wants to reposition the us as a world leader on the issue and already he has been reversing donald trump is back row on climate regulations and he has pledged a net zero emissions no later than 2050 and to do that, he has been pushing on ambitious agenda to switch to green energy. that includes around 500 dollars in incentives to encourage clean energy but because of political opposition, he was forced to drop a key provision which is penalising the polluters, so his plan has lost punch. it is mostly carrots that now are not sticking. it is the largest investment that any us government has ever made in terms of combating climate change and that is something that mister biden will be emphasising that by emphasising in glasgow. yeah, we should say we had updated figures from china over the last few days so they said the emissions will be by 2030 and then talking about getting to net zero x 2060, not by the middle of the century and, if that

was part of the problem with the statement that we got from rome, that the chinese didn't like the commitment in your language, so through the course of the day, it was watered down. as for india, we had no updated national declared contribution from them but we are expecting we might get something over the course of the next few days here in glasgow. you'll see. let me show you the stage in because we are expecting to hear from the us president, joe biden. you can see the us flag alongside the italian flag and as margaret was just saying, the slight frustration i think for the american president is that he comes here with only a framework deal on his climate legislation. $550,000,000,000 will be in that bill but he would like to have got more in that signed and sealed before you got your. that will not happen but perhaps it doesn't give him some leeway to begin negotiations here in glasgow.

lets in the meantime here a little from what we got earlier from the prime minister, he said global leaders will have to go further with their commitments to meet the cop26 targets, and he says of the whole thing fails, pledges like the paris agreement would become meaningless. we have seen progress in the last few days and weeks, saudi arabia, australia, russia have all made net zero commitments, meaning 80% of the global economy will wipe out its contribution to climate change by the middle of the century, up from 30%, thanks to the uk's cop26 leadership. countries such as the united states have doubled their spending on climate aid. every nation at this summit will end the financial support for international unabated coal projects by the end of this year. but these commitments, welcome as they are, eye drops any

rapidly warming ocean when we consider the challenge we have all admitted is ahead of us. just 12 g20 members have committed to reaching net zero 2050 or earlier. barely half of us have submitted improved plans for how we will cut carbon emissions since the paris summit in 2015. we have also failed to meet our commitments for $1 billion a year to support developing countries to grow in a clean and sustainable way. the un says emissions will rise by 15% by 2030, and they need a half by 15% by 2030, and they need a half by then. the countries most responsible for historic and present—day emissions are not yet doing theirfair share of present—day emissions are not yet doing their fair share of the work. if we are going to prevent cop26 from being a failure, that must change, and i must be clear, if glasgow fails, then the whole thing

fails. the paris agreement will have crumpled at the first reckoning. the world's only mechanism, viable mechanism for dealing with climate change will be holed beneath the water line. right now the paris agreement and the hope that came with it is just a piece of paper. we need to feel that piece of paper, to populate it with real progress, and i know that humanity has in it the power to rise to the challenge. the uk has proved it can be dan, we have our greenhouse gas emissions by 44% in the last 30 years whilst increasing our gdp by 78%, and we are cutting our contribution to climate change more and more everyday. we have made some progress at this g20, we have had a reasonable g20. but there is a huge

way still to go. we all know that we have the technology. what we need to do now is to raise the finance, but above all we need the political will in glasgow to make those commitments and to keep alive the hope of restraining the growth in our temperatures to 1.5 degrees. boris johnson in rome, _ temperatures to 1.5 degrees. boris johnson in rome, setting - temperatures to 1.5 degrees. boris johnson in rome, setting the tone for what welcome tomorrow here in glasgow. as borisjohnson says, paris was the watch, and glasgow is about translating into mahal, how you populate the paper with all ambitions that were set in paris, but one of the main principles was to ensure that going forward, countries would revisit their pledges and set new and more ambitious proposals. they call that the ratchet, that is why in recent weeks we have had countries like the

uk, us, many in the eu coming forward with new nationally determined contributions, 49 countries have now committed to a net zero target by 2050, another a0 have indicated they will sometime in the future set summer targets. polities these —— policies on a stand while they were? 0ne polities these —— policies on a stand while they were? one key part of the mix is carbon capture and storage, a technology that has existed for 50 years, forms a major part of many plans to get to get to net zero, yet today globally, we capture barely 0.i% net zero, yet today globally, we capture barely 0.1% of what we are met. we need to get that figure to around 10%, we need to capture 10% of what we put into the atmosphere. professor stuart hazell dean from edinburgh university is one of the world's foremost experts on carbon capture and i asked him if the technology works. it capture and i asked him if the technology works.— capture and i asked him if the technology works. it has been workin: technology works. it has been working since _ technology works. it has been working since the _ technology works. it has been working since the 1970s - technology works. it has been working since the 1970s in - technology works. it has been i

