Alok Sharma says China and India will have to 'justify' Cop26 scheming

Fury at China and India for torpedoing Cop: Alok Sharma warns Xi and Modi that they will have to ‘justify’ scheming that forced nations to accept ‘watered down’ green deal over coal use at dramatic finale to summit

World leaders at the Cop26 climate change summit have reached a deal today
There is fury from EU nations due to last-minute wording changes over coal
The Glasgow Pact was watered down after pressure from India and China
Alok Sharma ‘fought back tears’ and said he was ‘deeply sorry’ for the change
Talks overran due to disputes over finance, fossil fuels and cutting emissions

Cop26 president Alok Sharma today warned China and India they would have to ‘justify’ political scheming that hamstrung a global climate deal to protect their coal interests.

The Cabinet minister rounded on the Asian nations after the Glasgow summit last night agreed a watered-down deal on climate change following their last-gasp intervention.

The Glasgow Pact was watered down at the last minute with the wording on a section covering unabated coal – the burning of coal without climate change mitigating technology – changed from ‘phase out’ to ‘phase down’, leading to angry responses from European and vulnerable countries.

Mr Sharma, who appeared on the verge of tears and apologised for the change as Cop ended last night, insisted to Sky News that it had achieved ‘something remarkable’.

But he added: China and India are going to have to justify to some of the most climate-challenged nations what happened.’

The Cabinet minister rounded on the Asian nations after the Glasgow summit last night agreed a watered-down deal on climate change following their last-gasp intervention.

China’s Xi Jinping (left)) refused to attend Cop 26, while India’s Narendra Modi gave a speech days before his representatives helped to water down moves to stop coal use

Mr Sharma’s voice broke with emotion last night after hearing from vulnerable nations, which had expressed their anger over the changes to the text, as he said: ‘May I just say to all delegates I apologise for the way this process has unfolded and I am deeply sorry.’

WHAT DOES THE COP26 GREEN DEAL MEAN?

The gavel has finally come down on the Cop26 climate talks in Glasgow after the last-minute row over coal caused fury with some nations.

World leaders also agreed to explicitly target coal use and fossil fuel subsidies, though the original proposals were greatly watered down.

Despite the change, the climate agreement is still progressive as it is still the first explicit mention of fossil fuels in a UN climate agreement.

But, what else has been agreed?

There has also been a doubling of money for developing countries to help them to adapt to climate change. The current goal is $100bn a year, while there could be a trillion dollar a year fund from 2025.

While a compromise was found here, some countries and environmental groups fear the deal left significant loopholes which could undermine the integrity of the system by allowing certain emissions cuts to be counted twice.

A shift by Brazil, under pressure by some of its major companies, proved decisive in clinching the deal. In return, the country gets to keep some carbon credits it amassed under an older system that experts say wasn’t credible.

The deal asks countries to strengthen their 2030 national climate action targets to focus on the 2015 Paris Agreement goal of keeping warming to ‘well below’ 2C and pursuing efforts to limit temperature rise to 1.5C, by the end of 2022.

Experts and vulnerable countries have long advocated that threshold, but some nations previously held onto the option of aiming for ‘well below 2C (3.6 F)’.

The Paris Rulebook, the guidelines for how the Paris Agreement is delivered, was also completed after six years of discussions. It will allow for the full delivery of the landmark deal.

But the agreement also noted ‘with deep regret’ that wealthy nations had also failed to stump up a separate annual sum of $100 billion they promised over a decade ago.

During the conference, a range of wealthy governments stepped up with new pledges – totalling about $960 million – for two key U.N.-backed funds that help vulnerable nations adapt to climate change.

Still, the amounts pledged remained far below the annual $70 billion developing countries are thought to need now, an amount that could rise to $300 billion a year by 2030, according to the United Nations.

It urged countries to pay up ‘urgently and through 2025’.

