Green News

At the Cop28 climate conference taking place in Dubai, oil and gas producers are counting on carbon capture and storage (CCS) for a social license to keep drilling as usual. Don’t fall for it.

While it can be helpful at the margins, CCS cannot possibly deliver reductions in greenhouse gas emissions on the scale needed to avert climate disaster. This can only happen if the main sources of emissions – fossil fuels – are phased out.

CCS is expected to deliver less than a tenth of the cumulative carbon dioxide emission reductions, over the 2023-2050 period, needed to hold global warming to 1.5C.

In the International Energy Agency net zero emission (NZE) scenario, CCS captures approximately 1.5 billion tons (GT) of CO2 in 2030, and 6 GT by 2050. But very little of that is applied to emissions from fossil fuel production and combustion. It is primarily used to capture CO2 from sectors where emissions are harder and more expensive to reduce, such as cement production or chemicals.

Is the IEA NZE scenario the only way to achieve net-zero emission and limit the temperature increase to 1.5C? Certainly not. There are different scenarios out there, including those of the Energy Transition Commission and McKinsey. And scenarios coming out of models are not to be confused with reality. The fossil fuel industry claims it can achieve the same objectives as in the IEA NZE scenario, while producing more oil and gas, by relying more heavily on CCS. Is this true?

50% more expensive

Another IEA scenario, the stated policies scenario, gives the answer. Reaching net-zero carbon emissions in this way would require the capture of 32 GT of CO2 emissions by 2050, including 23 GT through direct air capture (DAC).

At this scale, DAC alone would require 26,000 TWh of electricity to operate, which is more than the total global electricity demand today. Reaching net-zero emissions in this way would be 50% more expensive (for an annual investment cost of $6.9 trillions) than in the IEA NZE scenario.

People in the oil and gas industry know there is zero probability of this high-CCS scenario coming true. They are not even seriously investing in it, but waiting for governments, through taxpayers, to pick up the bill. The reality is they are just fooling us one more time, to buy time we can’t afford to waste in dealing with the climate crisis.

For all these reasons, framing the objective of the energy and climate transitions in the Cop28 decision text as “phasing out unabated [i.e. without CCS] fossil fuel emissions”, without specifying the order of magnitude of CCS in the overall portfolio of zero-carbon energy solutions (approximately 10%), and its primary use (hard-to-abate sectors, outside the oil and gas industry), would be profoundly misleading.

Focus on real solutions

It would also be a missed opportunity for Cop28 to send a clear signal of where investments should be going in the energy sector, to ensure climate safety as much as energy security and future profits of energy companies: energy efficiency and savings; the deployment of renewable energies and other zero-carbon energy solutions (green hydrogen, sustainable biofuels, synthetic fuels, etc.); the complete decarbonization of the power sector (electricity generation); and the electrification of energy demand.

Today, the oil and gas industry is not part of the energy transition: it represent only 1% of the total investment ($1.8 trillion in 2022) in clean energy solutions, globally. And it invests only about 2.5% of its own record-high profits into clean energy, as opposed to the further expansion of oil and gas.

What should be the ratio of investments between zero-carbon energy solutions and the maintenance of existing oil and gas facilities, to limit the temperature increase to 1.5C? 50/50 by 2030, says the IEA in its fossil fuels special report, before it shifts further in the direction of a complete phase out from fossil fuels.

These should be the real objectives of Cop28, in relation to the energy transition. Otherwise, we are just mixing up the signal and the noise, confusing what should be the priority (phasing-out fossil fuels, phasing-in zero-carbon energy solutions) and what is a small part of the strategy (CCS) for a successful energy transition.

Laurence Tubiana is the CEO and Emmanuel Guérin is a fellow at the European Climate Foundation.

The post Don’t be fooled: CCS is no solution to oil and gas emissions appeared first on Climate Home News.

When Vietnam and a group of rich countries struck up a $15.5 billion energy transition deal nearly a year ago, they set out an enticing prospect: cheap financing would help the nation leave coal behind. 

But, as vague ambitions now turn into concrete plans, the reality looks rather different.

