Santos FC and COP28 – 12/16/2023 – Candido Bracher

“How did you go broke?”

“In two ways. Gradually, and then suddenly.”

I believe that the frequency with which this dialogue from Hemingway’s novel “The Sun Also Rises” is cited is due not only to its originality, humor and conciseness but mainly to the fact that the sequence “gradually and then suddenly” applies to various situations.

Just a few days ago, a particularly painful event for me fit perfectly into the picture: the relegation of Santos FC to Series B of the Brazilian Championship. It is certainly not possible to look for an explanation for the disaster in the missed goals against Fortaleza on the 6th, nor even in the crushing defeats in the last three matches of the championship.

The relegation had been gradually approaching over several years of inept management, bad hiring, discontinuity and almost the complete list of problems that can afflict the management of any company.

Among the emotions that excited fans during the acts of vandalism that spanned the Santos dawn, one was not justified: surprise. It was “ball sung”.

The fact makes us think about how many processes of degradation can be in gradual progress, without us noticing, or —better said— allowing us to ignore the decay so as not to occupy our mind with unpleasant thoughts.

At any stage of life, if we examine our professional activities, our emotional relationships, old projects, we will very likely find reasons to question whether in this, or in that specific case, a slow decline is not occurring.

Understanding its causes may not always be enough to avoid the outcome, but at least it allows us to become conscious agents in its conduct.

Even in situations in which the end is inescapable — as Manuel Bandeira addressed the “unwanted of people”, death —, awareness of the mechanisms that act on our health allows us to decisively influence the deadline and the conditions under which we will reach it. In this domain, the “sudden”, the surprise, must be reserved for exceptions.

But, if as human beings there is no way to escape death, the same does not apply to humanity as a whole. The intellectual resources that made man the dominant species on Earth must also be sufficient to ensure the continuity of the species.

This belief has been put to the test by the way in which threats to the planet “gradually” evolve.

A few hours before the drama in Vila Belmiro, the Global Tipping Points Report, coordinated by the University of Exeter, was released at the Climate Conference (COP28) in Dubai.

The text warns of the imminent triggering of irreversible climate phenomena “representing risks of a magnitude never before faced by humanity” according to its coordinator.

These phenomena “include the collapse of the great ice caps of Greenland and West Antarctica, widespread thawing of permafrost, the death of coral reefs in warm waters, and the collapse of an ocean current in the North Atlantic.”

The report’s descriptions provoke the unpleasant sensation that, as changes intensify, we may move from the territory of the “gradual” to the “sudden.”

However, until the eve of the closing of COP28, everything indicated that the world would continue its suicidal trajectory of prioritizing immediate financial interests over the imperative need to contain the process of global warming, through the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. , three quarters of which are due to the burning of fossil fuels (coal, gas and petroleum derivatives).

The draft, released at 45 of the second half, invited “to take initiatives that could include reducing the consumption and production of fossil fuels”. Despite mentioning the term “fossil fuels” for the first time, it made the recommendation seem like a menu, in which countries could choose, or not, to restrict the production and use of oil and its derivatives.

Al Gore, who has been warning about climate risks for more than 20 years, said of the document: “It is deeply offensive to everyone who took this process seriously.”

The representative of one of the Pacific island countries added dramatically: “We will not go silently into our watery graves.” The indignation provoked by the minutes was such that it caused the meeting to be extended for almost 24 hours.

At the end of the COP work, on Wednesday (13), skeptics — myself included — were surprised by the announcement of an agreement approved by 200 countries, which for the first time urges all nations to abandon fossil fuels “in a fair, orderly and equitable, accelerating action in this critical decade to achieve zero emissions by 2050.”

In practice, over the next two years, all nations must present a formal and detailed plan, explaining how they will reduce their GHG emissions by 2035.

The agreement is not perfect, it does not have the force of law and several nations place restrictions on it, which is to be expected in a commitment involving so many parties with different interests.

There are reasons to celebrate, after 30 years, the inclusion of fossil fuels in the final text, but much remains to be done. Perhaps “beyond expectations, less than necessary” is the expression that best reflects the result of the meeting.

Brazil was far from international headlines during the COP, except for the unedifying event of joining OPEC+. I do not doubt, however, that our representatives acted strongly behind the scenes, as is often the Itamaraty style. I believe that the country should only regret the lack of emphasis given to the issue of “nature-based solutions” for GHG capture during the meeting.

In any case, the progress achieved at the meeting allows us to dream, in two or three decades, of the following dialogue between the atmosphere and fossil fuels:

“How did you guys get discontinued?”

“In two ways. Gradually, and then suddenly.”