Poland again. Will they be pushing coal this time, too?

Back in Bonn, the Polish delegation was already promoting next year’s event. It enthusiastically presented a new logo and the slogan COP24 “CHANGING TOGETHER”. (In the backrooms creative variations such as “changing the climate together”, and “changing together, but changing what?” were heard.) Katowice’s strengths were presented at a special stand in the main negotiation area (the “Bula zone”). There was a range of social side events whose themes clearly reflected Poland’s approach to climate policy. They touched on the role of forests in implementing the Paris Agreement, best practice in clean industrial production, the national environmental protection financing system, CO₂ emission reduction through biocoal production, wasteless coal energetics as part of a circular economy, promoting cost-effective green technologies in developing nations, the role of small and medium enterprise in the development of green technologies and geothermal energy as an undervalued renewable source.

Preparatory documents for COP23 and the public announcements of the Minister of the Environment, Jan Szyszko, continually featured the same threads. They lead us to conclude that Poland’s priority at COP24 will be to stick to the timeframes set down in Paris and adopt the package of implementing decisions of the Paris Agreement. In his official statement delivered at the High Level Segment, the Minister emphasised that success in this would depend on all parties to the talks, as well as on observers representing business, local authorities, science, non-governmental organisations and trade unions. Unofficially, it is known that we can expect an attempt to increase industry representation. In a letter to delegates, the Minister indicated that success will depend on long and often emotional discussions and difficult but necessary compromises. These references may show an understanding of the negotiation process, but could also be an attempt to adopt an implementing package even at the cost of concessions on the quality and thoroughness of any agreed principles. At COP23 certain progress was made on an implementing package, but this may turn out to be too little to guarantee that the timeframe is adhered to. And so 2018 promises to be an arduous year for Poland’s presidency.

Next year may also see the so-called Talanoa dialogue taking place. It is intended to encourage the parties to recognise that the adopted aims are too low and to strengthen efforts to combat climate change, including actions leading up to 2020. The Polish presidency, together with Fiji’s presidency, must strive for the best possible outcome for this dialogue at COP24.

In a note from the Minister regarding preparations for the twenty-fourth Conference of the Parties, we find a reminder of the principle that states are expected to act within their capabilities and decide for themselves what they want to achieve. This is a reference to the Polish media’s oft-cited comparison of EU and international climate policy. From the point of view of the Law and Justice government, EU regulations should be based on the same principle of voluntariness. And it does not matter that this would weaken the effectiveness of actions. Other states can do more if they want. What matters is that Poland not be forced to do so. It is significant that the note indicates a target that is “significantly below 2°C” and adaptive, and that no mention is made of the need to strive to hold the increase in average global temperature at 1.5°C.

In the same document, the Minister also announced that during COP24 Poland will share its experience in innovation and financial mechanisms for enabling climate-neutral development. It is the environment ministry chief’s opinion that one of the conditions for such development was and is to balance CO₂ emissions against their capture by ecosystems in order to halt the rise in atmospheric CO₂ concentrations, stabilise them and, finally, reduce them.

This point is often repeated in Prof. Szyszko’s statements. From his point of view, which the Polish government shares, introducing the concept of climate neutrality into the Paris Agreement means that we can focus our efforts on increasing emission absorption by forests and thus avoid the need for severe emission restrictions. In an earlier announcement the Minister stated clearly that “this is a return to a climate policy designed to protect the climate while also preserving the specificity of national economies, which is particularly important for Poland. The Paris Agreement guarantees that we will continue to be able to use our mineral resources”. So, we don’t have to give up coal energy.

It is positive that the Minister emphasises the connection between climate policy and sustainable development goals, and the solving of other burning global issues such as access to water, food, energy and education. However, we should pay attention to the definition of sustainable development which the Minister repeated during a press conference at COP23 on Thursday 16 November 2017. Namely, “reasonable use of natural resources for economic growth, in conjunction with preserving a good environmental state”. With the emphasis on economic growth.

At the same conference the Minister referred to the Bonn summit as an economic conference and emphasised that as the host of the next summit Poland would outline the direction for global sustainable development. This meeting with journalists was, after all, somewhat atypical for UN negotiations – although it took place during the summit in Bonn, not much attention was paid to the COP23 talks. As Prof. Szyszko indicated, it was mainly about summarising the activities of the department of the environment over the two years of the Law and Justice government. The message was not directed to the summit attendees, but to the domestic audience. The main conclusion they were to draw was the narrative that the ministry’s work was a series of success stories. There was not a word of any problems or mistakes. The only questions came from state television journalists and the government-friendly TV Trwam.