A timeline for the early closure of coal power plants is absent from the investment blueprint for the Just Energy Transition Partnership (Jetp) unveiled at a Cop28 side event on Friday. The government expects instead to operate plants “flexibly” and to rely on the controversial co-firing of biomass and ammonia with coal.

Rich countries have also largely backtracked on their initial promise to offer financial support on more attractive terms than Vietnam could already secure from investors. Nearly 60% of the money will be provided as commercial loans, while the tiny share of grants available is primarily earmarked for technical support, the 223-page document shows.

Leo Roberts, a coal transition expert at E3G, said there are “major reasons” to be concerned.

“The investment plan is no longer the pathway to replacing coal power with clean alternatives the Jetp originally promised. Instead, it focuses on expensive or unproven technologies,” he added. “Those directly undermine the pace and scale of the energy transition.”

Hydropower push

Nearly a year after the initial announcement, Vietnam’s prime minister Pham Minh Chinh has mapped out how Vietnam aims to spend the $15.5 billion pledged by G7 nations to boost the deployment of renewables and cut dependence on coal.

Under the agreement, Vietnam aims to peak its emissions by 2030 – five years earlier than planned – and source close to half of its power from renewable energy within the same timeframe.

The development of dozens of hydropower projects across the country forms the backbone of the government’s strategy to hit the targets. A significant proportion of the donors’ money is already directly allocated to those projects. While the plants are a source of low-emission energy, the construction of dams and reservoirs has caused social and environmental issues in the country, including displacement and water scarcity.

The Vietnamese government also plans to expand its power grid, bolster battery storage, and invest in offshore wind and solar.

Contested coal conversion

New coal plants will continue to be built until 2030, while the government drafts a more detailed plan to deal with existing ones.

A phase-out of coal power plants at a large scale “is not feasible in the near-term” – the investment plan states – “but some older plants may be able to transition to alternative energy sources and uses”. In particular, those that have operating for at least 20 years will begin a phased conversion to biomass and ammonia “provided the price is right”.

NGOs have criticised the use of biomass co-firing, on the basis it prolongs the life of coal plants, emits more CO2 than is commonly accounted for and harms forest ecosystems. Ammonia co-firing is “very costly and has limited feasibility for deployment at scale”, according to E3G.

Loans not grants

A major issue is rich countries are reluctant to commit public money as grants. None have directly allocated finance to retire coal plants early. The plan refers to a need for social security and retraining of workers affected by the transition, but it is unclear who will pay for this.

Contributors prefer to invest in renewable energy projects, which bring a return through electricity sales.

Over half of the $8 billion in public finance will be “commercial” loans disbursed by development banks. Cheaper loans on concessional terms represent roughly a third of the package. Grants make up less than 4% of the money offered by governments, with guarantees and equity contributing to the total.

Commercial banks, part of the GFANZ coalition, are expected to invest the remaining $7.5 billion of the package.

At the launch event, the Vietnamese prime minister was flanked by the EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen and the UK net zero minister Claire Coutinho.

Von der Leyen called the partnership “a success story”. It is “a good example of everything we want to achieve here at Cop28,” she said. “We want to bring emissions down while driving economic growth up.”

She was echoed by Coutinho, who told Minh Chinh “we are uniting all our efforts behind you”. The Jetp model is “powerful”, she added, “because it is just”.

Silence over environmentalists’ crackdown

Neither of them raised concerns about human rights. The Vietnamese government has brutally cracked down on the civil society representatives that would normally have been key stakeholders in the programme.

Five environmentalists have been jailed in the last two years on tax evasion charges, which human rights groups say are trumped-up accusations. In the most recent case, Hoang Thi Minh Hong, director of the campaign group CHANGE, was handed a three-year prison sentence and a 100 million Vietnamese dong ($4,100) fine last September.

