Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Climate

The Global Stocktake Draft Has Something to Make Everyone Mad

The authors are taking some big swings. What makes it to the final draft will be anyone’s guess.

Devastated trees.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

By the 28th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, you’d think we’d have done it all before — but if you did, you’d be wrong. This year, for the first time, negotiators at the conference will produce what’s called a global stocktake report, summarizing the past five years of climate progress and setting the agenda for the next five years and beyond.

The stocktake goes all the way back to the Paris Agreement; if countries have to report on their progress toward meeting their climate goals, the thinking goes, they’ll take the agreement more seriously. This is the closest thing the Paris Agreement has to an enforcement mechanism — naming and shaming — and we’re about to see how well it works.

The stocktake report is more than 18 months in the making, although the first time most of the world may have become aware of it was in September, when the UN released a technical report on how things are going. TL;DR: They’re not going great, an impression further bolstered by another report released just before the start of COP28 in Dubai, which showed that the world is nowhere near meeting its Paris goals.

All that is to say that the authors of the final stocktake report, due at the conclusion of the conference, have a high bar to clear. Drafts of the report that have come out so far offer a window into their thinking — and a sense of how hard their job is. Keeping in mind that none of this language is final and that the report could still change radically between now and its official adoption, here are a few features to highlight:

The most helpful part: If you want a quick summary of the latest climate science, check out the draft’s opening sections, which lean heavily on UN scientific publications from the past two years, including the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Sixth Assessment Report.

The most controversial part: Given the headlines that have come out of COP28 thus far, the future of fossil fuels is likely to draw the most attention in the final text. On that front, the draft lists three options for negotiators — one recommending “an orderly and just phase out of fossil fuels,” one calling for “accelerating efforts towards phasing out unabated fossil fuels,” and one … saying nothing at all.

The most on-theme part: The same section of the report also has optional language around tripling renewables capacity, phasing out coal, and getting rid of “inefficient” fossil fuel subsidies. A couple paragraphs later, there’s an optional section calling for parties to the Paris Agreement to reduce global methane emissions by at least 30% by 2030 and 40% by 2035. Again, whether any of this winds up in the final agreement is a big unknown. But if those methane targets make it into the final version, it’ll mark a substantial expansion of the Global Methane Pledge first launched at COP26.

The most David-and-Goliath part: The adaptation section of the draft seems like it’s been heavily influenced by the Bridgetown Initiative crew.

To take a step back for a second: The Bridgetown Initiative is named after the capital city of Barbados, is championed by the island’s prime minister, Mia Mottley, and calls for rich countries to throw far more support to the most vulnerable nations using various forms of international financing, from World Bank programs to mobilizing private investment.

A lot of those ideas made their way into this draft. For instance, it has an optional paragraph that proposes a doubling of international adaptation financing and a variety of options calling for more grants and other financing mechanisms that won’t add to developing countries’ already groaning debt burdens. On the subtler side of things, one revision from an earlier draft throws the word “highly” in front of verbiage calling current climate finance efforts “insufficient to respond to worsening climate change impacts” in developing countries.

The trendiest part: COP28 has thrown its arms around AI. One section of the latest draft bids welcome to what’s called the Technology Mechanism on Artificial Intelligence for Climate Action, “which explores the role of artificial intelligence as potentially powerful tools for advancing and scaling up transformative adaptation and mitigation actions,” with a focus on developing countries.

What’s not in this draft: much of anything about carbon pricing. The notion of monetary penalties for climate-polluting appears just a few times in the draft’s 24 pages, and all in optional sections. The word “offset” doesn’t appear at all.

Read more about COP28:

The World Finally Agrees to Cut Emissions the Easy Way

Blue

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Spotlight

The Moss Landing Fire Is Radicalizing Battery Foes

From Kansas to Brooklyn, the fire is turning battery skeptics into outright opponents.

Texas battery project.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The symbol of the American battery backlash can be found in the tiny town of Halstead, Kansas.

Angry residents protesting a large storage project proposed by Boston developer Concurrent LLC have begun brandishing flashy yard signs picturing the Moss Landing battery plant blaze, all while freaking out local officials with their intensity. The modern storage project bears little if any resemblance to the Moss Landing facility, which uses older technology,, but that hasn’t calmed down anxious locals or stopped news stations from replaying footage of the blaze in their coverage of the conflict.

Keep reading...Show less
Hotspots

Trump May Approve Transmission Line for Wind Project

And more on the week’s conflicts around renewable energy.

Map of renewable energy conflicts
Heatmap Illustration

1. Carbon County, Wyoming – I have learned that the Bureau of Land Management is close to approving the environmental review for a transmission line that would connect to BluEarth Renewables’ Lucky Star wind project.

  • This is a huge deal. For the last two months it has seemed like nothing wind-related could be approved by the Trump administration. But that may be about to change.
  • The Bureau of Land Management sent local officials an email March 6 with a draft environmental assessment for the transmission line, which is required for the federal government to approve its right-of-way under the National Environmental Policy Act.
  • According to the draft, the entirety of the wind project itself is sited on private property and “no longer will require access to BLM-administered land.”
  • The email suggests this draft environmental assessment may soon be available for public comment, which is standard practice and required under the law to proceed. BLM’s web page for the transmission line now states an approval granting right-of-way for the transmission line may come as soon as this May.
  • We’ve asked BLM for comment on how this complies with Trump’s executive order ending “new or renewed approvals” and “rights of way” for onshore wind projects. We’ll let you know if we hear back.
  • It’s worth noting, however, that BLM last week did something similar with a transmission line that would go to a solar project proposed entirely on private lands. Could private lands become the workaround du jour under Trump?

2. Nantucket County, Massachusetts – Anti-offshore wind advocates are pushing the Trump administration to rescind air permits issued to Avangrid for New England Wind 1 and 2, the same approval that was ripped away from Atlantic Shores offshore wind farm last Friday.

Keep reading...Show less
Q&A

What’s the Deal with Battery Storage Regulation?

A conversation with Nikhil Kumar of GridLab

Nikhil Kumar, program director at GridLab
Heatmap Illustration

Today’s sit-down is with Nikhil Kumar, a program director at GridLab and an expert in battery storage safety and regulation. Kumar’s folks reached out to me after learning I was writing about Moss Landing and wanted to give his honest and open perspective on how the disaster is impacting the future of storage development in the U.S. Let’s dive in!

The following is an abridged and edited version of our conversation.

Keep reading...Show less