Part of the propaganda of success is the assertion that it was the hard work of the Polish delegation to COP21 in Paris that allowed targets for the quickest, most effective and cheapest possible reduction of atmospheric CO₂ to be adopted, in two fields of operations. The first was emission reduction through new technologies and innovative solutions for obtaining the maximum possible energy from traditional sources (read “coal”). The second field is using CO₂ held in the atmosphere to regenerate forests and soils in order to slow the negative effects of human activity in various regions of the world. The Minister emphatically stated that it was a result of our negotiators that absorption was treated on a par with emission reduction, and Poland’s State Forests are a model of how to use forests to absorb CO₂ emissions.

What exactly is the heavily promoted concept of Forest Carbon Farms? This is currently in the pilot project phase, which began in selected State Forest districts. The intention is to assess the influence of various scenarios of economic development on the carbon balance in the forest ecosystem. Forest engineering is planned, such as planting young trees in older forests, enriching reforestation, and introducing fast-growing species. At the same time, the project is designed to develop IT systems for calculating carbon content in the forest ecosystem. This sounds entirely reasonable and this kind of operation may certainly be useful. But how does it fit in to the Ministry of the Environment’s extensive narrative? Can we really increase absorption by forests to such an extent that we do not need a serious deep reduction of emissions? Of course not. Actions to limit deforestation and forest degradation, as well as afforestation, have long been taken into account in climate negotiations. The key is to ensure "additionality" and the durability of carbon bound up into wood and soil. The starting point is the carbon balance of healthy natural forests. In forest management, the planting of fast growing species will increase absorption, but can we talk about permanent binding if these trees are later felled, partly for use in construction and the furniture industry, and partly for paper manufacture or power generation?

The Minister said at the conference that our state and private forests are able to additionally absorb about 50 million tonnes of CO₂ per year, but did not mention durability, which is unfortunately impossible to guarantee, especially since changing climate conditions will subject forests to greater stress from heat waves and droughts, and increasingly frequent fires and pest infestations. Furthermore, according to the “Seventh Government Report and Third Biennial Report for the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change” recently published on the Ministry of the Environment website, the aggregated emissions for all estimated greenhouse gases in 2015 were equivalent to 385.8 million tonnes of CO₂. There is no chance that additional absorption would balance this out.

In the same speech the reference to the second priority in pursuing climate neutrality (after emission absorption by forests) was present, too - the innovation and use of Polish renewable energy sources, i.e. forest and agricultural biomass and geothermal energy. In the opinion of the Ministry of the Environment the first is decidedly the more important. Not a word was spoken about wind or solar energy.

Although it has little connection with the negotiations, it is hard not to notice the attempt to “clarify misunderstandings” regarding the logging being carried out in the Białowieża Primeval Forest. Thousands of researchers from around the world are protesting, there is a case in the EU Court of Justice, and Prof. Szyszko is utterly self-sacrificing in speaking on this subject at every opportunity. Unfortunately, the tactics of repeatedly re-stating arguments regardless of their validity may prove effective. According to the Minister, biodiversity in the forest has been preserved by the foresters, and they are now saving the forest, and the European Union's position on the matter is an example of a misunderstanding of the principles of Nature 2000. Period.

While discussing Poland’s role at COP23, the behaviour of its authorities within the European Union cannot be overlooked, because it impacts directly on the stances and actions of the entire EU delegation in the negotiation process. The other parties to the talks will not close their eyes to the effects of Poland blocking EU climate policy progress. And this time it was noticed. At the same time that debates were going on in Bonn, difficult negotiations were underway in Brussels on a reform of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). Representatives of the Polish government put a lot of effort into sabotaging solutions that would tighten the system and increase its effectiveness for 2020–2030. Special attention was paid to the possibility of using a modernisation fund to facilitate transformations in national energy systems. Many Western and Northern European countries believe that investments in bituminous coal or lignite should be forbidden. Poland is obviously opposed. Its authorities fought any solutions that might limit the ability to use the mechanism to support coal energy. The two-year process of work on the ETS reform ended with an overly watered-down compromise in order to exclude the funds generated by the system being invested in maintaining the role of coal in the energy mix. As a consequence, the ETS may be too ineffective for the EU to achieve the objectives of the Paris Agreement. For its toxic influence on EU politics, Poland received the “Fossil of the Day” award at COP23.

