Summary:
-
At the COP27 UN climate summit in Egypt, talks for what could be a historic agreement have been going on all night, and progress is said to be close.
-
Since no deal had been made by Friday, the two-week meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh, a resort on the Red Sea, was extended.
-
The most significant sticking issue has been who will pay for the “loss and damage” brought on by climate change in developing countries.
-
Representatives from the United States said their country was working on ideas for the summit to help developing nations pay for the costs of climate change.
-
There are doubts about whether the goal of keeping warming to a crucial 1.5C above pre-industrial levels will be met.
At the COP27 UN climate summit in Egypt, talks for what could be a historic agreement have been going on all night, and progress is said to be close.
Since no deal had been made by Friday, the two-week meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh, a resort on the Red Sea, was extended.
The most significant sticking issue has been who will pay for the “loss and damage” brought on by climate change in developing countries.
Even though the negotiators say they have reached an agreement, nothing has been signed yet.
Around 200 countries are represented at the summit.
While negotiators told reporters that an agreement was still some distance off and that they were preparing for another long night, host country Egypt stated that it wanted the general deal to be reached before the end of the evening.
These meetings frequently go past their scheduled times, and COP27 is one of the longest ever.
Even after the meeting in the resort city broke down late Saturday and a number of country representatives left, negotiations kept going.
-
A straightforward guide to climate change
-
Four issues are causing problems in the negotiations
-
The primary concerns for Egypt during the COP27 climate summit
The main point of disagreement is a “loss and damage” fund that developing countries have been asking for for a long time to pay for the costs of climate change.
If a deal is reached, it will be a historic win for those countries and could help lessen the impact of recent disasters like the flooding in Pakistan and Nigeria.
Late Thursday night, the EU said in a stunning move that it might agree to this under specified circumstances, which turned out to be contentious.
The EU claimed that all those with the means to do so, including more developed rising economies like China, Saudi Arabia, and Singapore, should contribute to the fund.
This raised important issues for the UN regarding what constitutes “developing nations.”
“A special moment”
The Africa Group’s chief negotiator, Alpha Kaloga, praised the alleged deal.
He tweeted, “Thirty years of patience.” The day has come. “It is finished.” “This special occasion is a victory for all international people.”
Dr. Siobhan McDonnell, a negotiator for the Pacific Islands, says that relief is the main feeling of the negotiators. “This is a key moment in gaining technical support for loss and damage on the ground in developing nations,” she added.
Under a commitment made 30 years ago, rich countries must contribute more to cutting carbon emissions. But the world has changed a lot since then. Some developing countries are now much wealthier and contribute more to emissions than they did back then.
Representatives from the United States said their country was working on ideas for the summit to help developing nations pay for the costs of climate change.
Sherry Rehman, Pakistan’s minister for the environment, had said before that talks were almost over.
Pleas regarding fossil fuels were one of the other concerns on the table.
During COP26 in Glasgow, which also went on longer than planned, countries decided to “scale down” their use of coal.
There is currently a suggestion to include oil and gas in this.
There are doubts about whether the goal of keeping warming to a crucial 1.5C above pre-industrial levels will be met.
According to the UN, if temperatures climb above this point, millions more people will be at risk from potentially catastrophic climatic effects.
Analysis by: Advocacy Unified Network
