By Eric Muraille, Philippe Naccache and Julien Pillot (Inseec Grande Ecole, Omnes Education Group)
The Paris climate agreement, adopted by 196 countries in 2015, sets ambitious goals to control CO₂ emissions to keep global warming below a symbolic threshold of +1.5°C compared to the pre-industrial era and avoid its most devastating impacts. However, since 2015, far from decreasing, global CO₂ emissions have even reached a record high, and in 2024 recorded “the strongest increase since the start of modern measurements in 1957”. The hottest year on record, 2024 will also be marked by increasing climate disasters.
Therefore, it is not surprising that the Secretary General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, has just stated that the 1.5°C threshold will definitely be exceeded in the coming years. Projections show a scenario between +2.3°C and +2.8°C by the end of the century, depending on whether the country keeps its commitments or continues with its current policies. And this, without taking into account the United States’ exit from the Paris agreement and the “drill babyrill” policy implemented by Donald Trump. In the context of this rejection, COP30 appears to be dominated by attempts to present projects as strategies to combat climate change that will primarily help the growth of the national economies of Southern countries.
Economic growth in countries of the South increases global emissions
Economic growth in the South explains much of the failure of the Paris agreement. Europe and the US each surpassed their 1990 peak CO₂ emissions in 2007. Since then, Europe has reduced its emissions by 30-35% and the US by about 15-20%. Combined, these carbon emissions represent only 20% of current global emissions. In contrast, China and India, which account for more than 40% of global emissions, have not yet reached their peak emissions.
China has committed to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 7% to 10% by 2035 through a massive transition to renewable energy. India, whose economy will still be 46.4% dependent on coal in 2023, hopes to achieve carbon neutrality by 2070. Meanwhile Brazil, host of COP30, has just approved oil drilling near the Amazon River, raising questions about the sincerity of its climate ambitions while the country is experiencing moderate economic growth.
Therefore, although the North has historically been responsible for nearly 30% of CO₂ emissions since 1850, it is economic growth in the South that is now determining the trajectory of climate and GHG emissions.
Collapse of natural wells and risk of leaks
Uncontrolled spikes in CO₂ emissions following the collapse of natural carbon sinks such as forests and oceans, which each absorb a quarter of CO₂ emissions, are another major risk we face.
Forests and soil only absorbed between 1.5 billion and 2.6 billion tons of CO₂ in 2023, far behind the 9.5 billion in 2022, mainly due to drought in the Amazon and fires in Canada and Siberia.
CO₂ absorption by the ocean has not decreased. However, it is photosynthesis carried out by marine ecosystems that is the origin of the long-term absorption of CO₂ in the form of sediment by the ocean. However, marine ecosystems are greatly impacted by rising temperatures. An increase of 1–2°C above local normal temperatures prevents symbiosis between coral and phytoplankton, leading to coral bleaching and increased susceptibility to disease. Tremendous coral die-offs have recently been observed, which experts say could mean a tipping point has passed. The loss of coral reefs not only impacts CO₂ absorption, but also coastal protection against storms and the food security of communities that depend on fishing.
If the decline in natural carbon sequestration continues and accelerates, we risk seeing climate change spiral out of control far beyond current model predictions.
Between techno-optimism and techno-opportunism
To align economic growth and reduced CO₂ emissions, countries are increasingly inclined to support technological solutions without having to think about the consequences for the ecosystem and the backlash they may have.
Brazil, for example, is calling for a four-fold increase in global production of “sustainable fuels,” including biofuels, which are one of the world’s main products. However, biofuel production is highlighted as one of the main causes of primary forest destruction. Forest destruction is also what makes Brazil the fourth largest emitter of GHG emissions between 1850 and 2021.
Elsewhere, more and more countries appear to be supporting CO₂ capture and storage (Carbon Capture & Storage or Carbon Dioxide Removal) projects. However, not only have these projects proven unprofitable without higher ton CO₂ valuations in carbon markets, they are also highly energy intensive and, like Climeworks, raise real questions about efficiency if expanded. And the strong growth in industrial activity associated with these projects paradoxically risks accelerating the disappearance of carbon sinks.
Related to this, a recent study was published in the journal Natural takes into account the potential for geological burial of CO₂ to combat climate change. This figure is ten times lower than expected. Therefore, some people are turning to the sea, as they hope to increase CO₂ capture and storage capacity. However, these strategies, which are still experimental, also have limitations and especially raise concerns for marine ecosystems. Some parties have called for this strategy to be banned because it is considered too uncertain and risky. Without forgetting the Jevons effect that these solutions can have, because when they are implemented on a very large scale, what incentives are left to reduce emissions and reduce pressure on natural resources?
Required calm
The latest IPCC report (AR6, 2022, Working Group III: Climate Change Mitigation) clearly states that peace of mind is essential to limit global warming, in addition to technological innovation and energy efficiency. It estimates that behavioral changes and awareness policies alone could reduce up to two-thirds of global emissions by 2050 and concludes that without awareness, carbon neutrality is impossible to achieve unless we use unrealistic CO₂ capture volumes.
It is clear that since 2015, COPs have been increasingly dominated by the political desire to sustain growth by focusing on increasingly risky technologies. This trend is getting worse with COP28 and COP 29 being held in fossil fuel producing countries, and these countries have an interest in not continuing the IPCC’s call for calm. Undoubtedly, the same will happen at COP30. The absence of high-level representatives from several major countries such as the US and China is a sign that the COPs have become a climate change mob that does not have the slightest chance of changing course towards a world beyond +2°C.
