COP26 Diaries: Day 5

The Aftermath

Today was my final day at COP26. ?

One of the upsides to attending international efforts like this one is that it provides an opportunity to share your vision with others and learn from each other. I had the chance to talk to Paul Polman today—a former CEO of Unilever, Paul is now the leading voice in sustainable business practices.

I have admired Paul’s career from day one, and he is currently leading a movement called net positive, details of which you can find in his recently published book. Paul’s ambition is to communicate the ways in which companies can begin solving problems instead of creating them. There are a lot of great lessons to learn from Paul’s experience; particularly at this very historic moment where the business world is struggling with turning consensus into action.

I also attended a very insightful panel on “frontloading” energy efficiency measures, joined by my good friend IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol. Fatih and I tried to tackle the issue of energy efficiency from public and private angles—and we both agreed that the key step forward is ensuring the implementation of global energy efficiency standards.

Fatih highlighted that due to a lack of universal rules and regulations, a family in India is now burning through triple the energy a family in Japan needs to cool down the air. We cannot afford to leave it to the willingness of manufacturers—there are “good CEOs, bad CEOS”, in Fatih’s words (hopefully, he sees me as the first kind), and we can’t wait around for everyone to listen to their conscience.

You don’t hear this a lot from business, but I cannot agree more with Fatih on the issue of regulations. Markets must be shaped around rules that require a certain level of efficiency in products and where rules are lacking, companies must step forward to usher in the change.

In addition to regulations, Fatih added that fiscal policies can be of a great use when it comes to increasing energy efficiency. Investments must be allocated in such a way that their burden should not fall on consumers. Incentives and tax breaks can help push the consumer in the right direction.

I’m an optimist—I brought sunglasses to Glasgow. If you give them the option, as we have been doing with Ar?elik for years now, the consumer will choose the better, more efficient product. If not for the climate, then for their own household bills.

Similar concerns were on the table at the joint TüS?AD- Ministry of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change panel, where I had the chance to share some of my expectations with regards to Turkey’s net-zero targets. I am very happy that Turkey has ratified the Paris Agreement, and have committed to transforming itself to a net-zero economy. The issue here is—and I mentioned this on the panel as well—isn’t the destination, but the roadmap.

Setting targets is a great way to begin, but we need a clear direction as to where we are headed. There are many companies in Turkey that don’t feel financially secure enough to take these steps—these companies should be educated and encouraged. Green transformation of sectors and industries must be supported by public authorities.

As Ar?elik, we are ready to lead our industry on this issue and remain open to sharing our vision and expertise with those that may benefit from it. The focus and attention given to this transformation now will undoubtedly shape Turkey’s economy and trade relations for years to come.

Some of the other key developments of my final day in COP26:

• The US climate envoy John Kerry sounded hopeful today when he said the 100 billion funding can be provided to emerging and underdeveloped countries by the end of 2022. This is good news, but we have to remember: 100 billion dollars were promised to these countries annually for the past 5 years, and only about 80 billion in total was delivered. We still need a productive approach to the issue of climate funding.
• COP26 isn’t even over yet, and some of the pledges and commitments are already breaking apart. Indonesia just spoke against the historic forestation commitment, of which the country is a signatory. We had all hailed that agreement as a victory and an important step towards halting deforestation, and it’s sad to see dissenting voices already on the rise. Siti Nurbaya Bakar, the environment minister of the country, said it was “unfair” to expect Indonesia to get to zero deforestation by 2030, and that economic progress in the country cannot be halted on account of the deal.
• Another deal that fell somewhat shorter than what we had hoped for was the agreement between over 40 countries to phase out from coal by 2030 or 2040, depending on the economic status of the country. Only 5 of the top 20 coal users are on that list, and those are all developing countries: Vietnam, Indonesia, Poland, Ukraine and South Korea. The big guns—U.S., Australia, China—are missing. Australian officials even went as far as to say that the country will find ways that will not include “wiping out industries.” Yes, smooth and proactive transition is key; but you know what else should not be wiped out? A chance at survival.
• Another issue with fossil fuels came to my attention today—the recent conversation at COP26 focuses on how gas is fast becoming “the new coal.” While being a lower emitter compared to coal, gas is still very much a fossil fuel. A Climate Analytics calculation shows that the use of gas will be responsible for 70% of the fossil emissions by 2030.?Yes, gas can be useful in transitioning to a clean energy future, but it must never be taken as a final destination.
• A recent study showed that the world’s richest 1% is on track to emitting 30 times more carbon than what is compatible with keeping global heating below 1.5C. By 2030, making up a population smaller than Germany, the richest 1% will account for 16% of total emissions of the world. The issue here is not simply how much they emit—most of these people are not vulnerable to the impact caused by those emissions. It’s the underprivileged and indigenous people that are most vulnerable to the climate crisis. This is why proper funding is key to achieve global success at climate efforts.

?

?

?

?

?