Search

Electric cars alone won’t save the planet. We’ll need to design cities so people can walk and cycle safely

At the COP26 climate summit, world politicians patted themselves on their backs for <a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/455658/cop26-agrees-new-global-climate-deal-with-last-minute-change-on-coal">coming to a last-minute agreement</a>. Humanity now waits with bated breath to see if countries implement the commitments they made, and if those commitments help the planet. If the rest of our climate progress mirrors the policies around transportation, we’re in for a difficult future. COP26 may have been one of the last chances to head off devastating climate change, and yet, the best and boldest action our leaders could envision for transportation was the universal adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) — with a vague nod to <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2021/11/10/electric-cars-wont-save-the-planet-say-transport-experts-at-cop26/?sh=15ebb8967978">active and public transport</a>. EVs are exciting for politicians, many businesses and a few drivers. They give us the illusion we are dramatically reducing our environmental impact while changing virtually nothing about our lifestyles. But EVs do what cars with internal combustion engines (ICE) have always done to our urban areas. They make it possible to put greater distances between the places we live, work and shop. But ever expanding cities are unsustainable. Building endlessly into greenfield areas and swapping forests or agricultural land for low-density housing uses exorbitant amounts of limited resources. The further out our cities grow, the less interest there is in building up to achieve the scale our urban areas need for the efficient use of infrastructures like water, sewerage, electricity and public transport. <h2>Electric cars are still cars</h2> Electric cars make our cities less attractive and less efficient for more sustainable modes of transport. No matter the type of propulsion, people driving cars kill 1.35 million people globally, including more than 300 in New Zealand, every year. More cars in cities mean more space taken for parking, less room and more danger for active modes and less efficient public transport. Plugging in a car doesn’t stop it from being a lethal machine or causing congestion. There is still no clear and sustainable pathway to manage the e-waste generated by EVs. Electric cars are not “green”. They still use tyres which create massive waste streams. Tyre wear produces microplastics that <a href="https://www.iucn.org/news/secretariat/201702/invisible-plastic-particles-textiles-and-tyres-major-source-ocean-pollution-%E2%80%93-iucn-study">end up in our waterways and oceans</a>. Although EVs use regenerative braking, which is better than traditional internal-combustion cars, they still use brake pads when the brakes are applied. Braking generates <a href="https://www.ecan.govt.nz/get-involved/news-and-events/2018/the-hidden-pollutant-in-our-brake-pads/">toxic dust composed of heavy metals</a> like mercury, lead, cadmium and chromium. These heavy metals make their way to our streams and rivers, embedding themselves in these waterways forever. <h2>Driving less, switching to active transport</h2> Even if EVs were great for the planet, we may not get to a level of use in New Zealand to meaningfully reduce transport emissions to merit our climate goals. New Zealand introduced subsidies in July this year, but at this point <a href="https://www.transport.govt.nz//assets/Uploads/Report/AnnualFleetStatistics.pdf">less than 0.5% of the vehicle fleet is fully electric</a>. At the current rate of EV adoption, it will take many decades before enough electric motors propel our vehicle fleet to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. According to the Climate Change Commission’s <a href="https://www.climatecommission.govt.nz/our-work/advice-to-government-topic/inaia-tonu-nei-a-low-emissions-future-for-aotearoa/">advice to the government</a>, to achieve New Zealand’s 2050 net zero target, at least 50% of imported light vehicles would need to be fully electric by 2029, with no light internal-combustion vehicle imports from the early 2030s. The report goes on to concede that: <blockquote> Even with the rapid switch to EVs, roughly 80% of the vehicles entering the fleet this decade would still be ICE vehicles. </blockquote> The current rates of EV adoption reflect uptake by the <a href="https://sciencepolicyreview.org/wp-content/uploads/securepdfs/2021/08/A_perspective_on_equity_in_the_transition_to_electric_vehicles.pdf">wealthiest in our society</a>. Once those with the greatest disposable income purchase electric cars, we can expect the adoption curve to flatten. It is unfair to expect middle and lower-income people to replace their current vehicles with more expensive electric cars. Mitigating emissions through consumerism is highly inequitable. We are placing the most significant burden on the most vulnerable groups. Those who push technology like EVs make big promises that lull us into a false sense that we can live our lives in virtually the same way we do now and not worry about the planet. In reality, our lifestyles need to undergo significant changes to make a meaningful impact. Despite all this, there is good news. The changes needed to move us closer to a sustainable future are many of the things a lot of us love about living in a community. It’s about bringing different land uses closer together to make it possible to live, work and shop in your neighbourhood. It’s about connecting communities with cycling and public transport infrastructure for longer trips. Life as we know it will have to change, but that change could be for the better. We don’t need to ditch the more than three million fossil fuel cars we already have, but we should drive them a lot less. Though it sounds nice, buying a new electric car won’t save the planet.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/171818/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/timothy-welch-1252494">Timothy Welch</a>, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-auckland-1305">University of Auckland</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/electric-cars-alone-wont-save-the-planet-well-need-to-design-cities-so-people-can-walk-and-cycle-safely-171818">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock

Domestic Travel

Five things you need to know about the Glasgow Climate Pact

The COP26 UN climate talks in Glasgow have finished and the gavel has come down on the Glasgow Climate Pact agreed by all 197 countries. If the <a href="https://theconversation.com/five-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-paris-climate-deal-52256">2015 Paris Agreement</a> provided the framework for countries to tackle climate change then Glasgow, six years on, was the first major test of this high-water mark of global diplomacy. So what have we learnt from two weeks of leaders’ statements, massive protests and side deals on coal, stopping fossil fuel finance and deforestation, plus the final signed <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2021_L16_adv.pdf">Glasgow Climate Pact</a>? From phasing out coal to carbon market loopholes, here is what you need to know: <h2>1. Progress on cutting emissions, but nowhere near enough</h2> The Glasgow Climate Pact is incremental progress and not the breakthrough moment needed to curb the worst impacts of climate change. The UK government as host and therefore president of COP26 wanted to “<a href="https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1455568026384863241">keep 1.5°C alive</a>”, the stronger goal of the Paris Agreement. But at best we can say the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C is on life support – it has a pulse but it’s nearly dead. The <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf">Paris Agreement</a> says temperatures should be limited to “well below” 2°C above pre-industrial levels, and countries should “pursue efforts” to limit warming to 1.5°C. Before COP26, the world was <a href="https://www.unep.org/resources/emissions-gap-report-2021">on track for 2.7°C of warming</a>, based on commitments by countries, and expectation of the changes in technology. Announcements at COP26, including new pledges to cut emissions this decade, by some key countries, have reduced this to a <a href="https://climateactiontracker.org/global/temperatures/">best estimate of 2.4°C</a>. More countries also announced long-term net zero goals. One of the most important was <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-59125143">India’s</a> pledge to reach net zero emissions by 2070. Critically, the country said it would get off to a quick start with a massive expansion of renewable energy in the next ten years so that it accounts for 50% of its total usage, reducing its emissions in 2030 by 1 billion tonnes (from a current total of around 2.5 billion). Fast-growing <a href="https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/headlines/493040-cop26-nigeria-will-cut-carbon-emission-to-net-zero-by-2060-buhari-says.html">Nigeria</a> also pledged net zero emissions by 2060. Countries accounting for <a href="https://zerotracker.net/">90% of the world’s GDP</a> have now pledged to go net zero by the middle of this century. <a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/431784/original/file-20211113-61366-1qm1j2h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/431784/original/file-20211113-61366-1qm1j2h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="Yellow minibuses on a busy street" /></a> Nigeria’s population is expected to overtake China’s this century. Santos Akhilele Aburime / shutterstock A world warming by 2.4°C is still clearly <a href="https://theconversation.com/cop26-what-would-the-world-be-like-at-3-c-of-warming-and-how-would-it-be-different-from-1-5-c-171030">very far from 1.5°C</a>. What remains is a near-term emissions gap, as global emissions look likely to flatline this decade rather than showing the sharp cuts necessary to be on the 1.5°C trajectory the pact calls for. There is a gulf between long-term net zero goals and plans to deliver emissions cuts this decade. <h2>2. The door is ajar for further cuts in the near future</h2> The final text of the Glasgow Pact notes that the current national climate plans, nationally determined contributions (NDCs) in the jargon, are far from what is needed for 1.5°C. It also requests that countries come back next year with new updated plans. Under the Paris Agreement, new climate plans are needed every five years, which is why Glasgow, five years after Paris (with a delay due to COVID), was such an important meeting. New climate plans next year, instead of waiting another five years, can keep 1.5°C on life support for another 12 months, and gives campaigners another year to shift government climate policy. It also opens the door to requesting further NDC updates from 2022 onwards to help ratchet up ambition this decade. The Glasgow Climate Pact also states that the use of unabated coal should be phased down, as should subsidies for fossil fuels. The wording is weaker than the initial proposals, with the final text calling for only a “phase down” and not a “phase out” of coal, due to a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/live/2021/nov/13/cop26-live-third-draft-text-expected-as-climate-talks-go-into-overtime?page=with:block-619012648f08b698cb951163#block-619012648f08b698cb951163">last-second intervention by India</a>, and of “inefficient” subsidies. But this is the first time fossil fuels have been mentioned in a UN climate talks declaration. In the past, Saudi Arabia and others have stripped out this language. This an important shift, finally acknowledging that use of coal and other fossil fuels need to be rapidly reduced to tackle the climate emergency. The taboo of talking about the end of fossil fuels has been finally broken. <h2>3. Rich countries continued to ignore their historical responsibility</h2> Developing countries have been calling for funding to pay for “loss and damage”, such as the costs of the impacts of cyclones and sea level rise. Small island states and climate-vulnerable countries say the historical emissions of the major polluters have caused these impacts and therefore funding is needed. Developed countries, <a href="https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-us-block-financial-support-climate-change-cop26/">led by the US and EU</a>, have resisted taking any liability for these loss and damages, and vetoed the creation of a new “Glasgow Loss and Damage Facility”, a way of supporting vulnerable nations, despite it being called for by most countries. <a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/431783/original/file-20211113-60020-8whsew.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/431783/original/file-20211113-60020-8whsew.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="Chart of cumulative historical emissions" /></a> The UK has one twentieth the population of India, yet has emitted more carbon from fossil fuels. <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-which-countries-are-historically-responsible-for-climate-change" class="source">CarbonBrief</a>, <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/" class="license">CC BY-NC-SA</a> <h2>4. Loopholes in carbon market rules could undermine progress</h2> Carbon markets could throw a potential lifeline to the fossil fuel industry, allowing them to claim “carbon offsets” and carry on business as (nearly) usual. A tortuous series of negotiations over article 6 of the Paris Agreement on market and non-market approaches to trading carbon was finally agreed, six years on. The worst and biggest loopholes were closed, but there is still scope for countries and companies to <a href="http://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2021/05/04/carbon-offsetting-british-airways-easyjet-verra/">game the system</a>. Outside the COP process, we will need much clearer and stricter rules for <a href="https://trove-research.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Trove-Research-Carbon-Credit-Demand-Supply-and-Prices-1-June-2021.pdf">company carbon offsets</a>. Otherwise expect a series of exposé from non-governmental organisatios and the media into carbon offsetting under this new regime, when new attempts will emerge to try and close these remaining loopholes. <h2>5. Thank climate activists for the progress – their next moves will be decisive</h2> It is clear that powerful countries are moving too slowly and they have made a political decision to not support a step change in both greenhouse gas emissions and funding to help income-poor countries to adapt to climate change and leapfrog the fossil fuel age. But they are being pushed hard by their populations and particularly climate campaigners. Indeed in Glasgow, we saw huge protests with both the youth Fridays for Future march and the Saturday Global Day of Action massively exceeding expected numbers. This means that next steps of the campaigners and the climate movement matter. In the UK this will be trying to stop the government granting a licence to exploit the new <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57762927">Cambo oil field</a> off the north coast of Scotland. Expect more action on the financing of fossil fuel projects, as activists try to cut emissions by starving the industry of capital. Without these movements pushing countries and companies, including at COP27 in Egypt, we won’t curb climate change and protect our precious planet. <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/simon-lewis-158469">Simon Lewis</a>, Professor of Global Change Science at University of Leeds and, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/ucl-1885">UCL</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/mark-maslin-108286">Mark Maslin</a>, Professor of Earth System Science, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/ucl-1885">UCL</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/five-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-glasgow-climate-pact-171799">original article</a>. Image: Rober Perry/EPA