Vietnamese campaigner Hoang Thi Minh Hong was sentenced to three years in prison last September. Photo: CHANGE/350Vietnam

Two weeks earlier Ngo Thi To Nhien, director of an independent energy policy think-tank, had been arrested on a charge of “appropriating documents of agencies and organizations”. Nhien worked for the EU, the UN, and the World Bank and, before her detention, had reportedly provided technical advice for the development of the Jetp.

At the time, the EU, Germany, the US, and UK said they were deeply concerned about the imprisonment of environmentalists.

Campaigners decried the silence over the crackdown at the investment plan launch.

“We urge multilateral development banks and donor governments not to bulldoze ahead with the Jetp,” said Tanya Lee Roberts Davis, NGO Forum on ADB’s Just Transitions Advocacy Coordinator. “Doing so would mean acting as complicit bystanders in the silencing and reprisals faced by community rights, workers’, environmental, and climate advocates.”

The post Vietnam charts uncertain coal path as finance falls short appeared first on Climate Home News.

It was UAE National Day yesterday in Dubai. While citizens celebrated with fireworks and drone shows, world leaders convened for a big dinner at Cop28, their speeches made. 

In one of the last speeches of the day, US vice-president Kamala Harris promised $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund, claiming the country is “a leader in the effort to expand international climate finance”.

Now she has to get it past Republicans in Congress, something that kept the US from delivering all of Barack Obama’s 2014 $3 billion pledge.

Italy, Switzerland, Portugal and Estonia have also announced GCF contributions at Cop28.

Several world leaders condemned Israel’s resuming attacks on Gaza, among them Lebanon, Syria, Turkey and South Africa. Harris skipped an event on energy transition to attend talks on the developing situation.

‘Greenwashing’ oil and gas initiative

Sultan Al Jaber’s much-touted Oil and Gas Charter “to speed up climate action in the industry” has seen the light of day.

Fifty oil and gas majors, representing 40% of global production, have committed to achieving net zero emissions by 2050 from their operations. That ignores the emissions caused by burning the stuff – 80-95% of the sector’s carbon footprint.

Other targets are ending routine flaring by 2030, and near-zero upstream methane emissions. Many oil majors, Al Jaber’s Adnoc included, have failed to implement bans on routine flaring.

Barbados’s prime minister Mia Mottley used her speech to target methane. Two years after a global methane pledge was launched in Glasgow, she said, “the global methane agreement that the world needs to see has not yet come.”

Mottley called for regulation and compliance – not voluntary commitments – to make oil and gas companies fix pipelines and stop flaring.

A group of 320 civil society organisations has written a letter to the Cop28 presidency saying the initiative should be dropped as it “serves primarily to greenwash the fossil fuel industry”.

In brief

Going nuclear – Twenty-two countries have pledged to collectively triple their nuclear energy capacity by 2050 from 2023 levels. They include the US, Canada, Japan, South Korea, UAE, UK and France.

Holy phase out – Pope Francis pleaded with Cop28 delegates to drop fossil fuels and engage in “lifestyles that are less dependent” on them. He was scheduled to deliver a speech in Dubai but pulled out due to health issues. Cardinal Pietro Parolin read his remarks instead.

Oil stays at home – Norway joined a group of countries pledging to stop financing fossil fuels internationally. The Clean Energy Transition Partnership, formed in 2021, has 40 members including the US, Canada and several EU countries.

Best forests forever – Brazil launched its proposal for a global fund to protect tropical forests in up to 80 countries. The Tropical Forest Forever Facility would mobilize at least $250 billion in existing resources and pay for conserved tropical forests in member countries.

Better late than never – The US has signed on to Powering Past Coal Alliance. Japan is now the only G7 country that has not committed to phasing out unabated coal power, although its prime minister Fumio Kishida said it would stop building unabated coal power plants.

Keep it in the ground – Colombia joined a group of nine countries calling for an international treaty to leave fossil fuels on the ground. It is the only fossil fuel producer among member countries, which consist mostly of small island states.

Bridgetown to IDB – Mottley’s climate adviser Avinash Persaud has announced he will leave government to become climate adviser to the Inter-American Development Bank’s president, starting 16 January.

The post Cop28 bulletin: US GCF pledge and ‘greenwash’ oil and gas charter appeared first on Climate Home News.