There was also progress toward setting a firm target for adaptation finance, which currently accounts for just a quarter of international climate finance for developing nations, garnering only $20 billion in 2019.

In a bid to spur further ambition, major emitters will also be asked to present new targets at the 2022 UN climate conference in Egypt.

The amount of money earmarked for poor countries to adapt to rising sea levels and other impacts of climate change was also increased, though not by as much as they had demanded.

Wealthy nations such as the United States and European Union members rejected demands to establish a fund to compensate poor countries for the destruction wrought by climate change, which developed countries are significantly responsible for because of their past emissions.

A small surcharge on carbon trades will go toward a fund to help poor countries adapt to global warming, but campaigners had hoped for the levy to be applied more broadly and blamed US opposition for that happening in Glasgow.

Countries agreed for tweaks to the rules on how often they need to report what they are doing to reduce emissions.

While this may seem technical, experts argue that greater transparency and more frequent accounting are important for building trust because nations are closely watching what others do.

China has been particularly wary of having others scrutinise its efforts too closely. Along with other developed and emerging economies, it is now expected to report every five instead of every 10 years.

Elsewhere, the rules covering what’s known as Article 6 will become increasingly important as countries and companies aim to cut their emissions to ‘net zero’ by 2050 by balancing out any remaining pollution they produce with an equal amount of carbon captured elsewhere.

When the UK took on Cop26 nearly two years ago, only 30 per cent of the world was covered by net zero targets while this figure is now at around 90 per cent.

Over the same period, 154 parties have submitted new national targets, standing for 80 per cent of global emissions.

Ninety per cent of the world’s forests have also been covered by a pledge from 130 countries to end deforestation by 2030.

Why do we need this?

When the Paris Agreement was negotiated in 2015, it was clear the national action plans, or nationally determined contributions (NDCs), that countries had submitted for emissions cuts up to 2030 left the world way off track to meet the temperature goals in the accord.

The agreement built in a ratchet mechanism that would see countries return with updated plans up to 2030 by Cop26 – which was meant to take place in 2020, but was delayed by the pandemic.

But the latest set of plans countries submitted in the run-up to Glasgow still leave the world for off track for the 45 per cent emissions cuts needed by 2030 to meet the 1.5C goal, instead heading for 2.4C of warming.

At the summit, countries were under pressure to come up with a deal in Glasgow to take steps to increase their ambition for emission cuts in the 2020s to stop the 1.5C goal slipping out of reach.

And with the impacts of 1.1C of warming already biting, there was also pressure to provide the finance for developing countries to cope with the crisis, and to address the loss and damage they are facing.

Scientists have also warned keeping temperature rises to 1.5C requires global emissions to be cut by 45 per cent by 2030, and to zero overall by mid-century.

Will it succeed?

Action and pledges since the Paris climate summit have been bending the curve down towards less dangerous temperatures, but there is still a long way to go, and a very short time to do it.

There is hope from the agreement that countries will come back with stronger action in the next year, and a signal that coal in particular is facing a bleak future.

A series of deals announced at Cop26 alongside the main negotiations – on cutting methane, switching to electric cars, protecting forests, driving finance towards green tech and actions and shifting from coal to clean energy – may drive momentum, if not deliver the scale of cuts needed on their own.

What does it mean for ordinary people in the UK?

Lives are going to change because of climate action, but the UK already has targets to cut its emissions by 68 per cent by 2030, in line with the Paris Agreement, alongside its domestic legal carbon-cutting goals.

It is implementing plans to meet them, with measures such as the coal power phaseout, conventional car ban and efforts to switch home heating to clean alternatives to boilers planned or under way.

In the longer term, it keeps alive the possibility of limiting global warming to 1.5C, helping protect people from the worst impacts of climate change.

In the UK, that means avoiding the most damaging flooding and storms, coastal erosion, water shortages and heatwaves that rising temperatures will bring.

In the words of the EU’s Frans Timmermans, it’s about ‘avoiding a future for our children and grandchildren that is unliveable’.

