India did not introduce the phrase “phase down” in the text of the Glasgow climate pact, senior officials realized negotiations on the COP26 said on Wednesday, rejecting criticism that Delhi played an important role in watering a difficult attitude to fight the crisis climate The controversy deals with changes in phrases “exit” to “phase down” in the context of using coal. The source in the Indian delegation had previously said India opposed the strong target of the removal of coal and other fossil fuels such as gas and oil, but specifically opposed Singling from coal, which was still among the sources of energy to develop countries.
Officials realized Mater on Wednesday said Minister of Environment Bhupender Yadav, represented India, read the text rewritten because the COP26 presidency asked the India to do it, and needed to reach the consensus in COP26 COP26 President Alok Sharma, in an interview to Guardian recently, said India and China would “have to explain themselves to the poor” because of their attitude in coal. He also said he was very frustrated with Delhi and Beijing’s attitude Previously during the formal plenary for the Glasgow climate pact, Sharma said he was very sorry for the road negotiations over, holding his tears.
“Phase out” was recommended by small island countries, Indian officials said on Tuesday. “The initial text has a” phase “for coal fuel subsidies and fossils that we disagree. This is our basic position in any case. But we did not introduce phrases ‘phase down.’ We have a problem with language in coal and removes fossil fuel subsidies. We do not approve that language they continue to push until the end, “said one senior official Indian problems, they repeat, not with the exit phase or phase down but introduce equity and protection in fossil fuel subsidies for the poor. On the last day (November 13) the exit phase was modified for the phase down because there was a language on a table out of the statement with US-China.
“It evolved after a discussion between the presidency which was the United Kingdom, US, Chinese, Indian and EU. Chairs (Alok Sharma) had to direct this discussion. This is the task of the seat to direct it to consensus. We agree to the amendment. The reason why we read the text because We are asked by the presidency. When you see the trial, you will feel that this is Indian, but we only read the statement. We strive to help achieve consensus. We also want to introduce certain protection and have some concerns. We don’t have a strong objection against The phase of ‘phase down’ is good because we try to find a language to ensure the results for the police themselves, “said the first official.
India pushed consensus because, the official explained, “If we have no cover decision, there are no other documents (including regulatory books on the carbon market) will move forward. Therefore, our interest in reaching consensus. Successfully from coal and removing material subsidies Our fossil burn has no problem thus, but must meet the requirements, “he added Other officials show that instead of chairs (Alok Sharma) presented it, which is the norm to read text, chairs choose to ask India to read the compromise text. Yadav is clear during its intervention that it is not an Indian position but by consulting with presidencies and other stakeholders.
We depend on coal, we may have to increase it and we provide subsidies to the poor to help them have a basic subsistence level. To compare it with general use, 20 times the type of energy (used) in some developed countries, unfair, “said second official Officials also said India did not subscribe to choose and choose one fossil fuel, namely coal, over the other. “They (developed countries