The US has promised $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund (GCF), for reducing emissions and adapting to climate change in developing countries.

US vice-president Kamala Harris made the promise at the Cop28 summit in Dubai on Saturday, claiming the US is “a leader in the effort to expand international climate finance”.

Together with pledges from Italy, Switzerland, Portugal and Estonia, it brings the total raised in the latest GCF replenishment round to $12.7 billion.

If delivered, it puts the GCF on course for what its secretariat describes in internal documents as a middling level of ambition.

But to deliver, Harris and Joe Biden ‘s administration will have to persuade Republicans in Congress to approve the money or take control of Congress by winning elections.

Mixed reaction

Reaction to the pledge was mixed. ActionAid USA’s Kelly Stone said it was a “far cry from what is needed”.

She pointed out that the US still owed the GCF $1 billion from a $3 billion Obama-era pledge in 2014. “In reality, they are only pledging $2 billion in new money,” she said.

Erika Lennon, a GCF-watcher from the Center for International Environmental Law, said that pledging less than the $3 billion Barack Obama pledged nine years ago is “unacceptable”.

“The climate crisis has worsened, the need for climate finance is greater and the US pledge has stagnated. The US can and must do better,” she said.

!function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",(function(a){if(void 0!==a.data["datawrapper-height"]){var e=document.querySelectorAll("iframe");for(var t in a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var r=0;r

Liane Schalatek from the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung foundation said it was "well below a fair share" and E3G's Alden Meyer said the US was "punching well below its weight".

The US's $3 billion is the biggest pledge of the fundraising round but its economy is far bigger than the other big donors in Europe and Japan.

But the Sierra Club's head Eva Hernandez said she was "encouraged" and the NRDC's Manish Bapna said it was "a promising signal of the USA's commitment to spur clean energy and promote resilience in vulnerable countries".

Congress problems

The US failed to deliver all of Obama's $3 billion pledge because of opposition from Republicans in Congress and later from Donald Trump in the White House. The Biden administration faces the same political headwinds.

In Congress, the House of Representatives, is currently controlled by the Republican Party. The Senate has a slim majority for Biden's Democrats.

Alden Meyer said getting GCF spending through the House of Representatives was not possible "unless they change their stance on it".

"There's three things they don't like about the GCF," he joked, "that its green, that it's for the climate and that it's a fund - other than that, they're fine with it".

As it happened: World leaders at Cop28

The best hope for getting funding through Congress, Meyer said, is for the Democrats to win the Presidential election next year and the Congressional elections at the same time.

The Biden administration could also use more general funds approved by Congress to channel money to the GCF, Meyer said, although that risks Congressional support for those funds.

A Trump victory in next year's elections would dampen any hopes of delivering the money. It was Donald Trump who, in his first term, refused to honour the remaining $2 billion of Obama's $3 billion pledge. He said the fund was "costing the United States a vast fortune".

In April, the Biden administration said it would pay $1 billion of this $2 billion but even that $1 billion has yet to reach the GCF's account.

This record of under-delivery has angered developing countries. In January, African members of the GCF board tried to block the US from co-chairing the board but later backed down.

The post US tees up Congress battle with $3bn Green Climate Fund pledge appeared first on Climate Home News.

In the early hours of Friday in Dubai, a city surrounded by oil and gas plants, a draft text emerged at Cop28 that opened the possibility of phasing out all fossil fuels.  

Other options are to “phase down” all fossil fuels, to focus purely on coal or to say nothing at all. The coin is in the air.

The text is in response to the global stocktake of progress to meet the Paris Agreement goals.

The draft recognises that current policies have made some progress to avoid the worst climate change scenarios, but “notes with significant concern” that we’re still not in line with the Paris Agreement goals of limiting warming to 2°C and aiming for 1.5°C.  

Russia wants a “phase out” to be removed from the text, saying it would “discriminate” against their economy. The Cop28 presidency has used language suggesting preference for a “phase down” of fossil fuels. 