At the Bonn summit another scene played out in the discussion on ratifying the so-called Doha amendment, which aims to extend the Kyoto Protocol’s validity up to 2020. The European Union will have no problem achieving its objectives, since it has already met them. This has not prevented Poland from remaining the only EU country not to ratify the amendment. President Andrzej Duda vetoed the ratification at the beginning of his office in 2015. At COP23 other EU countries put heavy pressure on Poland to at least announce that this state of affairs would be repaired before the climate summit in Katowice. They even announced that ratification documents would be submitted individually, leaving Poland behind to face the wave of criticism alone. Many delegates – politicians not only from EU countries but above all from many developing countries – believe it to be decidedly inappropriate for the COP24 host not to fulfil its obligations and complete the ratification process. Although largely symbolic, this issue is important in building trust between the negotiating parties. The Polish government has tried to use ratification as a bargaining chip in a play for EU climate policy concessions, but ultimately the environment minister declared his ratification before the end of the summit. For the sake of our public image we must make good on this promise, post-haste.

Describing the work at COP23 and plans for next year, Minister Szyszko has repeatedly stated how good the cooperation with the Presidencies of Fiji and Morocco has been. The presidencies are jointly making the necessary preparations and consultations to find out delegates' expectations, share experiences, and build trust and confidence so that the talks go well. He declared that Poland would do everything to create the conditions for a fair and transparent negotiation process. We can assume that this will be the case, if only for national pride and the importance that the success of the negotiations has for the image of Poland. At next year’s summit, with over 30,000 people from nearly 200 countries participating, the Law and Justice government wants to demonstrate that we are having successes in the reduction and absorption of emissions.

The Polish plans for COP24 also include promoting the achievements of other Eastern European countries which, through political and economic changes, have achieved significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The Minister has stressed that these countries are implementing responsible policies that are conducive to climate protection while also contributing to economic development.

At the summit in Bonn, Minister Szyszko presented Katowice as an example of positive changes. He emphasised that it is a centre of culture and science, innovation and modern industry – a place of major national and international events (and, it must be admitted, it truly is). It is the opinion of the Ministry of the Environment that the situation in Upper Silesia and Zagłębie is evidence of what can be achieved through a coherent policy of sustainable development and economic transformation. It is a mining region that has undergone enormous transformation without major social unrest – a vivid illustration of the success of Poland’s sustainable development policy.

In reality, Katowice was never simply a mining region. Its transformation has been eased by the presence of other industries, but is by no means complete; nor has it been thus far without social costs. The state of bituminous coal mining in Silesia is difficult, with no foreseeable improvement. Theoretically, there could be enough raw material for 30 years, but the profitability of mining is increasingly troubled, while workers are increasingly hard to come by. Mines are quietly merged, crews moved. At the same time the region is struggling with the cumulative environmental effects of decades of mining. Degraded land needs to be reclaimed and air pollution reduced, with air quality in many places being dire, especially in the heating season. Average unemployment is low but, in places where the mines which closed in the 1990s were the main or only employers, residents continue to experience the consequences, such as long-term unemployment, dependence on social security and high levels of crime. These areas need support, and many people feel abandoned by the authorities. Rather than working with the locals to work on optimal ways to continue the transformation in the long term, on addressing pressing issues, and on developing support mechanisms for the region, the authorities are ignoring problems which are staring them in the face. The delegates who come to Katowice for COP24 and come up against the Polish Presidency’s extensive narrative of success stories should keep this in mind.

The host of the COP is expected to do more than just provide a comfortable space for conversation and smoothly coordinate the negotiation process. Poland should show that it is taking concrete action to limit national emissions. It will not achieve this by pointing to past successes which have resulted from a systemic transformation rather than from intentional climate policies. It will not help to point to “stand-in” solutions and argue that these will allow us to continue emitting. At the summit in Katowice we cannot avoid the discussion on the need to reduce coal’s share in the power mix and to develop programmes for the socially-just transformation of coal regions.

The views and conclusions contained in this text express the views of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the Heinrich Böll Foundation.