Nov 19, 2021 · 17m · green-blueprint

How the Glasgow climate deal nearly collapsed

Akshat Rathi · 8m spoken Stephen Lacey · 4m spoken Alok Sharma · 54s spoken Marshall Islands Delegate · 21s spoken Indian Delegate · 15s spoken Mexican Delegate · 9s spoken Chinese Delegate · 7s spoken Swiss Delegate · 5s spoken
0:00 / 0:00

gold bands on the timeline = statements, start to end. Hover to read, click to jump. CC turns on captions

This episode of The Carbon Copy explores the dramatic final hours and behind-the-scenes diplomacy of COP26 in Glasgow, examining how a last-minute clash over coal phrasing nearly derailed the global climate pact.

How this conversation actually went

Every chapter scored 0–10 on four independent dynamics. Hover any point for the reasoning behind the score. How this is scored →

The hosts as informed peer 4.3 Guest teaching 3.7 Guest disagreement 1.0 The hosts pushing back 0.3
05100:0010:006:24–9:45 · The hosts as informed peer 4/10 The Historic Fossil Fuel Text and Global Pushback The host sets up the historical significance of fossil fuel language entering the COP text for the first time. The guest details the drafting process and explains how qualifiers were added to dilute the coal commitment. The conversation is entirely collaborative and narrative-driven.9:49–14:17 · The hosts as informed peer 5/10 Alok Sharma's Emotional Apology and Passing the Pact The host asks about Alok Sharma's reaction and synthesizes the US-China geopolitical dynamic. The guest shares reporting on how bilateral US-China talks shaped the text while India took the public blame, contextualizing the behind-the-scenes diplomacy.14:18–16:44 · The hosts as informed peer 4/10 Consensus Rules and the Mixed Legacy of Glasgow The host asks why fossil fuels had never appeared in COP texts previously and evaluates the 1.5 degree goal. The guest explains historical consensus rules established in 1992 and balances activist criticism against diplomatic achievement.6:24–9:45 · Guest teaching 3/10 The Historic Fossil Fuel Text and Global Pushback The host sets up the historical significance of fossil fuel language entering the COP text for the first time. The guest details the drafting process and explains how qualifiers were added to dilute the coal commitment. The conversation is entirely collaborative and narrative-driven.9:49–14:17 · Guest teaching 4/10 Alok Sharma's Emotional Apology and Passing the Pact The host asks about Alok Sharma's reaction and synthesizes the US-China geopolitical dynamic. The guest shares reporting on how bilateral US-China talks shaped the text while India took the public blame, contextualizing the behind-the-scenes diplomacy.14:18–16:44 · Guest teaching 4/10 Consensus Rules and the Mixed Legacy of Glasgow The host asks why fossil fuels had never appeared in COP texts previously and evaluates the 1.5 degree goal. The guest explains historical consensus rules established in 1992 and balances activist criticism against diplomatic achievement.6:24–9:45 · Guest disagreement 1/10 The Historic Fossil Fuel Text and Global Pushback The host sets up the historical significance of fossil fuel language entering the COP text for the first time. The guest details the drafting process and explains how qualifiers were added to dilute the coal commitment. The conversation is entirely collaborative and narrative-driven.9:49–14:17 · Guest disagreement 1/10 Alok Sharma's Emotional Apology and Passing the Pact The host asks about Alok Sharma's reaction and synthesizes the US-China geopolitical dynamic. The guest shares reporting on how bilateral US-China talks shaped the text while India took the public blame, contextualizing the behind-the-scenes diplomacy.14:18–16:44 · Guest disagreement 1/10 Consensus Rules and the Mixed Legacy of Glasgow The host asks why fossil fuels had never appeared in COP texts previously and evaluates the 1.5 degree goal. The guest explains historical consensus rules established in 1992 and balances activist criticism against diplomatic achievement.6:24–9:45 · The hosts pushing back 0/10 The Historic Fossil Fuel Text and Global Pushback The host sets up the historical significance of fossil fuel language entering the COP text for the first time. The guest details the drafting process and explains how qualifiers were added to dilute the coal commitment. The conversation is entirely collaborative and narrative-driven.9:49–14:17 · The hosts pushing back 1/10 Alok Sharma's Emotional Apology and Passing the Pact The host asks about Alok Sharma's reaction and synthesizes the US-China geopolitical dynamic. The guest shares reporting on how bilateral US-China talks shaped the text while India took the public blame, contextualizing the behind-the-scenes diplomacy.14:18–16:44 · The hosts pushing back 0/10 Consensus Rules and the Mixed Legacy of Glasgow The host asks why fossil fuels had never appeared in COP texts previously and evaluates the 1.5 degree goal. The guest explains historical consensus rules established in 1992 and balances activist criticism against diplomatic achievement.

