COP30 and the Art of Climate-Policy Neglect

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

70% : Stemming from a UN statute adopted in 1992 and bearing the acronym UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change), reaching the 30th edition of COP would be a triumph if its success was measured on diplomatic endurance.
55% : These two measures would have required meaningful political will from the leader of the free world, but would have successfully incentivized decarbonization around the world and encouraged an actual transition away from fossil fuels, very much critical for the safety and well-being of future humans.
51% : The conference effectively signaled that despite the escalating urgency of limiting greenhouse warming, the global reliance on fossil fuels will continue “until further notice.”
49% : And while, of course, the United States’ presence was sorely missed – with COP30’s fossil fuel interests emboldened, allowing them to dig in their heels – it feels almost repetitive to recent COP conferences with the country’s leadership.
45% : Look no further than the administration’s recurrent announcements on unleashing American coal and stopping clean energy projects in their tracks.
43% : Heaven forbid the Biden administration should use political capital to lead on the global stage for a carbon tax – which meta-analyses find are widely successful in slowing emissions – or on the domestic stage for an increase of the gas tax, also proven effective.
31% : Or, yet another fossil fuel fakeout.
14% : In 2023, I wrote in the Washington Post in “The great fossil fuel phaseout fakeout” about the Biden administration’s hypocrisy in approving the Alaskan oil-producing Willow Project – projected to yield 180,000 barrels of oil per day for 30 years – even as the U.S. delegation to COP28, headed by Vice President Kamala Harris, joined the majority’s resolve to transition away from fossil fuels.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.