Positivity is a critical tool in tackling global warming

By Andrew Adie

Just 100 days ago COP26 closed its doors. It achieved more than it is often credited for, and there lies the problem.

In the lead up to COP26, the environment and the drive to net zero was high on business, political and consumer agendas.

SEC Newgate’s global ESG Monitor found that in the UK alone, consumers cared more about the environment than they did about the economy or Covid. In the midst of the third lockdown, that was a striking statistic.

Yet wind the clock forward and the inescapable conclusion is that the enthusiasm and energy driving the net zero debate is leaching away. The success of COP26 (bringing business to the table to find solutions to the net zero transition; getting agreement to ‘wind down’ coal use; corralling $130 trillion in global finance to fund the ‘green’ transition – amongst many other achievements) have been lost in a fractious and deeply troubling start to 2022, which has brought a Russian invasion of Ukraine, inflation fears, ‘Covid party-gate’, and a cost of living crisis to the fore.

The positive environmental narrative around the need to deliver net zero and the economic, social and environmental benefits that could be achieved through this has disappeared from popular debate.

In its place we have fear and cynicism. The growing influence of groups like the Conservative Net Zero Scrutiny Group who are, in part, blaming the cost-of-living crisis on green energy tariffs and the cost of the net zero transition, is one example of this and a dangerous moment for the environmental movement.

As the reality of the cost-of-living increases bites deeper, potentially driven by even greater rises in energy prices as a result of international boycotts of Russian oil and gas, the strategic goal of ‘keeping 1.5 alive’ and reducing carbon emissions will almost certainly be eclipsed by short-term worries. Indeed, we are already seeing that today with a report in The Times that the Climate Change Committee has stopped short of recommending a ban on new oil and gas drilling in the North Sea given the need to factor in other considerations (beyond climate change) such as energy security. In other words, if rocketing energy prices lead to widespread voter anger, then the race to zero could well be conveniently delayed.

While achieving net zero by 2050 is a legal requirement for the UK, delivering that requires time and commitment. Weakening of the resolve (and the narrative that drives the political, commercial and public will to achieve net zero) makes it less likely that we will do so. 

This week we have seen reports that Alok Sharma (President of COP26 who remains in place until the start of COP27 in November, in Egypt) and John Kerry (the US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate) are both embarked in shuttle diplomacy to try and keep the goals agreed at COP26 on track.

Yet we also see reports that Egypt will be prioritising the ‘just transition’ and the delivery of the long-promised climate finance package from the G20 nations which will see $100 billion a year in climate finance aid being paid to developing nations to help them invest in the renewable and low carbon technologies needed to transition their economies to a net zero future.

Given that the G20 nations are responsible for 80% of global carbon emissions yet are likely to feel the impact of climate change less acutely than developing nations, then the logic behind the funding is hard to ignore. However, the G20 have failed to deliver on the promise and COP27 (Africa’s COP) looks set to place that failure at the heart of the discussions. Ironically, the crisis in Ukraine could focus G20 minds on the need to strengthen international ties and friendships and delivering this long-promised aid would be a good start.

However, more widely, when elected politicians start getting consumed by geopolitical and domestic troubles, when voter concerns grow around rising cost of living and when a narrative emerges that suggests that the cost of net zero pledges and energy efficiency measures may be fuelling the inflationary spiral, then it takes a brave and fair-sighted politician to set that aside.

In the UK, the ongoing fall-out from ‘party-gate’ also means that a change in prime minister remains on the cards, with Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak (the front runners) allegedly having a far less enthusiastic embrace of the net zero mission. Bill Clinton’s words ‘it’s the economy stupid’ will be hard to ignore for any new leader coming in. And that is before we factor in the potential longer-term fall-out of the Russian action in Ukraine.

Which is why the environmental movement needs to take back the narrative and reshape the mood music around net zero. As we face the grim reality of a new war in Europe that may not look like priority number one. Yet net zero remains one of the most critical issues facing the entire planet and while we are facing troubles elsewhere the climate crisis continues to build, and potentially get worse.

COP26 achieved much but it left a lot still to do. It did however present a more optimistic, upbeat message that we can avert climate catastrophe and drive a new type of economic growth through the enormous commercial, social and environmental progress that can be delivered as part of that net zero transition.

At COP26 that was defined as a once in a generation opportunity.

That spirit of optimism and determination to work together and deliver a common goal seems to have been lost in the fog of 2022. We need to rediscover that if the momentum to deliver net zero is to be maintained and if November’s COP27 meeting is to be anything other than a green-tinged platform for a major diplomatic fight.