The global stocktake text also proposes to end fossil fuel subsidies with “fairness”, as well as tripling renewable energy and doubling energy efficiency — two goals that have attracted broad support.  

Some bits did not make it into the draft, observers said. While the text does have a target for cutting emissions by 2030, it does not include a medium-term target for 2035. The IPCC says the world must cut emissions by 60% by then to keep us in with a chance of meeting the 1.5°C target.

Latest headlines

• As it happened: World leaders speaking at Cop28
• Countries pledge $400m to set up loss and damage fund

Circus comes to town 

More than 150 world leaders arrived in Dubai for day 2 of Cop28, where they announced modest funding pledges and bids for future Cops – but no new emissions targets. 

Their presence was felt by delegates on the ground. Parts of the venue were blocked for leaders to move, forcing people to take longer routes and cutting off access to a section of the conference. Journalists were told they needed special tickets and escorts to enter the main press conference room. 

The day started with a Climate Ambition Summit. UN chief Antonio Guterres took the stage to urge leaders to agree on a fossil fuel phase out. “Not reduce. Not abate. Phase out – with a clear timeframe aligned with 1.5 degrees,” he said. 

Then came the usual parade of national leaders. They had been urged to keep their speeches to three minutes, but some had a lot to say. France’s Emmanuel Macron and Kenya’s William Ruto went on more than four times the limit. 

Indian prime minister Narendra Modi pitched to host Cop33 in 2028. He announced a “green credits initiative” meant to go “beyond the commercial mindset of carbon credits”, without giving much detail about how. 

Brazilian president Lula da Silva boasted about his wins reducing deforestation by a third in his first year. He did not mention the country’s oil and gas expansion plans for 2030 or setting the stage to join OPEC in 2024. 

Some governments announced contributions to the new loss and damage fund, among them Italy ($108 million) and Canada ($8 million). World Bank CEO Ajay Banga, who will act as interim host of the fund, said the total pledged “isn’t going to get us very far” but money would start reaching people on the ground next year.

While tripling renewable energy was a common message in the leaders’ speeches, wording was less clear about phasing out fossil fuels, said E3G analyst Tom Evans. 

The post Cop28 bulletin: Fossil fuel phaseout is on the table appeared first on Climate Home News.

world leaders cop28 world leaders cop28 world leaders cop28. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore</font size>

The post As it happened: World leaders speak at Cop28 in Dubai appeared first on Climate Home News.

In a remarkable early win for the Cop28 presidency, a loss and damage fund became official on day one. Sultan Al Jaber banged his gavel and the room rose in applause.

There were a few complaints from negotiators. But the hard-fought compromise struck in Abu Dhabi three weeks ago held, with the World Bank the interim host of the yet-to-be-named fund.

The UAE set an example by contributing $100 million of a little over $400m in pledges.

With that potentially contentious matter out of the way – and the agenda agreed – public attention will now focus squarely on the issue of fossil fuels and their phase out.

Al Jaber addressed the issue in his opening speech. Negotiators, he said, “must look for ways and ensure the inclusion of the role of fossil fuels”.

He acknowledged “strong views” on having fossil fuels in the text and added that “we collectively have the power to do something unprecedented – in fact, we have no choice but to go the very unconventional way”.

He got some applause for saying he is laser-focused on the “north star” of limiting global warming to 1.5C. He did not mention the International Energy Agency’s verdict that that means no new fossil fuel production.

He added that his presidency “made a bold choice to engage with oil and gas companies”, having difficult discussions with them and now “many” are committed to “near zero” methane emissions by 2030 and have adopted net zero by 2050 targets.

This is a reference to the Cop28 oil and gas decarbonisation accelerator, which is supposed to launch next week. Most publicly-listed oil majors already have net zero targets – but most of those do not include the emissions from burning their products.

Both as Cop28 boss and oil company CEO, Al Jaber’s focus is on producing oil and gas in a cleaner way not producing less.

Latest stories

• Countries pledge $400m to set up loss and damage fund
• Seven things to watch out for in world leader speeches at Cop28
• How can corporates ‘course correct’ on climate?

