The Saudi delegation has flatly opposed any language in a deal that would even mention fossil fuels — the oil, gas and coal that, when burned, create emissions that are dangerously heating the planet. Saudi negotiators have also objected to a provision, endorsed by at least 118 countries, aimed at tripling global renewable energy capacity by 2030.

  • xilliah@beehaw.orgdeleted by creator
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 years ago

    Well they already live in a desert so what do they have to lose? And they’re rich enough to be able to afford all kinds of tech.

    • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 years ago

      They already import 80% of their food and 40% of the water they consume is not replenishing. That is besides being in an already unstable region of the world, which would become largely uninhabitable with climate change going on further. So when oil either runs out or they can not sell it anymore, they are in a really bad spot.

  • Nacktmull@lemm.eedeleted by creator
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 years ago

    They are obviously the one country that must not be asked about this.

  • Ben Matthews@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 years ago

    Saudi Arabia has had an active delegation at every IPCC meeting over three decades - no excuse to be unaware, they always manage to scrape as close as possible to rejection from the process. By the way we misrepresent by saying “Saudi Arabia” - petro-dollars are only existential for an autocratic government (similar applies to gas-putin) - Arabian population would benefit from less climate change (their region will approach uninhabitable in summer - pity COP was not in July - note how they moved world-cup).