‘We need trillions, not billions, to fight the climate crisis’, says activist

Despite the many restrictions on organizing protests at COP 27 (UN climate change conference), Tasneem Essop, who directs CAN (Climate Action Network), the largest climate network of civil society organizations in the world, participated in several of them, confined to a specific space within the conference venue.

In one of the climate marches, she questioned: “When we ask for funding for damages caused, they [os países desenvolvidos] they say they have no money. Lie. Because? Because they find money when it comes to financing the fossil fuel industry and even use our money to subsidize it”.

Financial compensation for vulnerable countries, for the first time under discussion on the official agenda of a climate conference, is defended by the activist as the most important agenda of COP27, an issue that does not only deal with material damage, but also with lives, homes and cultures destroyed as a result of the climate crisis.

According to Essop, the United States has been at this conference, and has been for a long time now, the main country to block advances in discussions on climate finance for damages. “It was because of them that the topic ended up in a footnote in the Paris Agreement.”

She also states that we will need another scale of investments for long-term financing, which must include the needs of developing countries.

In an interview with Sheet at COP27, the activist spoke about different aspects of the climate negotiations and the need for civil society to keep up the pressure on the lack of ambition of global leaders.

After the climate conference, Essop argues that efforts should be focused on government actions, including strengthening nationally determined contributions (NDCs), as in the case of Brazil.

Many countries came to the conference with climate commitments far below what we need to meet the targets set out in the Paris Agreement. What could you say about these discussions? As civil society, we want to see climate commitments include the issue of phasing out fossil fuel.

It is not possible to talk about reducing emissions without incorporating this. Developing countries also want to see a connection between the issue of mitigating greenhouse gases and all others, such as financing loss and damage and adapting to the climate crisis.

About loss and damage, a topic that for the first time is being discussed as part of the official agenda of a COP, what are CAN’s expectations and which countries have prevented advances? We expect that a line of financing for damages will be agreed at COP 27.

The question of how it will be operationalized may come next year. The G77 (a group of more than 130 developing countries) and China presented a proposal that emphasizes respect for the principles of equity and common responsibilities and suggests the creation of a transition committee to define the objectives, principles and operational modalities of the fund until COP28.

The main country blocking advances continues to be the United States. The US has always blocked, and that is why in the Paris Agreement this topic ended up in a footnote. Their main concern is compensation claims.

Could you talk a little more about that? Developed countries historically emit the most greenhouse gases, but it is the less responsible nations that are suffering the worst impacts of the climate crisis.

Financing for damages is a remedy for this injustice. The US does not want to recognize this as redress and does not want to be held responsible for the impacts as they fear it will trigger a series of legal actions.

Do we have any more news on climate finance? Unfortunately, the funding is not moving. Rich nations still haven’t delivered on their $100 billion/year pledge. This is a commitment of more than a decade, still unfulfilled.

Last year in Glasgow they apologized and said they would mobilize these resources by 2025, but there has been no movement in that direction this year.

In addition, long-term financing —post-2025 and yet to be defined—needs to have an approach based on the needs of developing countries. In this case, we’re talking trillions, not billions, that need to be delivered.

A UNFCCC committee [sigla em inglês para a convenção-quadro da ONU sobre mudanças climáticas] made an initial and conservative assessment of these needs, based on the NDCs [compromissos nacionais determinados) que foram apresentados. Mas nem todos os países incluíram perdas e danos, ou conseguiram estimar os custos dessas perdas. Mesmo com todas essas limitações, o número já chegou aos trilhões.

Qual a proposta da CAN para a eliminação equitativa dos combustíveis fósseis e qual é a probabilidade de avançarmos nessa discussão por aqui? Embora tenham adotado uma linguagem fraca na COP26, em Glasgow, ficamos muito felizes que 23 países tenham assumido a redução gradual de carvão no ano passado.

Porém queremos mais, queremos uma linguagem que reflita não apenas a redução do carvão, mas sua eliminação gradual e que também inclua petróleo e gás.

Sabemos que os países industrializados foram dependentes dos combustíveis fósseis para se desenvolver, e são eles que precisam agir mais rápido. Mas o que eles estão fazendo agora, por causa da guerra na Ucrânia e da chamada crise energética? Muitos estão recuando nessa questão.

O Reino Unido tem emitido novas licenças de petróleo e gás e diversos países da União Europeia (UE) estão investindo em gás na África (e a União Africana tem pressionado por mais investimentos em gás em seus países). Uma vez que você começa a investir nessa infraestrutura, quando você para? Nós sabemos que precisamos parar há muito tempo.

O governador do Mato Grosso, Mauro Mendes, defende que os países ricos paguem pelas necessidades dos países em desenvolvimento e, no caso do Brasil, pela proteção da floresta. Mas defende também o direito de manter o desmatamento legal [hoje permitido pelo Código Florestal]🇧🇷 What do you think? There are many voices in developing countries that are frustrated because rich nations have developed at the expense of their countries and defend the right to pollute, to cut down forests, as a development proposal. This is not what we are defending.

You cannot allow more deforestation and rich nations must provide the necessary support for socio-economic development, forest economy and reforestation in the region, for example.

We have some international cooperation agreements under way in Brazil, but they haven’t resulted in a significant reduction in deforestation yet. How could we improve them? These partnerships need to be treated as contributions to the national effort to reduce emissions and must have a structure of accountability, under the supervision of national governments and with the participation of civil society.

You spoke earlier about just energy transition. What would you have to say about how to consider it in Brazil, where, at the moment, we have record oil production and 196 gas thermoelectric plants in operation, for example🇧🇷 In these international spaces, many nations are starting to talk about just transition. But they are actually talking about energy transition. The concept has been misused, which is unfortunate.

If Brazil is going to conduct a fair transition process, it has to be a process that includes workers, local communities, indigenous peoples, women, that is, involving the whole of society.

The country must collectively decide where it wants to be by 2050, which is a radical transformation proposal that demands a profound change in our vision of the future. I know that President Lula has his heart and his past very close to the workers, and he will certainly consider them.

What deserves more attention after COP27? We need to strengthen government actions, including strengthening nationally determined contributions.

In other words, do we need a new NDC in Brazil? Yes, without a doubt, and Lula needs to signal to the world that Brazil is back and committed to tackling the climate emergency, and that the lives of people suffering around the world must also be considered.

We hope that global leaders will be inspired by Lula, who is and always has been an important leader, and we hope that he will become an advocate in the fight against the climate crisis.

X-Ray – Tasneem Essop, 60Specialist

She is the executive director of CAN (Climate Action Network), the largest climate network in the world, made up of more than 1,500 civil society organizations operating in more than 130 countries. She is serving her second term as a member of South Africa’s National Planning Commission, responsible for leading work on climate change and just transition.