Reality check

Before Al Jaber’s speech, Cop28 began on a personal note. Cop27 president Sameh Shoukry called the room to its feet for a moment’s silence for Saleemul Huq, Pete Betts and “all civilians who have perished during the current conflict in Gaza”. The UK, EU and Bangladeshi delegations then gave touching tributes to their former colleagues.

After reflecting on the successes of his presidency, Shoukry issued a “reality check” aimed at rich nations. “Most of what we bring forward as tangible solutions and actionable commitments is based on speculation or well wishes,” he said.

He gave examples of these “mere assumptions”: that rich countries will provide $100 billion in climate finance, that the loss and damage fund will raise billions of dollars and that international financial institutions will be reformed.

In fact, he said climate finance is decreasing in relation to developing countries’ growing needs. Weak replenishment rounds for the Green Climate Fund and Adaptation Fund “are but two examples of this worrying trend”.

He finished by criticising countries that are expanding fossil fuel production despite saying they would phase coal out. He didn’t name names but the UK’s proposed coal mine springs to mind or the US, Canada and Australia planning to increase oil and gas production.

The post Cop28 bulletin: A loss and damage fund is born appeared first on Climate Home News.

Governments have collectively pledged more than $400 million to establish a loss and damage fund for the victims of climate disaster.

On day one of UN climate talks in Dubai, negotiators rubber-stamped plans to get the fund up and running. The arrangements had been hashed out by a transitional committee over five fraught meetings in the past year.

The Cop28 president Sultan Al Jaber hailed the decision as “historic”, with a broad smile, after watching delegates burst into a round of applause.

“This sends a positive signal of momentum to the world and to our work here in Dubai,” he added.

Initial pledges

Following the text’s adoption, a handful of countries promised contributions to the start-up phase of the fund. Germany and Cop28 hosts the United Arab Emirates committed $100 million each, followed by the United Kingdom (£40m or $50.5m), the United States ($17.5m) and Japan ($10m).

EU member states, including Germany, are expected to collectively deliver at least €225m ($245m).

The relatively paltry contribution from the US – the world’s largest economy – attracted immediate criticism. Mohamed Adow, director of Power Shift Africa, called it “embarrassing.

Avinash Persaud, special envoy to Barbados prime minister Mia Mottley and a member of the transitional committee, welcomed the “hard-fought historic agreement”. But he said the pledges were unlikely to represent new and additional resources.

“Because the fund was only approved today, we can’t expect [them] to open up new budgets… so this initial money will be coming from existing budgets,” he told a press huddle, as reported by Carbon Brief’s Josh Gabbatiss.

How the fund will work

Significantly more money will be needed to help vulnerable communities benefit from the new mechanism once it gets up and running. The fund is designed to receive contributions “from a wide variety of sources”, including grants and cheap loans from the public and private sectors, and “innovative sources”.

The World Bank is set to initially host the fund for four years, despite strong resistance to its involvement from developing countries.

All developing countries “particularly vulnerable” to the effects of climate change will be eligible to benefit from the mechanism. However, the definition of vulnerability – one of the thorniest issues – is not detailed in the text.

The agreement is an “early win” for the Cop28 hosts, as it sets the start of the conference on a positive collaborative tone, Ana Mulio Alvarez, a loss and damage expert at E3G, told Climate Home.

Speaking at the plenary session, several negotiators underlined the difficult compromises needed to strike a deal.

Compromise deal

Developing countries had initially opposed a role for the World Bank, airing concerns over high costs, slow procedures and the US influence on the institution. But they eventually relented and accepted a compromise, with certain conditions attached to World Bank involvement and an out after four years.

Rich nations attempted to broaden the pool of donors expected to contribute, but made limited headway. The text “urges” developed countries to provide financial resources to the fund, while other nations are only “encouraged” to do so “on a voluntary basis”.

The EU climate chief, Wopke Hoekstra, has said China and petrostates like the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Qatar should pay into the fund. Others want to broaden the donor base to countries with high-emitting economies categorised by the UN as developing nations like South Korea and Russia.