working since the 1970s in many working since the 19705 in many applications worldwide, but not all focu5 applications worldwide, but not all focus on climate mitigation, it is used often in oil refineries, natural gas production, but there is no doubt that millions of tonnes a year can be captured, transported and stored 5afely underground by this type of technology. 50 and stored safely underground by this type of technology.— and stored safely underground by this type of technology. so why is it not being _ this type of technology. so why is it not being rolled _ this type of technology. so why is it not being rolled out _ this type of technology. so why is it not being rolled out more - this type of technology. so why is| it not being rolled out more widely thanis it not being rolled out more widely than is the case at the moment? you are uuite than is the case at the moment? you are quite right _ than is the case at the moment? 7m, are quite right that we are way behind on this type of action. in all of the climate 5imulation5 behind on this type of action. in all of the climate simulations and modelling of how to get to net zero, carbon capture and storage is essential for the last 20%, the most difficult 20% that this helps you with. what i think... we are stuck with. what i think... we are stuck with the political inaction and the market inaction which has not been led by governments, so governments need to get on the front fruit and try to innovate this and make this to be business as usual in their countries, and that means doing

5lightly tough things like either putting a tax or price on carbon dioxide emissions so that it is cheaper to capture, or the alternative, saying that we are not going to place a price on it, you, the oil and gas producers, have to store one tonne of carbon for every tonic carbon you produce, only that way will be get into the arithmetic balance of the carbon emi55ion with the carbon take—back obligation which has to make it work. so the carbon take—back obligation which has to make it work. 50 it the carbon take-back obligation which has to make it work. so it is -auttin which has to make it work. so it is putting the _ which has to make it work. so it is putting the obligation _ which has to make it work. so it is putting the obligation on - which has to make it work. so it is putting the obligation on the - putting the obligation on the emitters, but it is also ensuring emitter5, but it is also ensuring that for those who developed the technology and there is a profit and incentive to get more and more companies using it?— incentive to get more and more companies using it? correct, because nothin: in companies using it? correct, because nothing in our — companies using it? correct, because nothing in our industrial _ companies using it? correct, because nothing in our industrial societies - nothing in our industrial societies works for very long unle55 nothing in our industrial societies works for very long unless it makes a profit. that is not as difficult as it sounds, because if the tax is included or obligation, cost of disposable of c02 is included in the

price that we pay for the fundamental product, petrol or diesel or gas which goes to form the electricity we use in our home5,... leaders are starting to arrive here in glasgow, one of the first to arrive i5 in glasgow, one of the first to arrive is a swedish prime minister. i have been talking to him about his country's progress in reducing carbon emissions. he explained how important it was to go beyond that 1.5 degrees target and move towards a low carbon economy. first 1.5 degrees target and move towards a low carbon economy.— a low carbon economy. first we need to make sure — a low carbon economy. first we need to make sure we _ a low carbon economy. first we need to make sure we stick— a low carbon economy. first we need to make sure we stick to _ a low carbon economy. first we need to make sure we stick to the - to make sure we stick to the 1.5 degrees goal, that is the overarching purpose of this. in order to be able to do so the national determined contributions are important. tho5e well not be discussed or negotiated here but the di5cussed or negotiated here but the way we calculate and report emissions is important added that

it's something we need to fulfil from the paris agreement so that we can agree on how to calculate, report emissions and the next thing is of course the climate financing, we still lack some $20 billion to reach the promise of 100 billion us dollars. 50 reach the promise of 100 billion us dollars. , ., ., ., , dollars. so it is about galvanising ambitions and _ dollars. so it is about galvanising ambitions and setting _ dollars. so it is about galvanising ambitions and setting the - dollars. so it is about galvanising ambitions and setting the path i ambitions and setting the path forward. we talked about president putin, delegation say, is the work to impress on you the seriousness of what we face and in a way send them home with a flea in there? yes. what we face and in a way send them home with a flea in there?— home with a flea in there? yes, but also to show _ home with a flea in there? yes, but also to show the _ home with a flea in there? yes, but also to show the possibility, - home with a flea in there? yes, but also to show the possibility, this . also to show the possibility, this is perhaps the most important aspect right now, to see that what we do with the transition is that we get closer to a better society. we can cnc in that we can lower emissions

at the same time as we create new jobs —— we can see en suite in. when job5 —— we can see en suite in. when you have new technology, newjobs, future welfare. fossil free steel is almost a reality, we are building the largest battery factories in europe because we need to electrify our transport sector. in a north of sweden, they are now expanding, building a new society, this is as big as when we built the welfare system in sweden, the social democracy, this is a huge task, but it is positive, it has possibilities.- it is positive, it has possibilities. it is positive, it has ossibilities. ., ., ., possibilities. you have some of the hiuhest possibilities. you have some of the highest carbon _ possibilities. you have some of the highest carbon taxes _ possibilities. you have some of the highest carbon taxes in _ possibilities. you have some of the highest carbon taxes in europe, - possibilities. you have some of the highest carbon taxes in europe, do | highest carbon taxes in europe, do they work? highest carbon taxes in europe, do the work? ~ , , highest carbon taxes in europe, do they work?— highest carbon taxes in europe, do the work? ~ , , ., ., they work? absolutely, we have had carbon taxes — they work? absolutely, we have had carbon taxes for _ they work? absolutely, we have had