International Travel

COP26: New Zealand depends on robust new rules for global carbon trading to meets its climate pledge

As the <a href="https://ukcop26.org/">COP26</a> climate summit draws to a close, debate continues on one key issue in particular: a new rule book for global carbon trading to allow countries to purchase emissions reductions from overseas to count towards their own climate action. The world has generally welcomed headline-grabbing <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/07/so-what-has-cop26-achieved-so-far">agreements</a> on halting deforestation and tackling methane and <a href="https://ukcop26.org/end-of-coal-in-sight-at-cop26/">coal</a>. Likewise ambitious commitments from some large polluters, most notably <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/07/so-what-has-cop26-achieved-so-far">India’s pledge</a> to reach net zero carbon by 2070. But the devil is in the detail and there is serious concern that some of these commitments are only voluntary, while others look unachievable. Defining the rules for international carbon trading is a contentious agenda item — but one that will partly determine whether countries can meet their pledges and collectively limit global warming to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/05/president-of-paris-summit-says-18c-commitment-is-only-hypothetical">as close to 1.5℃ as possible</a>. The new rules, known as <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/in-depth-q-and-a-how-article-6-carbon-markets-could-make-or-break-the-paris-agreement">Article 6</a> under the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement">Paris Agreement</a>, will be important for New Zealand. During COP26, New Zealand announced its new Nationally Determined Contribution (<a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/nationally-determined-contributions-ndcs/nationally-determined-contributions-ndcs">NDC</a>) to reduce emissions by <a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/climate-change-conference-emissions-to-be-cut-by-50-per-cent-below-2005-levels-by-2030/WRDDTBYBIRDSOTQSDP7UH6KWLI/">50% on 2005 levels by 2030</a>. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern described this as “our fair share” and it is indeed a significant step up on New Zealand’s previous pledge to cut emissions by 30%. It leaves the country with 571 Megatons of CO₂-equivalent emissions to “spend” between 2022 and 2030. <h2>New rules for global carbon trading</h2> The New Zealand government stated its “<a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/climate-change-conference-emissions-to-be-cut-by-50-per-cent-below-2005-levels-by-2030/WRDDTBYBIRDSOTQSDP7UH6KWLI/">first priority</a>” was to reduce domestic emissions, but it acknowledged that alone could not meet the country’s new pledge. In fact, two thirds of the promised emissions reductions will have to come through overseas arrangements, especially with nations in the Asia-Pacific region. The <a href="https://www.climatecommission.govt.nz/our-work/advice-to-government-topic/inaia-tonu-nei-a-low-emissions-future-for-aotearoa/test-summary/">Climate Change Commission</a> has been critical of this approach, describing it as “purchasing offshore mitigation, rather than [doing] what was necessary to achieve actual emissions reductions at source”. But the approach is allowed under the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement">Paris Agreement</a>, which all states at COP26 have signed up to. This would allow one country to buy credits from another country that has exceeded its NDC, or to carry out activities that reduce emissions in another (host) country and count those towards its own NDC. It also supports non-market approaches to climate cooperation between countries around technology transfer, finance and capacity building. But these provisions have proved contentious, not least because they could result in double counting of emissions reductions, unless clear and robust operational rules are agreed. The COP26 summit has made some progress on this, but many finer details are yet to be resolved. <h2>Cutting emissions at home versus elsewhere</h2> Uncertainty about carbon market rules will be particularly problematic for New Zealand, given its reliance on overseas activities to meet its new NDC. There are also practical questions around how much of these activities will count towards New Zealand’s NDC, and how ready potential partners in the Pacific are for such carbon market trading mechanisms. Pacific Island nations are not currently trading or part of established carbon markets. They may not be able to develop the necessary technical expertise to ensure fairness, compliance and transparency well in advance of 2030. While there is scope to pursue opportunities to reduce emissions beyond our shores, we should be looking harder at what can be done domestically to help fulfil our NDC in the short time available. Public <a href="https://consult.environment.govt.nz/climate/emissions-reduction-plan/">consultation</a> on the government’s first <a href="https://environment.govt.nz/publications/emissions-reduction-plan-discussion-document/">emissions reduction plan</a> is currently underway until November 24. A final version is due in May 2022 and is expected to set out strategies for specific sectors (transport, energy and industry, agriculture, waste and forestry) to meet emissions budgets. It will also include a multi-sector plan to adapt to climate change, and to mitigate the impacts emissions cuts may have on people. It’s not ideal that a concrete plan for domestic emissions reductions is still six months away. But this does provide opportunity for people and interest groups to help shape priorities and pathways, and to encourage the government to set bolder domestic targets than would otherwise have been likely. The Climate Change Commission has already produced <a href="https://www.climatecommission.govt.nz/our-work/reducing-emissions/">recommendations for a low-emissions Aotearoa</a>, including the rapid adoption of electric vehicles, reduction in animal stocking rates and changing land use towards forestry and horticulture. Now is also the time to start building capacity to support Pacific Island nations in designing their carbon market policies. New Zealand has already <a href="https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/new-zealand-increases-climate-aid-contribution">pledged NZ$1.3 billion</a> in funding for climate change aid, about half of which will go to Pacific Island countries. Allocating some of this to enhancing technical know-how will help create a level playing field in carbon trading. It would ensure that whichever overseas arrangements materialise, these will be fair and deliver an “<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf">overall mitigation in global emissions</a>”, as the Paris Agreement requires. <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nathan-cooper-749971">Nathan Cooper</a>, Associate Professor of Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-waikato-781">University of Waikato</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kemi-hughes-1288573">Kemi Hughes</a>, Doctoral Researcher in Climate Change Governance, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-waikato-781">University of Waikato</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/cop26-new-zealand-depends-on-robust-new-rules-for-global-carbon-trading-to-meets-its-climate-pledge-171194">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock

Domestic Travel

COP26: what the draft climate agreement says – and why it’s being criticised

Having led the delegates at the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow to believe that the first draft of the final agreement would be published at midnight Tuesday, the UK presidency will not have made many friends by delaying it till 6am Wednesday morning. There will have been plenty of negotiators – not to mention journalists – who will have needlessly waited up all night. In fact, COP26 president Alok Sharma will not have made many friends with the <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Overarching_decision_1-CMA-3.pdf">text itself</a> either. As the host and chair of the summit, it is the UK’s responsibility to pull together all the negotiating texts which have been submitted and agreed over the last week into a coherent overall agreement. But the widespread consensus among delegates I have spoken to is that the draft they have produced is not sufficiently “balanced” between the interests and positions of the various country groupings. And for the chair of such delicate negotiations, that is a dangerous sin. Let’s recap. This COP (the conference of the parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change) is the designated moment under the 2015 Paris Agreement when countries must come forward with strengthened commitments to act. There are two main areas for this. One is emissions cuts by 2030, the so-called “nationally determined contributions” or NDCs. The other, for the developed countries, is financial assistance to the least developed nations. The problem facing the COP is that we know already that, when added together, countries’ emissions targets are <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/09/cop26-sets-course-for-disastrous-heating-of-more-than-24c-says-key-report">not nearly enough</a> to keep the world to a maximum warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial times, as the Paris Agreement aims for. And the financial promises don’t even reach the US$100 billion (£74.1 billion) a year that was meant to be achieved in 2020, let alone the much larger sums the most vulnerable countries need. So what have the poorest countries – and the vociferous civil society organisations demonstrating in Glasgow – been demanding? First, that NDCs should be strengthened before the scheduled date of 2025. And second, that <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02846-3">at least US$500 billion</a> should be provided in climate finance over the five years to 2025, with half of this going to help countries adapt to the climate change they are already experiencing. <h2>Urging – not requiring</h2> So what does the UK draft text say? It merely “urges” countries to strengthen their NDCs, proposing a meeting of ministers next year and a leaders’ summit in 2023. But “urges” is UN-speak for: “You may do this if you wish to, but you don’t have to if you don’t.” That is not enough to force countries to get onto a 1.5℃-compatible path. The text must require them to do so. On finance, the text is even weaker. There is no mention of the US$500 billion demand, although it does call for adaptation funding to be doubled. There is no mention of using the <a href="https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2021/08/23/how-the-world-can-make-the-most-of-new-special-drawing-rights">special drawing rights</a> (a kind of global money supply) which the IMF has recently issued for climate-compatible development. And there is insufficient recognition that the most vulnerable countries need much better access to the funds available. Of course, developing countries do not expect to get all their own way in the negotiations. But commenting on the overall balance of the text between different countries’ positions, one European delegate said to me: “This looks like it could have been written by the Americans.” It is of course true, as Alok Sharma emphasised in his afternoon press conference, that the text can still be changed. There are several issues on which negotiations are continuing and the text has yet to reflect their progress. Sharma has asked all parties to send in their suggested amendments to the draft and to meet him to discuss their reactions. He will find himself asked for a lot of meetings. But it matters how this early text is drafted, for two reasons. First, the lack of balance means that it is the least developed countries which will have to do the most work to change it. In Paris the French presidency worked the other way round. They drafted an ambitious text and dared the biggest emitters to oppose it. Second, the perceived imbalance could affect the trust in the British hosts. Sharma has built himself a strong reputation over the past couple of years preparing for the COP. He will not want to lose that in the crucial last days ahead. This story is part of The Conversation’s coverage on COP26, the Glasgow climate conference, by experts from around the world. Amid a rising tide of climate news and stories, The Conversation is here to clear the air and make sure you get information you can trust. <a href="https://page.theconversation.com/cop26-glasgow-2021-climate-change-summit/">More.</a> <img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/171632/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michael-jacobs-840558">Michael Jacobs</a>, Professorial Fellow, Sheffield Political Economy Research Institute (SPERI), <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sheffield-1147">University of Sheffield</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/cop26-what-the-draft-climate-agreement-says-and-why-its-being-criticised-171632">original article</a>.