Mr Sharma said: ‘On the issue of coal, I should point out that for the very first time in any of these conferences, the word ‘coal’ is actually reflected in the text. That again is a first.

‘Yes, of course I would have liked to ensure we maintain the ‘phase out’ rather than changing the wording to ‘phase down’, but on the way to phasing out, you’ve got to phase down.

‘But, ultimately, of course, what we need to ensure is that we continue to work on this deal, on these commitments, and on the issue of coal, China and India are going to have to justify to some of the most climate vulnerable countries what happened.

‘You heard some of that disappointment on the floor (of the conference).

‘What I would say to you is that overall this is a historic agreement, we can be really proud of it but, of course, this is just the start – we now need to deliver on the commitments.’

Mr Sharma insisted that efforts to limit global temperature increases to an average of 1.5C remained ‘within reach’.

However, academic Dieter Helm, professor of energy policy at Oxford University told Sky: ‘If the objective at Cop25 was to keep 1.5 degrees alive, it’s dead.

‘Even if, for the first time ever, every country does everything that it promised to do, we won’t be able to achieve 1.5C.’

Shadow business and energy secretary Ed Miliband has argued the Government ‘undermined’ Cop president Alok Sharma by cutting overseas aid.

He told Sky News’s Trevor Phillips on Sunday: ‘I have nothing but praise for Alok Sharma … and the job he did as Cop president, but I’m afraid the rest of the Government didn’t help him and undermined him with decisions like cutting overseas aid because we were then saying to other countries ‘please step up on climate finance’, when we were stepping back on aid to poorer countries.’

‘I also understand the deep disappointment but I think as you have noted, it’s also vital that we protect this package.’

Despite fierce disagreements over the wording of the deal, it is still a progressive agreement as it is the first UN climate agreement that has made an explicit mention of fossil fuels.

The overall deal has seen nearly 200 countries agree to keep the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels ‘alive’ or within reach.

The pact requests countries revisit and strengthen their 2030 national climate action targets ‘as necessary to align with the Paris Agreement temperature goal by the end of 2022, taking into account different national circumstances’.

World leaders and campaigners shared their disappointment at the changes made in the agreement, with some even deeming the deal as ‘weak’, while others insisted that the summit made important progress for global warming.

But many world leaders expressed their optimism following the conference, arguing that the green deal is an important step in tackling the climate crisis and will make a difference in the coming years.

Although the wording around unabated coal in the green deal – which refers to coal power generation without the use of technologies that can help to reduce CO2 emissions – was watered down, it has still been considered to be an important improvement.

After the deal was struck, Sharma said he wished he had been able to preserve the originally agreed language on phasing out coal power in the Glasgow climate deal.

‘Of course I wish that we had managed to preserve the language on coal that was originally agreed,’ he told reporters.

‘Nevertheless, we do have language on coal, on phase down, and I don’t think anyone at the start of this process would have necessarily expected that that would have been retained.’

Oxford Councillor Tom Hayes, Green Transport and Zero Carbon Oxford Cabinet Member, said Sharma was ‘choking back tears’ as he apologised to delegates, while Beth Rigby, Sky News’ political editor, also confirmed he was ‘holding back tears’.

Confirming a deal had been reached, Cop26 tweeted on Saturday night: ‘Glasgow Climate Pact has been agreed. It has kept 1.5 degrees alive.

‘But, it will only survive if promises are kept and commitments translate into rapid action.’

In response to the outcomes of the Cop26 summit, Prime Minister Boris Johnson thanked Sharma for working ‘incredibly hard’ to bring all the countries together but said there is still a ‘huge amount’ to be done.

He continued: ‘We asked nations to come together for our planet at Cop26, and they have answered that call.

‘I want to thank the leaders, negotiators and campaigners who made this pact happen – and the people of Glasgow who welcomed them with open arms.

‘I also want particularly to thank Cop President Alok Sharma who has worked incredibly hard to bring countries together.

