At COP28, there are plenty of representatives from the oil industry, and it's a problem

The United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28) was the most attended ever – over 97,000 people registered for the event. However, among them, there were also over 2,400 lobbyists from the fossil fuel industry, according to the count of a network of hundreds of environmental organizations. This year, personalities associated with the Oil & Gas sector would have been more numerous than almost all individual delegations from the 197 countries participating in the event. At the COP26 in Glasgow in 2021, representatives from the fossil fuel industry were around 500; at last year's COP held in Egypt, there were discussions about approximately 600 people. «It was said that progress would be made during this conference on commitments to eliminate the use of fossil fuels, and the industry is here to influence the outcome of the negotiations as much as possible,» a spokesperson for one of the environmental organizations present at the event told the BBC. The use of fossil fuels as sources of energy is the main cause of greenhouse gas emissions, which is responsible for climate change. While many Oil & Gas companies are also investing in renewable energy sources, environmental organizations opposed their presence at COP28 because they believe the real interest of this industry is to continue selling fossil fuels, despite the consequences for the planet. Therefore, their participation in climate conferences would create a conflict of interest.

The theme of fossil fuels at COP28

The country selected to host this year's COP, the United Arab Emirates, is closely tied to fossil fuels: it is the seventh-largest oil producer and emitter of greenhouse gases per capita in the world. Additionally, the president of the event, Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, was the CEO of the Emirati state oil company, one of the largest globally: he recently argued that abandoning fossil fuels would not help maintain the increase in global temperatures within 1.5 degrees, as stipulated by the Paris Agreement. A climate scientist, interviewed by The Guardian, described Al Jaber's words as «incredibly worrying,» bordering on climate denial and in stark contrast to the official position of the United Nations. Not surprisingly, the first draft of the COP28 agreement, on shared international commitments to counter global warming, was heavily criticized for being considered too weak. There was no mention of the gradual elimination of the use of fossil fuels or funding for companies that produce them. One of the harshest comments came from the Minister of the Environment of the Samoa Islands, who said: «We will not sign our death sentence.» In this regard, Al Gore, former U.S. Vice President and climate change activist, had stated that the first draft seemed «to have been dictated word for word by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries.»

"Phase out" or "phase down"?

UN climate conferences conclude when countries agree on a final document capable of advancing commitments to counter global warming. The texts, as they must be approved by countries with very different interests and needs, undergo intense negotiations, and the game often revolves around the meaning of individual terms. This year, there was much discussion about the words that should be used in the concluding document of COP28. In particular, the debate focused on the possibility of using the term «phase out,» which means «gradually eliminate,» or «phase down,» meaning «gradually reduce.» Countries most resistant to decreasing the use of fossil fuels, including major oil producers like the United Arab Emirates, pushed for the latter term, «phase down.» Although it may not seem like it, this is a substantial difference, corresponding to a much lesser commitment, especially because COP agreements leave states wide autonomy in how they implement the signed texts. In the final document of this year's conference, after lengthy discussions, a reference to the need to «gradually move away» («phase out») from the use of fossil fuels was included. Although it is the first time that fossil fuels are mentioned so explicitly in a COP treaty, the formulation of the approved text has been criticized as weak and excessively vague, compared to what environmental activists were advocating for, including the use of the term «phase out.» Furthermore, the document does not contain formal constraints for countries but rather a generic appeal – found in the expression «calls on» – to gradually move away from the use of fossil fuels. This is not the first time that the choice of certain words, rather than others, marks the failure of a climate conference. The alternative between «phase down» and «phase out» had already been discussed two years ago, at COP26 in Glasgow: in the final version of the agreement, revised after the positions of China and India, the agreement was reached for «gradual reduction» («phase down») of fossil fuels. For this change, at the end of the event, the then-president Alok Sharma apologized – becoming emotional – to all the delegates. Although COP28 has disappointed many expectations, President Al Jaber still seemed very pleased and satisfied.