The failure to include a call for a phase down in fossil fuels or mention oil and gas is a gaping hole in the draft, critics say.
New draft decision text out this morning at #COP27 ignores the science of 1.5°C.
🛢️ fails to mention oil, gas
❌ doesn’t end fossil fuel expansion
⛏️ phase down “unabated coal” still in but “unabated” is a loophole big enough to drive a drill rig through.
— Tzeporah Berman (@Tzeporah) November 17, 2022
Reaction to the draft is coming in.
New “elements” of a decision released by #COP27 team around 0630.
It has ballooned from 2 to 20 pages. That’s a strategic choice by those drafting. Hard 2-3 days beckons…
Some hot-takes below… pic.twitter.com/R3ViDRnlK8
— Ed King (@edking_I) November 17, 2022
Good morning, and welcome to the Guardian’s live coverage of the Cop27 climate conference.
The big news this morning is that the first draft of the cover text has just been published, although it will change significantly in the coming days. Here’s a quick take from Reuters:
The UN climate agency has published a first draft on Thursday of what could be the overarching agreement from the Cop27 climate summit in Egypt However, much of the text is likely to be reworked in the coming days.
The document, labelled a “non-paper”, indicating it is still far from the final version, repeats the goal from last year’s Glasgow climate pact to “to accelerate measures towards the phase-down of unabated coal power and phase out and rationalise inefficient fossil fuel subsidies”.
It does not call for a phase-down of all fossil fuels, as India and the EU had requested. The text does not include details for launching a fund for loss and damage, a key demand from the most climate vulnerable countries such as island nations. Rather, it “welcomes” the fact that parties have agreed for the first time to include “matters related to funding arrangements responding to loss and damage” on the summit agenda.
It does not include a timeline for deciding on whether a separate fund should be created or what it should look like, giving time for negotiators to continue to working on the contentious topic.
The initial reaction from many has been one of disappointment and worry at the pace of progress – with so much to be resolved, it is unlikely the conference will finish on time.
We’ll have more detail on that, and analysis of the text, shortly.
I’m Sandra Laville, and you can send me news tips and questions at [email protected] or on Twitter at @sandralaville.