Does Cop26 offer hope for the world?

WHAT are we to make of Cop26 – variously described as a

‘diplomatic triumph’, a ‘historic success’ (inevitably by Boris) and a ‘disappointing failure’.

A ‘diplomatic triumph’ stems from a final deal being reached at all.

This was predicated on last-minute decision-making being removed from the conference as a whole to a clique of four ‘global leaders’ and the jettisoning of coal phase-out for ‘phase-down’.

Two of the global leaders involved – the US and China – had refused to sign an earlier pact for phasing out coal, so this was obviously a boon for them. The precise meaning of ‘phase-down’ – whether it applies to all coal production, what the time scale involved is and whether links exist with coal ‘phase-out’ – remain essentially unclear.

It is a common fact that diplomacy is most successful where forms of words chosen to reach agreement between parties elude precise meanings.

Apparently, the diplomatic endgame brought tears to the eyes of Alok Sharma.

Cop26 is being heralded as a ‘success’ because it has seemingly kept alive the ‘flame of 1.5 Celsius’.

This, of course, will only be the case if Cop27 meets next year, as requested by the UK, and delivers both ambitious actions to halve carbon emissions by 2030 and improve net-zero carbon plans by 2050.

Currently, inclusive of Cop26 pledges, Carbon Action Tracker forecasts an increase of 14% in carbon emissions by 2030 and not a reduction of 45% (required to keep global temperature rises within 1.5 Celsius). Carbon Action Tracker also forecasts temperature rises between 1.8 Celsius (its most optimistic scenario where 2030 targets are met and all Cop26 pledges are delivered) and 2.7 Celsius (if not) by the end of the century.

There is an alternative sceptic view which has it that, although achieving such huge carbon reductions in a short period of time may be near impossible, keeping the tiny, guttering ‘flame of 1.5 Celsius’ alive usefully allows ownership of any historically monumental failure to achieve carbon cuts and prevent dangerous global temperatures to be shifted to the egyptian rather than UK government. (No, would politicians do that?!)