COP29: ‘Animal Farm’ Moment

Climate scientist/activist Joyce Kimutai gave a frank assessment of the just completed two-week UN climate conference of parties (COP 29) on social media. Hers is a refreshing take in comparison to the whining of the developing (statist) countries seeking handouts and the glass-one-eighth-full newspaper reporting from the mainstream media. She began:

Now, as I recover from the exhaustion of the past weeks, I find myself sitting on my couch, sipping sweet Kenyan tea, while reflecting on the outcomes of COP29.

As the climate crisis deepens, multilateralism is weakening, leaving vulnerable communities at the center of geopolitical tensions. The $300 billion commitment is both insignificant and shameful in the grand scheme of addressing the climate emergency.

I participated in numerous negotiation and coordination sessions, as well as side events. One side event focused on the need to improve scenarios to better represent an equitable world. Another explored synergies between the planned IPCC report on adaptation guidelines, indicators, and metrics and the ongoing work under the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) . In all these discussions, I gave my absolute best.

As for the outcomes, they left much to be desired. The principles of the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement call for developed countries to take the lead in reducing emissions and providing financial, technological, and capacity-building support to developing nations. This is essential to foster international cooperation and partnerships in addressing the climate crisis. However, Annex I (developed) countries appear unwilling to fully honor these obligations.

Instead, they argue that wealthier developing countries, such as China and the Gulf states, should contribute to climate finance and support other developing nations, due to their current emissions. These countries, in turn, reject this notion, emphasizing that Annex I nations have failed to lead while disregarding their historical responsibility for the climate crisis. This deep disagreement fuels division. Meanwhile, at the heart of this stalemate are vulnerable communities bearing the brunt of escalating climate impacts and nations, particularly in Africa, drowning in debt as they attempt to address the worsening crisis.

And then came the dramatic end. In a last-minute standoff, the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) staged a premature walkout, demanding clarity on their share. Sadly, they lost. We, the Non-Annex I countries, lost. The Annex I countries got their way. To make matters worse, the COP Presidency controversially wielded the gavel to push the decision through, ignoring requests for the floor. It was, quite frankly, an “Animal Farm” moment.

Enough said in 325 words. I commented:

What did you expect? And now, is it back to the science to qualify the alarm?

Elsewhere, Kimutai stated: “I often question myself whether it’s worth attending COP, and my answer is always the same: giving up and letting them win is not an option.” Let who win? What about consumers and taxpayers and the land/seascape spared of energy sprawl from wind, solar, and batteries? Is human betterment the standard, or your preconceived ideas about CO2 as the enemy, not the friend?

The post COP29: ‘Animal Farm’ Moment appeared first on Master Resource.