“The UAE’s contribution of $100 million is welcome, both for its solid cash and for the pressure it puts on the world’s biggest polluters to also step up and recognise their responsibility for decades of pollution,” said Teresa Anderson, climate justice campaigner with ActionAid International.

“Innovative sources” of finance could mean carbon taxes on international aviation or shipping, financial transactions or fossil fuels. France and Kenya are set to launch a coalition at Cop28 to develop these options.

Civil society experts have said much more work lies ahead and, ultimately, the success of the fund will depend on how much money it is equipped with.

The cost of loss and damage for developing countries is projected to reach $400 billion per year by 2030.

“Although rules have been agreed regarding how the fund will operate there are no hard deadlines, no targets and countries are not obligated to pay into it,” said Adow. “The most pressing issue now is to get money flowing into the fund and to the people that need it.”

The post Countries pledge $400m to set up loss and damage fund appeared first on Climate Home News.

Dubai airport is filling up with Cop delegates, who are passing quickly through immigration without having to show their visas. 

Their Uber rides are taking them along highways flanked by banners from Saudi Arabia’s Green Initiative, urging them to visit their pavilion. 

Many are popping in their complimentary sim cards, handed over with your passport by immigration officials. 

But others are suspicious of this free gift. With the UAE’s reputation for cyber-spying, there’s talk of VPNs, burner phones and not using the venue’s wifi, QR codes or app (after last year’s controversy). 

Whether its paranoia or they’re really out to get us, many are taking precautions. 

Latest stories

• Four questions for Cop28 to settle about a global carbon market
• Special report: How can corporates ‘course correct’ on climate?
• Seven things to watch out for in world leader speeches at Cop28

On the defensive 

And Sultan Al Jaber thinks they’re out to get him too. The Center for Climate Reporting revealed that talking points were drawn up for him for Cop28 meetings with foreign governments, which included lobbying for fossil fuel deals for the oil and gas company he heads. 

Asked about it in a press conference yesterday, Al Jaber laughed and said the reporting was “an attempt to undermine the work of the Cop28 presidency”. 

While he did not dispute the authenticity of the talking points prepared for him, he claimed he had not seen them and did not use them. He added that he and the UAE didn’t need the Cop28 presidency to make business deals.

Sultan Al Jaber addresses questions at a press conference yesterday (Photo credit: Kiara Worth/UNFCCC)

Agenda agreed 

Al Jaber’s diplomats appear to have passed their first test with flying colours, as they persuaded negotiators not to add new items to the Cop28 agenda. 

Groups of developing countries put a series of issues forward as agenda items including developed countries scaling up finance and opposition to trade measures like the EU’s carbon border tax. 

But they appear to have been persuaded that these priorities will be discussed elsewhere on the agenda. 

So the opening ceremony should begin this morning as planned and adopting the agenda should now be just a formality – in contrast with the nine-day debate in Bonn earlier this year. 

Compared to the leaders’ speeches tomorrow, the ceremony will be a relatively low-key affair but it is the moment Sultan Al Jaber turns from Cop28 president-designate to Cop28 president. 

He will make a speech which is his moment to lay out what he wants from the summit. After the latest revelations, any language on fossil fuels will be watched carefully. 

The post Cop28 bulletin: Welcome to Dubai appeared first on Climate Home News.

When jubilant government negotiators signed the Paris agreement in 2015, they agreed to hold a global stocktake at the end of 2023 of how the fight against climate change is going.

That time has now come and the verdict is not good. The UN climate chief Simon Stiell told reporters last month “we are far from where we need to be as a global community” and the “window of opportunity is rapidly closing”.

He called for a “course correction”. Governments will debate what that entails at the Cop28 climate summit 30 November-12 December.

But it’s not just governments that will decide our fate. Businesses have the power to get the world’s emissions down too. And part of the response to the global stocktake is increasing transparency and accountability around corporate action.

UK aid cuts leave Malawi vulnerable to droughts and cyclones

Kaveh Guilanpour is a vice president at the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions. “2024 really needs to see an effective response to the outcomes of the global stocktake so that it doesn’t remain words on paper,” he said.