‘There is still a huge amount more to do in the coming years.

‘But today’s agreement is a big step forward and, critically, we have the first ever international agreement to phase down coal and a road map to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees.

‘I hope that we will look back on Cop26 in Glasgow as the beginning of the end of climate change, and I will continue to work tirelessly towards that goal.’

But Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer hit out at Boris Johnson, saying he was ‘responsible’ for the summit making too many promises rather than taking action.

He tweeted: ‘It’s welcome that an agreement has been reached at COP26. But we’ve seen too many promises for tomorrow, not the action that’s needed today. Boris Johnson bears some responsibility for that.

‘We must use the final year of the UK’s presidency to rescue what COP26 hasn’t achieved.’

Although Cop26 has insisted the deal is still strong enough to keep the 1.5C climate change pledge ‘alive’, the green deal has been met with fury from some leaders and campaigners, who have described the pact as ‘weak’.

Swedish climate change activist Greta Thunberg, 18, said: ‘The #COP26 is over. Here’s a brief summary: Blah, blah, blah. But the real work continues outside these halls. And we will never give up, ever.’

Meanwhile, Secretary-General of the UN António Guterres said the outcome of the conference was a ‘compromise’ but said that world leaders must ‘accelerate’ climate action to keep the pledge of limiting global warming to 1.5C ‘alive’.

He said: ‘The outcome of Cop26 is a compromise. It reflects the interests, contradictions and state of political will in the world today. It is an important step, but it is not enough.

‘We must accelerate climate action to keep the goal of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees. It’s time to go into emergency mode.’

He said that we must ‘phase out’ coal and ‘put a price on carbon’ and protect vulnerable communities as he cited goals that were not achieved at the conference.

Guterres said he understood people’s disappointment after the conference but insisted that progress is not always a ‘straight line’.

He added: ‘We are in the fight of our lives, and this fight must be won. Never give up, never repeat, keep pushing forward. I am with you.’

And Laurence Tubiana, the architect of the Paris deal, said that ‘COP has failed to provide immediate assistance for people suffering now’.

Simonetta Sommaruga, the Swiss environment minister, mirrored their sentiments as she expressed her disappointment that the language on fossil fuel subsidies was altered.

She added: ‘We would like to express our profound disappointment that the language we agreed on, on coal and fossil fuels subsidies has been further watered down as a result of an un-transparent process.’

While UN climate change head Patricia Espinosa said: ‘We will be leaving Glasgow with clarity on the work we need to undertake to reach the 1.5C goal.’

She said progress had been made in many areas, adding: ‘At Cop26, parties built a bridge between good intentions and measurable actions to lower emissions, increase resilience and provide much-needed financ.

‘A bridge leading to the historic transformation we must make to achieve rapid reductions this decade and ultimately towards the 1.5C goal.

‘A bridge between the admirable promises made six years ago in Paris to the concrete measures science calls for and societies around the world demand.’

But Xie Zhenhua, a Chinese climate envoy, seemed to be in excellent spirits as he gave a thumbs-up when asked on the plenary floor if the Glasgow pact was going to pass.

Through his translator, Xie Zhenhua confirmed: ‘We have a deal.’

But he went on to say that the ‘voice of developing countries hasn’t been heard enough’ after talks stalled over issues around finance for poorer countries.

US climate envoy John Kerry also appeared optimistic following the agreement, saying: ‘We are in fact closer than we have ever been before to avoiding climate chaos and securing cleaner air, safer water and a healthier planet.’

Elsewhere, Scottish Government minister Patrick Harvie described Cop26 as a ‘failure’.

The Scottish Greens co-leader, whose party is in a power sharing agreement with the SNP Government, said the conclusion reached by the global UN climate summit in Glasgow is ‘shameful’.

Mr Harvie, Scottish minister for zero carbon buildings, active travel and tenants’ rights, said: ‘The failure of governments to deliver an agreement that puts the planet on course for a 1.5C rise is shameful.

