to win. Meanwhile we’ve gone from ‘urging’ countries to strengthen their 2030 emissions targets in line with the 1.5C goal to merely ‘requesting’ they do so by 2022. It wasn’t good enough before, it’s even weaker now and that needs to change.
But there’s wording in here worth holding on to and the UK presidency needs to fight tooth and nail to keep the most ambitious elements in the deal. We’ve moved from richer nations largely ignoring the pleas of developing countries for promised finance to tackle climate change, to the beginnings of a recognition that their calls should be met. Now we need developed countries to scale up their offer of support and finance.
Negotiators in Glasgow simply have to seize the moment and agree something historic, but they need to isolate the governments who’ve come here to wreck progress and instead listen to the calls of youth and vulnerable nations.
In parallel we’re witnessing a deliberate and cynical effort by a few nation states to turn article 6 into a charter for cheating, greenwash and loopholes. Today is an absolutely critical day in the fight to defend the 1.5C goal from vested interests who’ll do anything to dodge their responsibility for the climate crisis. Anything less puts the essence of Paris in peril.
Updated
The language on fossil fuels is “much weaker” in the new draft than the earlier version, according to Jean Su from the Center for Biological Diversity, and shows “the oily imprints of fossil fuel influence.”
In a major blow to the credibility of these talks, the final language throws a lifeline to climate-killing fossil fuels through carbon capture technologies and continued subsidies to oil, gas and coal. We need more than weak gestures towards ‘low-emission’ energy. To have any hope of preserving a livable planet, we need to ignite a zero-emission revolution now. We’re waiting for world leaders, especially President Biden, to break this destructive pattern and finally put people over fossil fuels.
Updated
Nicola Sturgeon not optimistic that this will be the last day of the summit
I am talking over the blog now for what is set to be a long day.
Scottish first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, is not alone in thinking these negotiations may go into the weekend.
Asked if Friday is the last day of the summit on Sky News this morning, she said: “I wouldn’t bet lots of money on that. I hope we see progress today.
“I certainly hope that finishing at six o’clock tonight, which is the plan, would be possible.
“Equally, I would not be surprised to know that it was going into tomorrow. That’s not unusual at Cop, so nobody should read anything particular into that if it does happen.”
Sturgeon said she has not had a chance to properly absorb the new draft of the deal that could be agreed at Cop26 but that, from what she has seen, she would describe it as “inching forward”, adding that there is time to improve it.
“If I was a young person looking into this summit right now I would say it’s not good enough.
“There may have been inches forward in this latest draft but there’s still time to get it even further forward and to really make the Glasgow agreement one that lives up to the urgency of the emergency we face.”
She added: “In these final hours, the prime minister if necessary should come back here and drive this deal over the line.”
Updated
James Murray of BusinessGreen is fairly optimistic about the wording of the draft:
Snap verdict: It all looks... quite... good? Very long way to go to get the unresolved areas sorted (finance remains the big sticking point), but many of the more ambitious elements remain largely intact at this point and the hope will be they can continue to be defended.
— James Murray (@James_BG) November 12, 2021
The reference to coal and fossil fuel subsidies is a big breakthrough. 'Unabated' calls the coal industry's bluff and says 'if you can do CCS go ahead'. 'Inefficient' subsidies is more of a fudge, but another signal reforms are needed on this front.
— James Murray (@James_BG) November 12, 2021
The big counterargument will be this could be a step forward in the UN process, but does it really 'keep 1.5C alive' when we're heading for 2.4C? Can pressure really be applied to get countries to massively strengthen their plans?
— James Murray (@James_BG) November 12, 2021
And can they get a decent deal on finance?
Regarding paragraph 29 – the one about when countries have to come back with stronger pledges – Adam Vaughan at New Scientist points out the language used by the UN is key:
So to be clear, the 2nd #cop26 draft text language of “requests” on new climate plans next year is weaker than “urges” in 1st draft
— Adam Vaughan (@adamvaughan_uk) November 12, 2021
To a lay-person like you or me, “requests” sounds stronger than “urges” in first draft
But UN says requests is weaker https://t.co/0pmVhKJ4Ju pic.twitter.com/PjCqGXJ2Sk
The fact the language in that paragraph has been downgraded will not be seen as a good sign.
Interesting to note that nowhere in the current draft text is the strongest word available to the UN, “demands”, used.
Updated
Crucially, the new text does not mean that countries will have to return with strengthened NDCs next year. Last night the three main architects of the Paris agreement told the Guardian that it is essential that countries return next year if catastrophic global heating is to be averted.
Here are the key quotes:
Christiana Figueres: “If that [five years] is the first time that countries are called to increase their ambitions, honestly that’s going to be too late. This is critically important. We need much more urgency, as this is the critical decade. We need to come back next year. We can’t wait five years for new NDCs.”
Laurence Tubiana: “It’s really important that we come back next year, and in 2023. That must be central to any outcome in Glasgow. This is necessary to fulfil the Paris agreement.”
Laurent Fabius: “In the present circumstances [targets] must be enhanced next year.”
Read Fiona Harvey’s full story here:
My colleague Fiona Harvey says it is a surprise and a positive step that the coal phaseout has remained in the document at all, and that the fact it has remained in the draft is a positive step.