Travel Trouble

"My dear late husband": Queen Elizabeth discusses Prince Philip in climate speech

As the COP26 Climate Change Conference commenced in Glasgow, the Queen delivered a powerful speech. Speaking via video message, Her Majesty spoke from the White Drawing Room at Windsor Castle to world leaders gathered at the Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum. She encouraged people to work "side by side" to help combat the global effects of climate change, as she referenced her "dear late husband" Prince Philip, who was also passionate about the cause. “I am delighted to welcome you all to the 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference; and it is perhaps fitting that you have come together in Glasgow, once a heartland of the industrial revolution, but now a place to address climate change,” the Queen said in her message. “This is a duty I am especially happy to discharge, as the impact of the environment on human progress was a subject close to the heart of my dear late husband, Prince Philip, The Duke of Edinburgh.” Her Majesty recalled Philip's passion for protecting the planet, as she said how proud she was of his legacy. “It is a source of great pride to me that the leading role my husband played in encouraging people to protect our fragile planet, lives on through the work of our eldest son Charles and his eldest son William. I could not be more proud of them.” Speaking to the challenges of the climate emergency, the Queen said that "none of us underestimate the challenges ahead." “History has shown that when nations come together in common cause, there is always room for hope. Working side by side, we have the ability to solve the most insurmountable problems and to triumph over the greatest of adversities.” She went on to say how important fighting the climate crisis is for future generations, as she noted "none of us will live forever": a poignant statement from the 95-year-old monarch how was unable to attend the summit in person due to health reasons. Image credits: Getty Images

International Travel

Joe Biden and Boris Johnson caught napping at COP26

US President Joe Biden and UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson were both caught trying to catch some shut eye during the COP26 Climate Change Conference in Glasgow this week, and while that may sound bad, many people were quick to look for the nuance in the situation. In a video posted to Twitter by Washington Post journalist Zach Purser Brown, President Biden can be seen closing his eyes for approximately 20 seconds, before he is approached by an aide. After their conversation, Biden can be seen rubbing his eyes. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Biden appears to fall asleep during COP26 opening speeches <a href="https://t.co/az8NZTWanI">pic.twitter.com/az8NZTWanI</a> — Zach Purser Brown (@zachjourno) <a href="https://twitter.com/zachjourno/status/1455174496164458496?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 1, 2021</a></blockquote> Some weren’t convinced he was actually falling asleep, with one Twitter user writing, "I have extensive knowledge re: watching old men fall asleep during church. This ain’t that. I’d bet everything he was just closing his eyes so he can listen better w/out distraction." Meanwhile, others accepted that he was falling asleep, but shared their own experiences of what his schedule might have looked like that contextualised his exhaustion. One Twitter user wrote, “When I worked in the Joint Staff and would go NATO meetings, we'd typically fly overnight then have a whole day of meetings...I'd grow my fingernails long to stick them into my palms during the meeting to keep from falling asleep. Nice work by the aide to intervene.” Others said it indicated he was not up to the job, with one person writing, “If it isn’t that important, then he shouldn’t be there. If it is important and he can’t stay awake, then he shouldn’t be there. Either way it shows he is not up to the job.” Fortunately, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson was on hand to help Biden feel less alone. He was spotted shutting his eyes during the opening ceremony of the conference, while seated next to Sir David Attenborough and the Secretary-General of the United Nations. While some made fun of the Prime Minister for nodding off, others wondered why he was not wearing a mask when both men next to him were. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Takes an extra special kind of dickhead to not wear a mask to protect David fucking Attenborough <a href="https://t.co/UwJFBxc3pz">pic.twitter.com/UwJFBxc3pz</a> — James Felton (@JimMFelton) <a href="https://twitter.com/JimMFelton/status/1455271483102703622?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 1, 2021</a></blockquote> A source at Number 10 said it was “total nonsense” to suggest Johnson had been falling asleep. Obviously, he was just resting his eyes. Image: Twitter/Getty Images