speaking balance: gold is the hosts, purple is the guest (3 minute bins)

0:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%0:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%3:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%3:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%6:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%6:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%9:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%9:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%12:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%12:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%15:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%15:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%
Sharpest disagreement ▶ 13:42 Questioning the omission of oil and gas

The guest highlights India's challenge to developed nations, pointing out the hypocrisy of targeting coal while major producers like the US ensured oil and gas remained unmentioned.

Hardest push from the hosts ▶ 13:25 Probing US geopolitical motivation

The host reframes the US concession on coal language as a diplomatic move to protect fragile bilateral negotiations with China rather than just saving the summit pact.

Biggest teaching moment ▶ 14:26 Historical context of the consensus mandate

The guest educates the host on the 1992 origins of the UNFCCC consensus rule, noting how nations like Saudi Arabia insisted on full unanimity to historically block fossil fuel mentions.

The host holds their own ▶ 15:30 Comprehensive synthesis of Glasgow outcomes

The host delivers an expert breakdown of the final deal, enumerating specific policy inclusions such as carbon trading rules alongside major shortcomings like lack of financial mechanisms.

the scores for every segment, with the reasoning behind each
ChapterTopicThe hosts as informed peerGuest teachingGuest disagreementThe hosts pushing backWhy
The Historic Fossil Fuel Text and Global Pushback 4310 The host sets up the historical significance of fossil fuel language entering the COP text for the first time. The guest details the drafting process and explains how qualifiers were added to dilute the coal commitment. The conversation is entirely collaborative and narrative-driven.
Alok Sharma's Emotional Apology and Passing the Pact 5411 The host asks about Alok Sharma's reaction and synthesizes the US-China geopolitical dynamic. The guest shares reporting on how bilateral US-China talks shaped the text while India took the public blame, contextualizing the behind-the-scenes diplomacy.
Consensus Rules and the Mixed Legacy of Glasgow 4410 The host asks why fossil fuels had never appeared in COP texts previously and evaluates the 1.5 degree goal. The guest explains historical consensus rules established in 1992 and balances activist criticism against diplomatic achievement.

Statements from this episode (5)

Assertion Supported
Lacey: Glasgow climate agreement explicitly mentions fossil fuels for the first time
“COP-XVI just wrapped in Scotland, we have an agreement, and for the first time it explicitly mentions fossil fuels.”
Stephen Lacey Nov 19, 2021 ▶ 3:24
Assertion Supported
Rathi: India, China, and US aligned to change 'phase out' to 'phase down'
“You know, in the last hours of negotiation on Saturday, there was a fight between India, China, and the U.S. On one side, and all the other countries on the other side to try and change one word from phase out to phase down.”
Akshat Rathi Nov 19, 2021 ▶ 7:37
Opinion
Sharma tearfully apologizes for late-stage changes but defends the climate pact
“May I just say to all delegates I apologize for the way this process has unfolded, and I'm deeply sorry. I also understand the deep disappointment, but I think, as you have noted, it's also vital that we protect this package.”
Alok Sharma Nov 19, 2021 ▶ 10:35
Assertion Supported
Rathi: US and China originated the COP26 'phase down' coal language
“And that two or three page document that Came on Wednesday was what then set the tone for the deal to happen on the Saturday, and in that deal is where we had the language around phase down of coal, and that's the language that eventually made it into the fina…”
Akshat Rathi Nov 19, 2021 ▶ 12:50
Assertion Supported
Rathi: Saudi Arabia pushed for UNFCCC consensus rule, blocking fossil fuel mentions
“When the framework that created COP meetings called the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was put together back in 1992, Saudi Arabia was among the countries that objected To make sure that the process is by consensus rather than by superma…”
Akshat Rathi Nov 19, 2021 ▶ 14:30
Made with StarZero

Turn any episode into a week of clips.

This entire site, over 100 episodes transcribed, diarized, checked and made playable, runs on the StarZero media pipeline. Drop in your own episode and the podcast clipper finds the moments worth sharing, cuts them, captions them, and reframes them for every feed.