‘The influence of fossil fuel companies is clear. We know that fossil fuel companies had more representation at this summit than any single nation, and the outcome has reflected that.’

He said his party would continue to push for more action.

But Nicola Sturgeon argued that the Cop26 has made ‘progress’ as she praised the historic recognition of fossil fuels in the agreement, although she did recognise the ‘disappointing’ last-minute interventions from China and India.

The Scottish First Minister said: ‘The Glasgow Climate Pact does not contain everything that every country wanted and there is understandable disappointment that key issues were watered down in the final hours, but there can be no doubt that the Glasgow summit has made progress on some important issues.

‘The importance of capping temperature increases at 1.5 degrees is no longer questioned and the need for countries to come back next year with higher contributions to tackling emissions may just be enough to keep 1.5 alive – if countries including Scotland really do deliver on our commitments.’

She added: ‘There is also recognition for the first time, although it is deeply disappointing that due to last minute interventions by China and India it is not as strong and clear as it should be, of the need to reduce reliance on fossil fuels, a journey Scotland has already embarked on – and needs to accelerate – in a way that is fair and just.’

Elsewhere, Lars Koch, a policy director for charity ActionAid, said it was disappointing that only coal had been mentioned in the deal, saying it gave a free pass to wealthy regions who have been ‘extracting and polluting’ for more than a century and continue to produce both oil and gas.

In the wake of the ‘Glasgow Pact’ being gavelled through – more than 24 hours after the official finishing time of the conference – there were warnings that the 1.5C goal was ‘on life support’.

In the Paris Agreement in 2015, countries committed to limit temperature rises to ‘well below’ 2C and try to limit them to 1.5C to avoid the most dangerous impacts of storms, droughts, crop failures, floods and disease.

Scientists have warned keeping temperature rises to 1.5C requires global emissions to be cut by 45 per cent by 2030, and to zero overall by mid-century.

But despite countries being required to update their action plans, known as nationally determined contributions, for emissions cuts up to 2030 in the run-up to Glasgow, the latest pledges leave the world well off track to meet the goal.

Sharma’s voice broke with emotion as he said he understood the ‘disappointment’ from vulnerable nations, which expressed their anger over the changes to the text

Leaders at the Cop26 climate change summit reached a deal, but it prompted fury after China and India forced a last-minute change over the language about coal. Pictured: Alok Sharma

Countries were under pressure to come up with a deal in Glasgow that will see them rapidly increase their ambition for emission cuts in the 2020s to stop the 1.5C goal slipping out of reach, as well as provide the finance for developing countries to cope with the crisis.

The deal has measures on finance for poorer and more vulnerable countries to develop cleanly, cope with climate impacts and address the loss and damage they face from climate-related storms, floods, droughts and rising seas.

The final agreement urges developed countries to at least double their collective provision of climate finance to help developing nations adapt to climate change, from 2019 levels, by 2025.

The text noted ‘with deep regret’ that wealthy nations had also failed to stump up a separate annual sum of $100 billion they promised over a decade ago. It urged countries to pay up ‘urgently and through 2025’.

It also promised to double finance to help developing countries adapt to rising temperatures by the same date.

Guinea, representing the developing-nation group at the talks, expressed ‘extreme disappointment’ at the decision to initiate only a ‘dialogue’ to talk about ‘arrangements for the funding of activities to avert, minimise and address loss and damage’.

Low-lying small island nations that fear losing much of their land to rising sea levels – from the Marshall Islands to Fiji and Antigua and Barbuda – also said they were dissatisfied the fund they had called for had not been created.

Bhupender Yadav, India’s climate minister, asked how developing countries could pledge to phase out fossil fuel subsidies when they still have to ‘deal with their development agendas and poverty eradication’.

While Amanda Mukwashi, chief executive of Christian Aid, said: ‘We were told that Cop26 was the last best chance to keep 1.5C alive, but it’s been placed on life support.