News

Kate and Wills attend COP26 reception, winning praise from Her Majesty

Image: Getty Prince William and Kate Middleton led a royal reception as they met with world leaders at COP26 in Scotland on Monday night. The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge stunned the crowd wearing co-ordinating blue outfits as they stepped out to host a reception for the Earthshot Prize Awards in Glasgow. The royals spoke with guests as key members of the Sustainable Markets Initiative, and the winners and finalists of the first Earthshot Prize Awards, at the Clydeside Distillery. The couple were all smiles at the event. At one stage, Kate, 39, was seen attempting to give dead larvae – which is used as livestock feed – to her husband William, 39. Prince Charles, Camilla, and Britain’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson also attended the event, which was part of the broader COP26 talks. At the event, the guests all paused to watch and listen to the Queen’s speech as she addressed the world leaders from Windsor Castle, as she was not able to attend the event on Doctors' orders. She said she “couldn’t be more proud” of her son Prince Charles and grandson Prince William in their climate crisis fight – but Prince Harry was notably missed from her praise. The Queen also paid a touching tribute to her late husband Prince Phillip’s decades long climate fight. A spirit which she said now lives on in Charles and William. “It is a source of great pride to me that the leading role my husband played in encouraging people to protect our fragile planet lives on through the work of our eldest son Charles and his eldest son William,” said the Queen. “I could not be more proud of them.” The monarch said it was fitting for the COP26 talks to be taking place in Glasgow, as it was once the heartland of Britain’s industrial revolution. She paid homage to those who have enthusiastically taken on the climate crisis in their own lives, including the younger generation. It comes after Buckingham Palace announced this week that the Queen will only be undertaking “light, desk-based duties” as she recovers from illness. Wearing a green dress and butterfly broach, she instead spoke to the summit via video link. Addressing the world leaders via video, Her Majesty added: “In the coming days, the world has the chance to join in the shared objective of creating a safer, stabler future for our people and for the planet on which we depend. “None of us underestimates the challenges ahead." “But history has shown that when nations come together in common cause, there is always room for hope.” The Queen also urged the leaders to “rise above the politics of the moment” and ”achieve true statesmanship” when addressing the climate crisis. She ended her speech telling the world leaders that “the time for words has now moved to the time for action”. “Of course, the benefits of such actions will not be there to enjoy for all of us here today.” “But we are doing this not for ourselves but for our children and our children’s children, and those who will follow in their footsteps.”

Family & Pets

A successful COP26 is essential for Earth’s future. Here’s what needs to go right

