The world stands at a critical juncture. We have depleted much of the Earth’s carbon budget, leaving just a few years to avert a global disaster. Immediate, coordinated, and substantial action is essential to prevent widespread catastrophe. Consequently, COP28 may not only be the most pivotal climate summit in history but could also rank as one of the most significant international gatherings ever. However, it is taking place in the UAE, a country with deep ties to the oil industry, and is led by Sultan Al Jaber, the CEO of one of the globe's largest oil firms. This presents a troubling conflict of interest, yet progress at COP28 seems to be moving quickly. Still, signs of self-interest linger, prompting the question: Is COP28 a genuine transformation or merely a façade?

Let’s begin with perhaps the most encouraging news from COP28 so far. On Saturday, over 110 nations pledged to triple global renewable energy capacity by 2030 and double the annual rate of energy efficiency improvements. Nearly all G20 countries have signed on, which is significant since they are responsible for 80% of global emissions. Although China and India, two of the largest polluters (though far behind the US in per capita emissions), have not committed, they have expressed support. The UAE aims to incorporate this pledge into the final agreement at COP28, which would require nearly 200 countries to join.

But is this commitment sufficient? The IEA and IRENA have determined that to limit global warming to below 1.5 degrees Celsius, global renewable capacity must reach between 11,008 GW and 11,174 GW by 2030. Current renewable capacity is around 3.6 GW, only a fraction of what is required by 2030. Hence, this commitment is promising, particularly if it finds its way into the final COP agreement.

Renewable energy isn’t the only sector gaining traction at COP28; nuclear power is also receiving attention. Despite its controversial reputation, nuclear energy has carbon emissions comparable to or even lower than renewables. Concerns regarding its safety are often exaggerated, as it results in fewer fatalities per energy unit than any renewable source, and significantly fewer than fossil fuels. Additionally, nuclear is one of the few low-carbon energy sources that can provide on-demand power, making it crucial for future net-zero energy grids. Nevertheless, the expansion of nuclear energy has stagnated or even reversed in several cases recently.

In a positive development, over 20 nations have called for a tripling of global nuclear energy capacity to achieve net-zero by 2050. These nations include the US, Japan, Ghana, the UK, and several others, indicating a shift in perception about nuclear safety, as both Japan and Ukraine—countries that have experienced major nuclear accidents—have signed on to this initiative.

Along with clean energy commitments, COP28 is also witnessing a push to reduce oil production, although one significant player is notably silent.

Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has announced intentions to join OPEC+ in 2024, not to safeguard Brazil's oil sector but to influence the industry towards change. He stated, “I think it’s important for us to participate in OPEC+ because we need to convince the countries that produce oil that they need to prepare to reduce fossil fuels.” He added, “Preparing means taking advantage of the money oil generates and investing so that a large continent like Latin America can produce the renewable fuels they need.”

In contrast, Colombia, a major oil producer, has taken decisive action by calling for an end to new coal, oil, and gas projects. It has joined the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty, which includes various international bodies and cities advocating for a transition away from fossil fuels.

The IEA has stated that fossil fuel expansion must cease to meet climate goals, so while Colombia's actions may seem tardy, they are critical in pressuring other oil-producing nations to follow suit. The UAE, however, has remained conspicuously silent on calls for reducing oil production, despite being a key contributor to climate change—a situation that is hardly surprising.

Unfortunately, the positive developments seem to wane here, giving way to concerning trends.

One of the most blatant instances of greenwashing occurred over the weekend when 50 of the largest oil and gas companies pledged to achieve net-zero operations by 2050. At first glance, this appears to be a significant step forward, but the pledge only addresses emissions from production, excluding emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels. To put this into perspective, burning a single 42-gallon barrel of oil releases 426.10 kg of CO2, while producing that barrel generates only 42.61 kg of CO2. Therefore, this commitment does little to mitigate the overall emissions from the oil and gas sector, especially considering the distant deadline for net-zero operations.

This pledge fails to confront the reality that the only way to decarbonize the oil and gas industry is to halt production as soon as possible. Carroll Muffett, president of the Center for International Environmental Law, characterized this as merely more industry greenwash.

Concerns regarding the integrity of COP28's president, Sultan Al Jaber, have also proven justified.

During a live event on November 21, Al Jaber made alarming statements when questioned by Mary Robinson, chair of the Elders group and former UN climate envoy. When faced with pressing questions, Al Jaber remarked, “I accepted to come to this meeting to have a sober and mature conversation. I’m not in any way signing up to any discussion that is alarmist. There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5C.” He continued, “Please help me, show me the roadmap for a phase-out of fossil fuel that will allow for sustainable socioeconomic development unless you want to take the world back into caves.”

Al Jaber's assertions are fundamentally misguided; every scientific study aimed at achieving 1.5 degrees of warming includes a near-total phase-out of fossil fuels. Respected organizations like the UN, IEA, and IRENA, along with numerous individual studies, consistently support this conclusion. Al Jaber also disregards abundant evidence showing that renewable energy sources create more and better-paying jobs than fossil fuels, while also enhancing energy independence, which can bolster national security. Moreover, renewables have proven to be significantly more profitable than oil; a study from the Centre for Climate Finance and Investment at Imperial College Business School revealed that profits from renewable energy have outstripped those from fossil fuels by 367% over the last decade.

Either Al Jaber is woefully uninformed for someone leading such a critical climate summit, or his vested interest in preserving his oil-driven wealth renders him too morally compromised to fulfill this role. Regardless, this stance is deeply troubling.

Ultimately, the advancements seen at COP28 are occurring primarily in spite of, rather than because of, the UAE and Al Jaber. The majority of the global community seems ready to make substantial changes to protect our planet at this critical moment. Yet, those tasked with leading this charge are largely sidelined, disseminating anti-scientific, misleading oil propaganda and attempting to greenwash the summit. There is, however, a silver lining: it reveals the true motivations of oil-rich nations, which prioritize profit over planetary health. They will either have to grapple with the backlash as the world shifts from fossil fuels to renewables, jeopardizing their economies and global standing, or they will need to adapt dramatically to maintain their wealth and influence. Which path will you choose, Al Jaber? Because at this moment, COP28 is not a farce, but your leadership certainly is.

Thank you for reading! Your support enables content like this. For early access to articles and more, consider following me and my project Planet Earth & Beyond or connect with me on Bluesky or X.

(Originally published on PlanetEarthAndBeyond.co)

Sources: France24, BBC, Sky, The Guardian, Climate Change News, IEA, Ember, EPA, Will Lockett, BGEN