Updated
Paragraph 62 in the second draft is new:
62. Also acknowledges the important role of a broad range of stakeholders at the local, national and regional level, including indigenous peoples and local communities, in averting, minimizing and addressing loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change;
This explicit recognition of the roles of indigenous people in fighting climate breakdown and conservation is a step forward, and something indigenous groups have been calling for for a while.
Leo Hickman, director at Carbon Brief (who have obviously had their coffee this morning) has noted that some of the key wording around mitigation in the new draft is much more specific:
The cover-decision wording in the key Mitigation section of the latest draft, compared to the first draft from 2 days ago, is much more specific in certain key areas
— Leo Hickman (@LeoHickman) November 12, 2021
e.g. it has now removed the loose "1.5C by 2100" wording that concerned IPCC scientists
(New draft on right...) pic.twitter.com/vvI8DHGbZs
Paragraph 29 deals with the crucial question of how soon countries will have to return with new commitments, known as NDCs. Under the Paris agreement countries are expected to return every five years, but scientists and diplomats say new science has shown that is far too slow and that without better pledges before 2025, the world would be heading for disaster.
The text of the first draft said:
29. Urges Parties that have not yet submitted new or updated nationally determined contributions in accordance with decision 1/CP.21, paragraphs 23-24 to do so as soon as possible in advance of the twenty-seventh session of the Conference of the Parties (November 2022);
while the new text says:
29. Recalls Articles 3 and 4, paragraphs 3, 4, 5 and 11, of the Paris Agreement and requests Parties to revisit and strengthen the 2030 targets in their nationally determined contributions as necessary to align with the Paris Agreement temperature goal by the end of 2022, taking into account different national circumstances;
The caveat “taking into account different national circumstances” is doing a lot of heavy lifting - it’s not hard to imagine almost any country could find an excuse to lean on that if they chose to.
Updated
Simon Evans at Carbon Brief makes the point that the mention of fossil fuel and coal phaseouts is still in the text. Although the language about the subject appears weaker, their inclusion in the first draft was seen as a big moment and it was not a given that they would remain in the second draft at all.
++NEW++
— Simon Evans (@DrSimEvans) November 12, 2021
Fresh drafts of #COP26 "cover decision" texts
FOSSIL FUELS AND COAL PHASEOUT REMAIN
1/CP.26 https://t.co/CBynslbSRV
1/CMP.16 https://t.co/5sX7e1NJl2
1/CMA.3 https://t.co/pqWJQvXBHM
More in THREAD pic.twitter.com/wxgkKGuFHZ
Paragraph 44, on climate finance for poor countries, appears to have been strengthened. The original read:
44. Emphasizes the need to mobilize climate finance from all sources to reach the level needed to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement, including significantly enhanced support for developing country Parties, beyond USD 100 billion per year;
and the current version reads:
44. Notes with deep regret that the goal of developed country Parties to mobilize jointly USD 100 billion per year by 2020 in the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation has not yet been met, and welcomes the increased pledges made by many developed country Parties and the Climate Finance Delivery Plan: Meeting the US$100 Billion Goal and the collective actions contained therein;
Reaching the target of $100bn a year - which had been promised in 2015 as part of the Paris agreement - is a key sticking point of the negotiations and one of the main things poor and vulnerable countries are demanding. This acknowledgement that rich countries have broken their promise appears to mark progress on the issue.
The Associated Press news agency’s initial reaction is downbeat, suggesting the wording on fossil fuels has been weakened.
Negotiators at this year’s UN climate talks in Glasgow appeared to be backing away from a call to end all use of coal and phase out fossil fuel subsidies completely.
The latest draft proposal from the meeting’s chair released Friday calls on countries to accelerate “the phaseout of unabated coal power and of inefficient subsidies for fossil fuels.”
A previous version [on] Wednesday had called on countries to “accelerate the phasing out of coal and subsidies for fossil fuel.”
While the chair’s proposal is likely to undergo further negotiation at the talks, due to end Friday, the change in wording suggested a shift away from unconditional demands that some fossil fuel exporting nations have objected to.
Paragraph three of the draft has changed. The first draft read:
3. Expresses alarm and concern that human activities have caused around 1.1 °C of warming to date, that impacts are already being felt in every region, and that the carbon budget consistent with achieving the Paris Agreement temperature goal is being rapidly depleted;
but the new draft says:
3. Expresses alarm and utmost concern that human activities have caused around 1.1 °C of global warming to date and that impacts are already being felt in every region;
The removal of the reference to the carbon budget being depleted feels like a weakening of the text, though it’s possible that language has been removed in exchange for strengthening of language elsewhere during the horse trading between negotiators.
Second draft of Cop26 text published
Here’s a link to the draft text which appeared on the UN website minutes ago. Analysts around the world will be examining it to see how it differs from the previous draft, and whether the language has been strengthened or weakened.
You can read my colleague Fiona Harvey’s analysis of the key paragraphs of the previous draft here:
Welcome to the Guardian’s live blog of the final scheduled day of Cop26.
Although the conference is due to end at 6pm GMT today, most people expect it will overrun, possibly into Saturday or even Sunday.
In the meantime, a new draft text has been released so we’ll be bringing you all the reaction to that and analysis through the day.
You can reach me at alan.evans@theguardian.com or on Twitter at @itsalanevans
.png?w=600)