A week from Monday, a crucial round of United Nations climate change negotiations will begin in Glasgow and the stakes could not be higher. By the end, we’ll know how far nations are willing to go to address humanity’s biggest challenge. So is COP26 on track for success? There are reasons to be hopeful. More than 100 countries, including China, the United States and United Kingdom, have already pledged to reach net-zero emissions. Globally, renewable energy is <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/05/11/995849954/renewable-energy-capacity-jumped-45-worldwide-in-2020-iea-sees-new-normal">booming</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/asias-energy-pivot-is-a-warning-to-australia-clinging-to-coal-is-bad-for-the-economy-169541">the tide is turning</a> against fossil fuels, and the <a href="https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/markets-moving-economic-costs-australias-climate-inaction/">economic costs</a> of not acting on climate change are becoming ever more obvious. But if history has taught us anything, no country at the summit will agree to do more on climate change than it believes it can do at home. In other words, domestic politics is what drives international negotiations. <h2>What will happen in Glasgow?</h2> The first COP, or Conference of Parties, was held in Berlin in 1995. About a quarter of a century later, it will meet for the 26th time. COP26 will determine the direction of key aspects of the fight against global warming. Chief <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-cop26-heres-how-global-climate-negotiations-work-and-whats-expected-from-the-glasgow-summit-169434">among them</a> is how well nations have implemented their commitments under the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to well below 2℃, and the extent to which they will increase that ambition. Other issues on the agenda include climate finance to developing nations, adaptation to climate change and carbon trading rules. Starting on October 31, hundreds of government delegates will attend for two weeks of complex and intense negotiations over the specific text of the agreement. Typically, what delegates can’t sort out is left to political leaders, who negotiate the thorniest issues. Historically, final agreement occurs in the wee hours of the final session. Outside the convention centre is the unofficial COP, which is more like a world climate expo. Thousands of representatives from business, civil society and elsewhere — from bankers and billionaires, to students and survivalists – gather for panel discussions, exhibitions and protests. <h2>Progress is slow</h2> Global climate talks involve people from all around the globe with different interests, preferences, and mandates (what negotiators sometimes call “red lines”). As you can imagine, progress can be slow. Almost 200 nations are signed up to the Paris Agreement, and agreement is by consensus. That means just one country can hold up progress for hours or even days. Cynics – more often than not, those wanting to <a href="https://theconversation.com/fossil-fuel-misinformation-may-sideline-one-of-the-most-important-climate-change-reports-ever-released-165887">delay climate action</a> – claim the whole process is nothing more than a talk shop. It’s true, talk is slow. But it’s also much better than coercion, and without the negotiations countries would face much less pressure to act. It’s also true that over the last 25 years, these negotiations have redefined how the world thinks and acts on climate change. After all, it was the COP in Paris that tasked the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to provide a <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/spm/">special report</a> on the impacts of global warming of 1.5℃ above pre-industrial levels. Its findings reverberated around the world. <a href="https://theconversation.com/new-un-report-outlines-urgent-transformational-change-needed-to-hold-global-warming-to-1-5-c-103237">It found</a> if we’re to limit warming to 1.5℃, we must reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 45% by 2030, reaching near-zero by around 2050. But since the Paris Agreement was struck, global emissions have continued to rise, even with the impacts of COVID-19. COP26 is a major test of whether the world can turn this around and avert runaway global warming. <a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427720/original/file-20211021-15-1xxiq11.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427720/original/file-20211021-15-1xxiq11.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="" /></a> <h2>Will Glasgow deliver?</h2> For the Glasgow summit to be deemed a success, a few things need to go right. First of all, countries need to commit not simply to net-zero targets by 2050, but stronger targets for 2030. <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-06876-2">Without them</a>, there’s zero chance the world will hold the rise in global temperatures to 2℃. Major emitters will also need to support developing countries with the finance and technologies to enable them to transition to clean energy and adapt to climate change impacts, including severe flooding and prolonged droughts. Other issues, such as rules around international carbon markets, will also be on the agenda, but even the most robust carbon markets are <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/117/16/8664">unlikely</a> to deliver emissions cuts at the speed scientists warn is necessary to avert disaster. There are signs of hope. The US has been, historically, the most important player in the international negotiations, and President Joe Biden has outlined <a href="https://theconversation.com/biden-says-the-us-will-rejoin-the-paris-climate-agreement-in-77-days-then-australia-will-really-feel-the-heat-149533">the most ambition climate plans</a> in the nation’s history ahead of the Glasgow summit. The US, together with the UK, the European Union and a host of smaller countries, <a href="https://theconversation.com/glasgow-showdown-pacific-islands-demand-global-leaders-bring-action-not-excuses-to-un-summit-169649">including those in the Pacific</a>, comprise a strong and influential coalition of countries gunning to limit warming to 1.5℃. So what stands in their way? Well, what countries are willing to commit to in Glasgow is not so much a function of what happens in Glasgow, but of <a href="https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/gbp/the-politics-of-climate-change-negotiations-9781783472109.html">domestic politics</a> in their capitals. This is why Democrats in Washington are feverishly working to ensure <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/10/19/climate-reconciliation-biden-white-house/">Biden’s massive budget bill</a>, which includes measures such as a clean electricity program, makes its way through Congress. The bill is vital to the president’s commitment to halve emissions by 2030. It’s also why astute observers have been fixated on well-known climate laggards heavily reliant on fossil fuels, such Brazil, Russia, and Australia, to see whether any domestic political developments might lead these nations to commit to more ambitious targets by 2030. And it’s why lobbyists for industries that stand to lose from climate change – namely oil, gas and coal – know to kill off climate action in Glasgow, they need to kill off climate action at home. International negotiations are often referred to as a <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2706785">two-level game</a>. Changes at the domestic level can enable new and, hopefully, ambitious realignments at the international level. Will these realignments occur? We don’t have long to find out, but at the domestic level in many nations, there has never been a worse time to advocate for fossil fuels – and this should give us all hope that action on climate change is more likely than ever. <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/christian-downie-762">Christian Downie</a>, Associate Professor, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-successful-cop26-is-essential-for-earths-future-heres-what-needs-to-go-right-169542">original article</a>. Image: AP Photo/David Cliff

International Travel

Prince Charles implores big business to help us ‘go green’

