Claire's blog

What happened at COP26? And what next?

The short answers to these questions are simple: in the face of escalating climate breakdown, COP26 did little to shift our trajectory away from catastrophe, away from business-as-usual and towards curbing fossil fuel use. Rich countries have refused to step up and meet their obligations to those who have least to cause the climate crisis.

In the words of Greta Thunberg, more “blah, blah, blah”.

And as for what comes next, of course we go on fighting to keep the chance of staying beneath 1.5C alive.

The long version? After two weeks with a flurry of announcements, greenwash, struggles over seemingly minor details of text, and anger from civl society massed on the streets of Glasgow, it’s worth unpacking some of the details of what was really agreed, or not. How does the jargon translate into real world outcomes, literally of life and death? In these details we can see beneath the media spin and glossy announcements the brutal realities of power, money, and neocolonialism.

1.5C ‘on life support’

As the window of opportunity is closing to stay within 1.5C heating and avoid the worst climate catastrophe, where are we left as COP26 ends?

Under the Paris climate deal, nations had to submit updated voluntary commitments to climate action (known as nationally determined contributions or NDCs) before the talks. Unsurprisingly, these are generally lacking in substance or urgency. Many lack clear deliver plans and delay meaningful change until after 2030. Climate Action Tracker’s useful analysis finds that even with all new pledges for 2030, we will still emit roughly twice as much in 2030 as required for 1.5C.

They estimate if all current pledges for emissions cuts by 2030 are met, this gives only a 50% chance of staying below 2.4C.

Of course 1.5C itself is no ‘safe level’. Many areas have already experienced devastating wildfires, floods, hurricanes and heatwaves at 1.1C. These, in combination with longer-term impacts such as drought, disproportionately affect countries who have done least to cause the problem and have fewest resources to deal with them.

Trade unions join calls to save Green Homes Grant

 
UK trade union leaders have written to the Chancellor calling on him not to cut funding from the Green Homes Grants scheme. They say removing around £1 billion from the scheme would jeopardise the UK’s chances of a green recovery, and put jobs at risk. With severe administrative problems caused by mismanagement of the scheme by US firm ICF, they also call on the scheme to be brought under public sector control.
 
Gail Cartmail, Unite Assistant General Secretary said, "The UK has some of the poorest housing stock in western Europe and 'fuel poverty' is rampant – so the need for a comprehensive housing renovation programme - with the 'green' agenda at its heart - is desperately required. The current failings in the Green Homes Grants scheme has been abetted by awarding the contract to a US firm, when, during the pandemic, it is the public sector that has more than proved its worth as the standard bearer of delivering services in a timely fashion. This contract should be brought back under public sector control immediately."
 
John Moloney, PCS Assistant General Secretary said, "The failure of Boris Johnson's Government to deliver on the Green Homes Grant – already at best a drop in the ocean initiative to tackle the climate emergency – exposes the truth about their world beating leadership on climate change and the large scale investment needed for a green recovery."
 
Suzanne Jeffery, Chair of CACCTU said "At a time of a jobs crisis and climate crisis and in the year UK hosts COP26, it's a dangerous and unnecessary failure. Cutting back this scheme threatens jobs and climate action."
 
Full letter below.

Pages