In response to the deal, Prime Minister Boris Johnson thanked Sharma for working ‘incredibly hard’ to bring all the countries together but said there is still a ‘huge amount’ to be done

Commenting on the outcomes of the Cop26 summit, Swedish climate change activist Greta Thunberg, 18, said: ‘The #COP26 is over. Here’s a brief summary: Blah, blah, blah’

‘Rich nations have kicked the can down the road and with it the promise of the urgent climate action people on the front line of this crisis need.’

Harjeet Singh, a senior advisor with Climate Action Network International, noted the Glasgow outcome did at least recognise the rising costs of losses and damage in developing countries.

It said ‘climate change has already caused and will increasingly cause loss and damage and that, as temperatures rise … will pose an ever-greater social, economic and environmental threat’.

But, Singh said, the failure to put a fund in place to help poorer nations pay those costs means ‘we are walking in inches when we must move in miles’.

The Glasgow deal did agree to fund the Santiago Network, a body that aims to build technical expertise on dealing with loss and damage, such as helping countries consider how to move communities away from threatened shorelines.

Teresa Anderson, climate policy coordinator at ActionAid International, said COP26 was ‘an insult to the millions of people whose lives are being torn apart by the climate crisis’.

Commenting on the decisions made in the deal, Shauna Aminath, the Maldives environment minister, said: ‘For some loss and damage may be the beginning of conversation and dialogue. But for us this is a matter of survival.’

Lia Nicholson, delegate for Antigua and Barbuda, spoke on behalf of small island states said the outcome was ‘not even close’ to what they had hoped for.

The green deal also agreed on finalising key parts of the ‘Paris rulebook’, on areas such as establishing carbon markets which have been outstanding since the climate treaty was agreed in 2015.

Responding to the decisions made after the two-week-long summit, Greenpeace International executive director Jennifer Morgan said: ‘It’s meek, it’s weak and the 1.5C goal is only just alive, but a signal has been sent that the era of coal is ending. And that matters.’

And Tina Stege, Climate Envoy, Marshall Islands, said: ‘This package is not perfect. The coal change and a weak outcome on loss and damage are blows.

‘But it is real progress and elements of the Glasgow Package are a lifeline for my country. We must not discount the crucial wins covered in this package.’

Elsewhere, Professor Tim Benton, Environment and Society Programme at Chatham House, said that not enough was done at the conference to reduce emissions to ‘avoid dangerous climate change in decades to come’.

He added: ‘There have been lots of pledges and the launching of encouraging new international initiatives, some more meaningful than others.

‘But genuine urgency and a willingness to match words with action and to close the yawning gap between pledges and detailed, short-term plans – is still missing.’

Bert Wander, acting CEO at Avaaz, echoed these concerns as he said that the pledge to keep the 1.5C target within reach was ‘hanging by a thread’.

Nicola Sturgeon has argued that the Cop26 has made ‘progress’ as she praised the historic recognition of fossil fuels in the agreement, although she recognised the ‘disappointing’ last-minute interventions from China and India

But Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer hit out at Boris Johnson, saying he bore ‘responsibility’ for the summit making too many promises for tomorrow, rather than taking action

He continued: ‘Glasgow has delivered procedural gains on emissions cuts, and important signals on the need to deliver urgently-needed funds to vulnerable countries, but it is nowhere near enough.

‘If we are to cut emissions in half by the end of the decade, we need an urgent transformation in how governments approach the climate crisis.’

Manuel Pulgar-Videl, WFF’s global lead on climate, acknowledged that progress was made during the climate change summit, adding: ‘There are now new opportunities for countries to deliver on what they know must be done to avoid a climate catastrophe.

‘But unless they sharply pivot to implementation and show substantial results, they will continue to have their credibility challenged.’