carbon taxes for 30 _ they work? absolutely, we have had carbon taxes for 30 years. _ they work? absolutely, we have had carbon taxes for 30 years. it - they work? absolutely, we have had carbon taxes for 30 years. it forces. carbon taxes for 30 years. it forces companies — carbon taxes for 30 years. it forces companies to _ carbon taxes for 30 years. it forces companies to change _ carbon taxes for 30 years. it forces companies to change their - carbon taxes for 30 years. it forces i companies to change their behaviour? yes. do they pass the cast onto consumers? —— pasta course. thea;c yes. do they pass the cast onto consumers? -- pasta course. they are chanauin consumers? -- pasta course. they are changing their— consumers? -- pasta course. they are changing their business _ consumers? -- pasta course. they are changing their business models - consumers? -- pasta course. they are changing their business models so - changing their business models so they are thinking totally different. i cannot say that that never happened, it might be so, but we cannot see that have so dramatically increased prices in general. we keep inflation, as all the other countries, but now it works, we see the system in europe works, so we need to make sure we have a global carbon tax. i5 need to make sure we have a global carbon tax. . need to make sure we have a global carbon tax— carbon tax. is it getting harder for euro ean carbon tax. is it getting harder for european leaders _ carbon tax. is it getting harder for european leaders to _ carbon tax. is it getting harder for european leaders to keep - carbon tax. is it getting harder forl european leaders to keep investing in fo55il european leaders to keep investing in fossil fuel exploration? european leaders to keep investing in fossilfuel exploration? i european leaders to keep investing in fossil fuel exploration? i talk to the last hour, there are a0 fo55il to the last hour, there are a0 fossil fuel project5 to the last hour, there are a0 fossil fuel projects in the pipeline in the uk. for all the ambition that bori5 in the uk. for all the ambition that borisjohnson has said, why would you press on with that when we cannot bernard or use it? it is dead

money. —— cannot burn it. i will cannot bernard or use it? it is dead money. -- cannot burn it.— money. -- cannot burn it. iwill not interfere in — money. -- cannot burn it. iwill not interfere in domestic— money. -- cannot burn it. iwill not interfere in domestic politics - money. -- cannot burn it. iwill not interfere in domestic politics here | interfere in domestic politics here but i will say there is no future in fossil. we need to get rid of the fossil, otherwise we cannot tell our fo55il, otherwise we cannot tell our children and the coming generations that we did our utmo5t children and the coming generations that we did our utmost to make sure that we did our utmost to make sure that we did our utmost to make sure that we deal with this very serious issue, so i think wejust that we deal with this very serious issue, so i think we just need to make sure the path mu5t issue, so i think we just need to make sure the path must be to get rid of fossil, get rid of fossil, thatis rid of fossil, get rid of fossil, that is what we need to do. share rid of fossil, get rid of fossil, that is what we need to do. are we doinu that is what we need to do. are we doing enough _ that is what we need to do. are we doing enough to — that is what we need to do. are we doing enough to cement _ that is what we need to do. are we doing enough to cement in - that is what we need to do. are we doing enough to cement in place . that is what we need to do. are we i doing enough to cement in place the changes and regulations that we need? your success and they come along and say, no, i don't like the commitments, i want to change. you know the seriousness of the challenge because you have been to a number of these 5ummits, your success hasn't, do we need to embody what you decide out what the readers here decide in the regulations so that others cannot wriggle out of

it? , , , that others cannot wriggle out of it? _ , it? firstly, my successor, i believe it? firstly, my successor, i believe it will be that — it? firstly, my successor, i believe it will be that one, _ it? firstly, my successor, i believe it will be that one, it _ it? firstly, my successor, i believe it will be that one, it will _ it? firstly, my successor, i believe it will be that one, it will not - it will be that one, it will not change that, but there is a risk depending on who, but i think the feeling is so strong for this to reverse this, go another way and say we can keep fo55il, i don't think it is possible. you'll also see enterpri5e5, finance sector investing more and more in green, and renewable5, they do not want to invest in fossils, i think it is going on the right direction. it will be hard to reverse, almost impossible, but we need to speed up the pace. the impossible, but we need to speed up the ace. ~ . impossible, but we need to speed up the ace. ~ , ,, the pace. the prime minister sweden there, the second _ the pace. the prime minister sweden there, the second most _ the pace. the prime minister sweden there, the second most famous - the pace. the prime minister sweden. there, the second most famous swede here and glasgow at the moment, the other being great thin bag. interesting that he says about the

size of the challenge, he equated to building the social system, even bigger than that i would say, what we are talking about this week add week after its real wiring idly planning of the global economy, it is unprecedented. everything here will he decided having massive implications for the way we heat and build our homes, what we eat, the way we travel to work. there will be many leaders who say the size of the challenges to bay, there are others who say, what do we do? give up? or do we take on heddon, the swedish pragmatist quite optimistic that they are making real progress —— take it head on. we are safely here in glasgow but hundreds of passengers are hoping to travel here for cop26 who came by train and are not by car, and have been left waiting inside london's euston station. that is because we have had some awful weather along the way and

a number of fallen trees