The Cop31 climate talks have acquired something their delegates scarcely expected: a little political breathing space. The comeback by Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in the second round of Brazil’s presidential race was important for many reasons. Victory for his opponent, Flávio Bolsonaro, would have marked a dangerous retreat from democracy. But Mr Bolsonaro’s commitment to environmental deregulation would also have spelled disaster for the Amazon, making Lula’s re-election a big win for the climate. Similarly, success by Democrats in the US midterms means that Donald Trump’s destructive grip has been loosened. If they win back the White House in 2028, the US should rejoin the UN process in time for Cop34.
While the diplomatic picture is less bleak than it might have been, the threat level remains high and rising. António Guterres used his last Cop as UN secretary general to issue a pithy warning that “it’s make or bake time”. With the latest analysis pointing to heating of 2.7C by the end of the century – far beyond the 1.5C target in the Paris agreement – governments face another crunch moment: by pivoting away from fossil fuels, they can still avert the most dangerous impacts. Yet the UK’s Andy Burnham was the only G7 leader to make the trip to Turkey; the French and German leaders chose to attend an EU summit in Dublin instead.
Warnings of mounting risks, unprecedented heat and disasters such as August’s glacier collapse on the Nepal-Tibet border can engender a sense of paralysis or unreality. The leaders of both host countries prompted anger last week: the Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, publicly extolled his country’s oil reserves, while Australia’s Anthony Albanese failed to mention fossil fuels in his speech. But for all its flaws, the UN climate process remains crucial. There is no other mechanism to broker a global green transition.
Mr Burnham’s appointment of a climate security adviser, Madeleine Alessandri, should focus minds in the UK. Kemi Badenoch’s rejection of net zero has undermined an important cross‑party consensus. Ministers, who must soon make a decision on Rosebank oil and gas field, must realise that economic damage caused by the carbon pollution from the oil and gas produced would dwarf any benefits. Governments of countries that are far poorer than the UK cannot be expected to turn away from coal and oil if rich countries keep investing.
A resolution to derive 35% of energy worldwide from electricity by 2035 will be agreed this week if objections from fossil fuel producers can be overcome. Attempts to undermine the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change must also be resisted. It provides the science on which the process depends. Increased accountability on climate finance is urgently needed too. Poor countries cannot be expected to put up with endless delays.
A large majority of the global public recognises the threat from global heating and wants action by governments. Of course, this takes courage and leadership: people may back a green transition in the abstract, but be more resistant to changes that affect their lives. But those pushing for a faster shift away from fossil fuels, at Cop31 and at a national level, should be emboldened by the way that public awareness and support have grown: they are on the side of the future, while their opponents are stuck in the past.
