by The failure of Cop28 to phase out fossil fuels is “appalling” and “dangerous” given the urgent need for action to tackle the climate crisis, the scientist said.
One called it a “tragedy for the planet and our future” while another said it was the “dream product” of the fossil fuel industry.
The United Nations climate summit ended on Wednesday with a compromise agreement that called for a “transition” from fossil fuels. The stronger term “graduation” was supported by 130 of the 198 countries negotiating in Dubai but was blocked by petrostates, including Saudi Arabia.
The agreement was hailed as historic as it was the first time fossil fuels, the root cause of the climate crisis, had been mentioned in 30 years of climate negotiations. But scientists said the agreement contained many loopholes and did not match the severity of the climate emergency.
“The lack of agreement to phase out fossil fuels has been a disaster,” said Professor Michael Mann, a climatologist and geophysicist at the University of Pennsylvania in the US. “The ‘switching away from fossil fuels’ was weak tea at best. It’s like making a promise to your doctor that you’ll switch from nuts after being diagnosed with diabetes.”
Dr Magdalena Skipper, editor-in-chief of the science journal Nature, said: “The science is clear – fossil fuels have to go. The world’s leaders will fail their people and the planet if they do not accept this reality.”
An editorial in Nature said the failure to phase out was “more than a missed opportunity”, it was “dangerous” and “against the core goals set out in the 2015 Paris climate agreement” on global warming. limit to 1.5C. (2.7F) above pre-industrial levels.
“The climate doesn’t matter who emits greenhouse gases,” the editorial continued. “There is only one viable path forward, and that is for everyone to phase out almost all fossil fuels as quickly as possible.”
Sir David King, chairman of the Climate Crisis Advisory Group and former UK chief scientific adviser, said: “The treaty is very wordy. Ensuring that 1.5C remains viable will require a full commitment to a range of far-reaching measures, including a complete fossil fuel phase-out.”
There was a discrepancy between the stark statement on the reductions in emissions needed and the proposed action to achieve those reductions, he said: “The Cop28 text recognizes the need for ‘deep, rapid and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions ‘ to stay inside. line with 1.5C. But then he lists a bunch of attempts that have no chance of achieving that.”
The scientists said the loopholes included the call to “accelerate” carbon capture and storage to capture emissions from burning fossil fuels, an option that can play a small role at best.
Related: Cop28 failed to stop deadly fossil fuel expansion plans – so what now?
Dr Friederike Otto, a climatologist at Imperial College London, said: “Until fossil fuels are phased out, the world will continue to be a more dangerous, expensive and uncertain place to live. With every vague word, every empty promise in the final text, millions more people will join the front lines of climate change and many will die.”
Professor Martin Siegert, polar scientist and deputy vice-chancellor at the University of Exeter, said: “The science is very clear. Cop28 is a tragedy for the planet and our future, if it does not make a clear declaration to stop burning fossil fuels. The world is heating up faster and more powerful than Cop’s response to deal with it.”
Professor Mike Berners-Lee, a carbon footprint expert at Lancaster University, said: “Cop28 is the fossil fuel industry’s dream come true, because it looks like progress, but it isn’t.”
Dr Elena Cantarello, senior lecturer in sustainability science at Bournemouth University, UK, said: “It is very disappointing to see how a very small number of countries have managed to put short-term national interests ahead of the future of people and nature. .”
Dr James Dyke, associate professor of world system dynamics at the University of Exeter, said: “Cop28 needed to make an unambiguous statement. While the call for agreement on the need to transition away from fossil fuels is welcome, there are numerous caveats and loopholes that may be meaningless.
“This agreement is a significant sign of previous failures and no change of pace in the increasingly urgent need to stop the rapid burning of coal, oil and gas.”
The scientists’ views were echoed those of Anne Rasmussenthe chief negotiator for the group Alliance of Small Island States, whose speech at the end of Cop28 received a standing ovation from delegates: “It is not enough for us to refer to science and then make agreements that ignore what science tells us. we have to do.”
Climate science was at the heart of a row that dominated the first week of the summit after the Guardian published comments from Cop28 president Sultan Al Jaber, in which he said: “There is no science out there, or there is no story out there, says the phasing out of fossil fuel will achieve 1.5C.” Al Jaber later said: “I have repeatedly said the phase-out and phase-out of fossil fuel is inevitable. In fact, it is essential.”
Dr Lisa Schipper, professor of development geography at the University of Bonn in Germany, said: “The Cop President’s early statement about the lack of science behind the phasing out of fossil fuels sent shock waves to scientists, especially those who contributed to the Inter-Government. Panel on Climate Change [most recent report]since the science in the report is so clear that fossil fuels need to be phased out to prevent a point of no return.”
Related: Cop28 is a farce that will fail, but there are other ways we can try to save the planet | George Monbiot
Mann said the COP rules needed to be amended, for example by allowing supermajorities to vote through decisions on holding petrification protests and by barring oil executives such as Al Jaber, who runs the United Arab Emirates’ state oil company, from being in charge of the future. summits.
“Fix it, don’t eliminate it,” Mann said. “The police are the only multilateral framework we have for negotiating global climate policies. But the failure of Cop28 to make any meaningful progress at a time when we have the opportunity to limit warming below catastrophic levels is deeply worrying.”