Prince Charles has made an impassioned plea to global business leaders, imploring them to help us ‘go green’, following huge bushfires that recently ripped through Greece as well as unprecedented storms in Haiti. The prince wrote this call to business leaders in the Daily Mail, saying businesses with money have a critical role to play, and that if we unlock this private sector investment, we could bring about a 'game-changing green transition'. Talking about the devastating bushfires in his beloved Greece, Prince Charles wrote the scenes of these fires have been 'terrifying' and 'the stuff of nightmares'. He tells of his heartbreak at seeing the land where his father and grandfather were born being 'swallowed up by ferocious flames' and warns that 'time is rapidly running out'. 'We now have no alternative,’ he writes, ‘… we have to do all we possibly can in the short time left to us to avoid the enormous climate catastrophe that has already begun to show its face in the most terrifying ways.’ We have time left, ‘but only just’ Prince Charles writes, there is time to address the crisis, 'but only just'. The prince wants leading companies to sign up to his 'Terra Carta', a charter which commits them to putting sustainability at the heart of all their business activities. More than 400 have so far, but Charles warns the crisis is 'monumental' and can be tackled only by big business and governments working together. Warning that weather-related disasters should serve as a wake-up call, the prince writes: 'We have been in the 'last chance saloon' for too long already, so if we do not confront the monumental challenge head on - and fast - we and the world as we know it will be done for.' <img class="post_image_group" src="https://over60.monday.com/protected_static/657795/resources/279481326/big-Bushfires%20in%20Greece%20UM.jpg" alt="" data-asset_id="279481326" data-url-thumb="https://over60.monday.com/protected_static/657795/resources/279481326/thumb-Bushfires%20in%20Greece%20UM.jpg" data-url-thumb-small="https://over60.monday.com/protected_static/657795/resources/279481326/thumb_small-Bushfires%20in%20Greece%20UM.jpg" data-url-thumb-big-scaled="https://over60.monday.com/protected_static/657795/resources/279481326/thumb_big_scaled-Bushfires%20in%20Greece%20UM.jpg" data-url-large="https://over60.monday.com/protected_static/657795/resources/279481326/large-Bushfires%20in%20Greece%20UM.jpg" data-url-big="https://over60.monday.com/protected_static/657795/resources/279481326/big-Bushfires%20in%20Greece%20UM.jpg" data-url-original="https://over60.monday.com/protected_static/657795/resources/279481326/Bushfires%20in%20Greece%20UM.jpg" data-filename="Bushfires in Greece UM.jpg" data-is-gif="false" data-post-id="1129824677" /><img style="width: 500px; height: 281.25px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7843343/bushfires-in-greece-um.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/b62701f2e6ec4bf6aa76d00c19998c81" /> This call to big business is significant While Prince Charles has been vocal about climate change before, this challenge to big business is a significant intervention from his previous actions. It comes in the wake of a stark report from the United Nations' panel on climate change earlier this month which warned of unprecedented global warming and which was described as a 'code red' moment for humanity. On 31st October to the 12 November, Britain will host <a rel="noopener" href="mailto:https://ukcop26.org/" target="_blank">COP26, the UN's climate change conference</a>, in Glasgow, which is seen by some as one of the last chances for major nations to agree an approach to prevent potentially catastrophic global warming. Prince Charles has been a pioneer in highlighting environmental issues. Last year, he launched the Sustainable Markets Initiative at the World Economic Forum in Davos in a bid to accelerate global progress on sustainability. The 'Terra Carta' is one of its flagship initiatives. It aims to provide a roadmap for businesses to move towards an ambitious and sustainable future by 2030. Its concept is based on the 1215 Magna Carta, and aimed at holding major companies accountable for helping to protect the planet. In today's article for the Daily Mail, the prince says we have been 'testing our world to destruction' and it is now up to all of us to get involved to combat climate change. The prince also made a significant private donation to the Hellenic Red Cross recently to help assist its humanitarian response to the residents of the fire-stricken areas in Greece. The prince opened his story in the Daily Mail with these words: Owing to family connections, I have always felt a particular fascination and affection for Greece. Apart from the allure of her landscapes, history and culture, both my father and grandfather were born there, which is why I was so touched to be invited earlier this year to celebrate the bicentenary of the country's independence. Now, five months later, it has been heartbreaking to see the devastating fires affecting Greece, Turkey, and now Italy which has just recorded Europe's highest ever temperature. And he ended his story with this heartfelt call to action: This is why COP26 is so crucially important for our very survival on this increasingly over-heating planet – something our children and grandchildren are rightly and deeply concerned about. The 'coalition of the willing' joins me in hoping that the conference will deliver the transformational decisions and the roadmap for change for which our planet is crying out. We now have no alternative – we have to do all we possibly can in the short time left to us to avoid the enormous climate catastrophe that has already begun to show its face in the most terrifying ways, most recently in the Mediterranean. World leaders, working closely with the private sector, have the power to make the difference. COP26 affords them an opportunity to do so before it is finally too late. Photo: Getty Images

Home & Garden

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Entertainment

Property

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Electric cars alone won’t save the planet. We’ll need to design cities so people can walk and cycle safely

Five things you need to know about the Glasgow Climate Pact

COP26: New Zealand depends on robust new rules for global carbon trading to meets its climate pledge

COP26: what the draft climate agreement says – and why it’s being criticised

"My dear late husband": Queen Elizabeth discusses Prince Philip in climate speech

Joe Biden and Boris Johnson caught napping at COP26

Kate and Wills attend COP26 reception, winning praise from Her Majesty

A successful COP26 is essential for Earth’s future. Here’s what needs to go right

Prince Charles implores big business to help us ‘go green’