Touching on the Paris Agreement, Kaveh Guilanpour, VP of international strategies at the Centre for Climate and Energy Solutions, said: ‘The Paris Agreement is working.

‘It was never expected to solve the climate emergency in one go – but to do so over time.

‘In 2014, before the Agreement was adopted, the world was heading toward close to 4 degrees Celsius of global heating. Coming out of COP26, new commitments made mean that we are heading toward closer to around 2 degrees.

‘Glasgow was an important step in keeping open the possibility of limiting global heating to 1.5 degrees.’

Elsewhere, Tanya Steele, chief executive at WWF, said: ‘This summit has seen the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5C become the North Star guiding us all but a clear pathway is far from certain and we still have a long way to go.

‘We are encouraged by the recognition that nature must be an integral part of tackling the climate crisis and by commitments on curbing coal and fossil fuel subsidies.’

But Gabriela Bucher, international executive director of Oxfam, said that some world leaders do not think that they are ‘living on the same planet as the rest of us’.

She added: ‘It seems no amount of fires, rising sea levels or droughts will bring them to their senses to stop increasing emissions at the expense of humanity.’

But she welcomed the decision to strengthen 2030 reduction targets by next year, adding: ‘Big emitters, especially rich countries, must heed the call and align their targets to give us the best possible chance of keeping 1.5 degrees within reach’.

Rachel Kennerley, climate campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said: ‘The road to 1.5 just got harder when these talks should have cleared the way to making it a whole lot easier.’

Meanwhile, Friends of the Earth’s Sara Shaw also described the outcome of the conference as a ‘scandal’, adding: ‘COP26 will be remembered as a betrayal of global South countries.’

But Xie Zhenhua, a Chinese climate envoy, seemed to be in excellent spirits as he gave a thumbs-up when asked on the plenary floor if the Glasgow pact was going to pass

‘The UK government cunningly curated announcements throughout this fortnight so that it seemed rapid progress was being made.’

She added: ‘Here we are though, and the Glasgow get-out clause means that leaders failed to phase out fossil fuels and the richest countries won’t pay historic climate debt.’

Talks overran from their finish time of Friday evening as negotiators came under pressure to resolve issues around fossil fuels, the efforts of countries to cut emissions in the 2020s and rules on carbon markets and transparency.

The news of a deal came after there was a pushback on the draft deal’s historic inclusion of language about phasing out unabated coal and inefficient fossil fuel subsidies.

On Saturday, Iran said it was not satisfied with the language in the draft agreement on phasing out fossil fuel subsidies and expressed its support for India, which also criticised richer nations over the pledge.

‘We are not satisfied on paragraph 36 on the phase out of fossil fuel subsidies. We support the Indian delegation related to fossil fuels,’ the Iranian delegation told the United Nations climate summit.

India called for language relating to the phasing out of fossil fuels and their subsidies to be stripped out of the text, while China and several other countries had raised concerns about the passage, although major coal producer Australia said it was happy with the deal.

US and European Union envoys then met with their Chinese and Indian counterparts to discuss details of an agreed phaseout of coal, according to a member of the Indian delegation.

And India and China succeeded in changing the wording of the Glasgow Pact, which was watered down from escalating the ‘phase out’ of unabated coal, to ‘phase down’.

The deal came after Boris Johnson spoke out amid fears that the UN global conference could break up without a significant deal to tackle global temperature increases.

Scientists have warned that keeping temperature rises to 1.5C requires global emissions to be cut by 45 per cent by 2030, and to zero overall by mid-century but countries’ plans for this decade leave the world well off track.

New analysis warned existing plans up to 2030 put the world on track for 2.4C of warming, well above the goals internationally agreed in the Paris accord to curb temperature rises to ‘well below’ 2C and try to limit them to 1.5C.

