Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Sparks

5 Quick Things to Know About the COP28 Agreement

Unsurprisingly, not everyone’s happy with it.

COP28.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

After two weeks of intense negotiations and apparent stalemate in Dubai, all 198 delegates swiftly approved a breakthrough climate agreement this morning at COP28. The deal — a culmination of a two-year process known as the global stocktake — isn’t perfect, and it was met with a mix of praise and disappointment. United Nations climate chief Simon Stiell said that while the deal doesn’t “turn the page” on fossil fuels, it marks “the beginning of the end” of the fossil fuel era. Here are five things worth knowing about the agreement:

1. It doesn’t call for a fossil fuel phase-out

The agreement avoids the contentious “phase out” wording that nearly derailed the climate talks earlier. But it does call on countries to accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels this decade in pursuit of achieving net zero by 2050. This marks the first time a post-oil and gas future has been mentioned in a COP agreement, something that would have been “unthinkable just two years ago,” said Business Green’s James Murray.

The text also calls for tripling renewable energy capacity, phasing down unabated coal, reducing methane emissions, phasing out “inefficient” fossil fuel subsidies, and accelerating zero and low-emissions technologies including nuclear energy and carbon capture and storage.

“This sends a clear signal that the world is moving decisively to phase out fossil fuels,” said Jake Schmidt, the senior strategic director for the Natural Resources Defense Council. “It puts the fossil fuel industry formally on notice that its old business model is expiring.”

2. It appears to greenlight natural gas

The final text features a paragraph making it clear that “transitional fuels” can play a role in the energy transition. This is likely a nod to natural gas — a fossil fuel often labeled as “clean” compared with coal but that leads to emissions of methane, an extremely potent greenhouse gas. Environmentalists worry those emissions will put net zero goals in danger, but “producers have long argued that gas should complement the roll-out of intermittent renewables, replacing dirtier fossil fuels like coal and oil,” explained Stephen Stapczynski at Bloomberg Green.

3. It uses ‘weak’ language

One of the biggest criticisms of the deal is that it only “calls on” countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions, which some see as little more than an invitation. “It is the weakest of all the various terms used for such exhortations,” said CarbonBrief’s Leo Hickman.

4. Saudi Arabia gave a nod of approval

Saudi Arabia was chief among major oil-producing nations to object to a call for phasing out fossil fuels, so to eke out a deal, the COP presidency had to find language that signaled progress on curbing pollution without crossing Saudi Arabia’s red line. A source told Reuters the Saudis agreed to the deal because it offers "a menu where every country can follow its own pathway."

5. It doesn’t do nearly enough on finance

The text lacks specific commitments from rich nations to help developing nations transition away from fossil fuels. “Asking Nigeria, or indeed, asking Africa, to phase out fossil fuels is like asking us to stop breathing without life support,” Ishaq Salako, Nigeria’s environmental minister, told The New York Times.

The theme emerging from the reactions seems to be that this deal is good, but not nearly as good as it could have been. Former Vice President Al Gore’s lukewarm reaction sums it up pretty well:

Red

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
Sparks

Major Renewables Nonprofit Cuts a Third of Staff After Trump Slashes Funding

The lost federal grants represent about half the organization’s budget.

The DOE wrecking ball.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The Interstate Renewable Energy Council, a decades-old nonprofit that provides technical expertise to cities across the country building out renewable clean energy projects, issued a dramatic plea for private donations in order to stay afloat after it says federal funding was suddenly slashed by the Trump administration.

IREC’s executive director Chris Nichols said in an email to all of the organization’s supporters that it has “already been forced to lay off many of our high-performing staff members” after millions of federal dollars to three of its programs were eliminated in the Trump administration’s shutdown-related funding cuts last week. Nichols said the administration nixed the funding simply because the nonprofit’s corporation was registered in New York, and without regard for IREC’s work with countless cities and towns in Republican-led states. (Look no further than this map of local governments who receive the program’s zero-cost solar siting policy assistance to see just how politically diverse the recipients are.)

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Sparks

Esmeralda 7 Solar Project Has Been Canceled, BLM Says

It would have delivered a gargantuan 6.2 gigawatts of power.

Donald Trump, Doug Burgum, and solar panels.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images, Library of Congress

The Bureau of Land Management says the largest solar project in Nevada has been canceled amidst the Trump administration’s federal permitting freeze.

Esmeralda 7 was supposed to produce a gargantuan 6.2 gigawatts of power – equal to nearly all the power supplied to southern Nevada by the state’s primary public utility. It would do so with a sprawling web of solar panels and batteries across the western Nevada desert. Backed by NextEra Energy, Invenergy, ConnectGen and other renewables developers, the project was moving forward at a relatively smooth pace under the Biden administration, albeit with significant concerns raised by environmentalists about its impacts on wildlife and fauna. And Esmeralda 7 even received a rare procedural win in the early days of the Trump administration when the Bureau of Land Management released the draft environmental impact statement for the project.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Sparks

Trump Just Suffered His First Loss on Offshore Wind

A judge has lifted the administration’s stop-work order against Revolution Wind.

Donald Trump and wind turbines.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

A federal court has lifted the Trump administration’s order to halt construction on the Revolution Wind farm off the coast of New England. The decision marks the renewables industry’s first major legal victory against a federal war on offshore wind.

The Interior Department ordered Orsted — the Danish company developing Revolution Wind — to halt construction of Revolution Wind on August 22, asserting in a one-page letter that it was “seeking to address concerns related to the protection of national security interests of the United States and prevention of interference with reasonable uses of the exclusive economic zone, the high seas, and the territorial seas.”

Keep reading...Show less
Blue