Know better. Do better.

The fast-approaching COP28 climate summit in Dubai, due to start at the end of this month, is expected to produce myriad new promises of climate action, including large amounts of funding to step up installations of renewable energy, from solar to wind power.

What it’s not likely to bring, however, are significant new commitments to actually cut the production and use of oil and gas, two fossil fuels that - with coal - are the main drivers of climate change.

Instead, oil- and gas-producing nations around the world say they aim to reduce the emissions from those fossil fuels rather than the fuels themselves.

How? They plan to ‘abate’ planet-damaging emissions by capturing more of them – such as from power plants and big industry – and pumping them into permanent underground storage or in some cases turning them into new materials.

Such “carbon capture and storage” (CCS) combines old technologies for a new purpose, and is already being used at limited scale around the world.

A pre-summit note by COP28 host nation the United Arab Emirates has suggested the world work toward “an energy system free of unabated fossil fuels by mid-century, with coal being a priority”.

So why bother to phase out fossil fuels then? The problem, scientists and industry experts say, is that only a tiny fraction of the carbon capture and storage capacity needed to avoid the worst impacts of climate change is in the pipeline or likely to ever be built.

And while capturing emissions from smokestacks is relatively simple, it’s much harder from other big climate pollution sources – such as car tailpipes or airplanes. Then there’s the fight over what actually constitutes an ‘abated’ fossil fuel.

Some scientists have proposed that the word ‘abated’ should only apply when emissions have been reduced by 90-95%, writes correspondent Alister Doyle.

But most fossil fuel-producing countries aim at COP28 to leave the definition much vaguer, which could allow them to carry out much less ambitious emissions cuts while still maintaining that their fossil fuels are climate-friendly.

That is a huge problem with the latest round of national climate action plans showing the world is heading toward a 9% increase in climate-changing emissions by 2030 compared to 2010 – nowhere near the 43% decline scientists say is needed to give the best chance of keeping people and nature safe.

At COP28, “omitting reduction targets for coal, oil and gas production from a climate plan is like trying to drive with the rearview mirror missing,” noted Ploy Achakulwisut, a climate policy researcher and co-author of a new report on the fossil fuel “production gap”.

“We need to ensure that as we scale up renewable energy we are also phasing out fossil fuels,” she said in a piece for Context.

That’s not an easy task for countries such as Indonesia, which gets about 85% of its electricity from fossil fuels, mainly coal. Last year, wealthy nations put together $20 billion in funding to help the Southeast Asian nation push ahead toward a “just energy transition”.

A range of countries - from South Africa to Vietnam and Senegal - have now landed similar Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs). But Indonesia’s plan so far hasn’t adequately consulted or offered help to coal workers and other local communities that would be affected by the shift, said Tommy Pratma, executive director of Traction Energy Asia, an Indonesia-based policy think-tank.

“There is nothing ‘just’ about JETP Indonesia yet,” he told our correspondent Michael Taylor.

After a few months away on sabbatical, I’m happy to be back at the desk this month with plenty of ideas to fuel - cleanly! - our climate change coverage. Don’t miss what’s coming both from inside the halls of COP28 and from the rest of the world – subscribe to our YouTube channel and visit our website.

See you next week!

Laurie