‘We are in the fight of our lives’: Secretary-General of the UN António Guterres (pictured left with Boris Johnson and Sir David Attenborough) said world leaders must ‘accelerate’ climate action to keep the pledge of limiting global warming to 1.5C ‘alive’

His voice breaking with emotion after hearing from vulnerable nations which expressed their anger over the changes to the text, Sharma said: ‘May I just say to all delegates I apologise for the way this process has unfolded and I am deeply sorry’

‘In his shoes, I may have stayed here for the remainder of the summit, but come back… every shoulder to the wheel.

The summit began with a bang as world leaders descended on Glasgow armed with a string of headline announcements, from a commitment to slash methane emissions to a plan to save the rainforests.

But progress had also stalled in the underlying technical and now minister-level negotiations, with countries disagreeing on whether national emissions cutting plans must be ramped up in the short term.

On Wednesday, negotiations further stalled when the United States and China – the two largest emitters – unveiled a joint climate action plan.

The leaders of the two global superpowers said they would meet the goals of the Paris climate accord to limit global warming to ‘well below’ 2C above pre-industrial levels and pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5C.

Although it was light on detail, observers said the pact allayed concerns that frosty US-China relations entering into Cop26 would derail the talks.

But trust levels between rich polluters and developing nations remained low after developed countries failed to stump up the $100billion a year they promised by 2020.

Developing nations were insisting on more money for adaptation that can help them brace for future climate shocks, with finance disagreements were holding up progress.

Developed nations favoured a greater push on emissions reductions, something countries yet to fully electrify their grids – and largely blameless for emissions – feel is unfair.

The deal came as the green credentials of the event in Glasgow were revealed in a new report, which found it is expected to have a carbon footprint twice as large as Cop25, making it the most carbon-intensive summit of its kind.

A preliminary report for the UK Government by consultants Arup states 102,500 tonnes of CO2 equivalent (tCO2e) is due to be released by the summit in Glasgow.

Around 60 per cent of this comes from international flights taken by world leaders and business leaders including Amazon’s Jeff Bezos.

The change of wording came after Iran said it was not satisfied with the language in the draft agreement on phasing out fossil fuel subsidies and expressed its support for India, which also criticised richer nations over the pledge. Pictured: Indian delegate member Bhurpender Yadav

His £48million Gulf Stream led a 400-strong parade of private jets into COP26 a fortnight ago, including those belonging to Prince Albert of Monaco, scores of royals and dozens of ‘green’ CEOs – as an extraordinary traffic jam forced empty planes to fly 30 miles to find space to park.

The UK Government said this year’s summit is the largest climate change conference so far, and the Arup report includes emissions from both the blue and green zones.

Madrid hosted Cop25 in 2019, which produced 51,101 tonnes of CO2 equivalent (tCO2e).

Commenting on the report, Dr Doug Parr of Greenpeace UK said: ‘The meeting in Glasgow is not supposed to be a demonstration of sustainable lifestyles, and it shouldn’t be judged in those terms.

‘But the failure to reach any meaningful agreement about limiting aviation’s vast carbon emissions – at a conference where 60 per cent of their emissions came from aviation, with a backing chorus of media outrage at the private jet hypocrisy of the elites – really highlights the lack of equity in these talks.

‘Creating loopholes for the use of the rich not only maintains their disproportionately high emissions, but makes it so much harder to persuade anyone else to cut.’

Delegates were asked to consider low-carbon methods of travel to Cop26.

A spokeswoman for the UK Government said: ‘As official UNFCCC figures show, Cop26 is a substantially bigger event than other recent Cops, with over 39,000 participants as against nearly 27,000 at Cop25.

‘Cop26 will be a carbon neutral event and will be the first Cop to demonstrate carbon neutrality validation through PAS2060, the internationally recognised standard on carbon neutrality.

‘As part of its analysis, the Government has for the first time included both the full blue and green zone impacts, giving a fuller and more accurate picture of emissions from the site.’

The Government said the Arup report is a baseline assessment which would not fully reflect many of the emission-reduction measures, while final emissions will be confirmed following the event.

Source: Read Full Article