Governments may agree at Cop28 to triple renewable energy capacity and double energy efficiency by 2030 and phase out fossil fuels by mid-century.

“The corporate world needs to see that clear signal,” Guilanpour said, and could work with governments and organisations like the International Renewable Energy Agency to map out those transitions.

Equally, voluntary corporate initiatives like RE100, under which members commit to getting 100% of their electricity from renewables, bolster political will to aim high. The initiative calculates its 400+ members collectively use more electricity than France. They’ve got buying power.

Outdoor clothing brand Patagonia is aiming to cut its direct emissions (scope 1&2) 80% from 2017 levels by 2030, and indirect emissions (scope 3) by 55% (Photo credit: Ajay Suresh)

Business knows

As the head of climate solutions at business research firm Morningstar Sustainalytics, Anya Solovieva talks often with investors and the upper echelons of the corporate world.

Over a full English breakfast at a private members club in London’s financial centre, she told Climate Home that “there is an awareness of the global stocktake, I think investors are watching”.

China sets out methane plan, but no reduction target

But, she added, investors see 1.5C as “a minimum as opposed to a goal” and for them “it actually doesn’t necessarily have that big of an impact if we move from 1.5[C] to 1.6[C], the reality is that the transition is happening”.

For the people that will suffer from the extra climate disaster, the difference between 1.5C and 1.6C matters hugely. But for either target, the solution for businesses is the same – get emissions down as fast as possible.

Solovieva said that corporations’ managements are aware of this need to reduce emissions to net zero.

The UAE’s answer

For most companies, that is a decades-long project which will far outlast any CEO or sustainability lead.

That’s why initiatives have sprouted up in recent years asking businesses to commit to setting and meeting targets.

The latest comes from the United Arab Emirates’ Cop28 presidency, which is asking firms to sign a Net Zero Transition Charter (NZTC).

In a statement, the Cop28 presidency said the charter follows September’s technical report from the global stocktake “which showed that the world is off track to keeping the goals of the Paris agreement alive”.

Colombia’s big green plans run into headwinds

By signing the charter, companies are promising to “publicly set 1.5C-aligned, science-based, credible and transparent net zero 2050 and interim emissions reduction targets”.

This can be through a “net zero-aligned national pledge” or by signing up for an existing programme like the Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi), Race to Zero or 2050 Pathways.

Over 250 companies have already registered targets judged 1.5C-compatible by SBTi including beer brewer Heineken, toy-maker Hasbro and fashion brand Burberry.

Toy-maker Hasbro has climate plans judged 1.5C-compatible by the Science Based Targets initiative (Photo credit: Inside the Magic)

To be compatible with the NZTC, they must also produce a “credible” net zero transition plan within a year of Cop28 and publicly report their emissions and progress on their transition plan.

Companies that do this will be praised on the Cop28 website and will be able to boast of their involvement in their marketing materials.

Cop28 president Sultan Al-Jaber said “the private sector’s  engagement in Cop28 – their resources, expertise, and commitment – is vital in driving real-world action”.

The charter will further enable them to ” take meaningful action on climate, track progress and be held accountable”.

Greenwashing risk

The NZTC builds upon the work of a 16-person taskforce convened by the UN chief Antonio Guterres to tackle corporate greenwash.

At Cop27 in Egypt last year, the taskforce launched its recommendations. Its chair Catherine McKenna told a packed tent that “too many of these net zero pledges represent little more than empty slogans and hype”.

UN head Antonio Guterres talks with Catherine McKenna (left) and other taskforce members (Photo credit: UN Climate Change)

Some recommendations from the McKenna taskforce have been adopted by the Cop28 presidency. Both say that firms should should support a just transition, align their lobbying with their climate commitments and leave trade associations whose activities aren’t compatible with 1.5C of warming.

Other taskforce recommendations are absent from the NZTC. The taskforce said that companies “cannot claim to be net zero while continuing to build or invest in new fossil fuel supply”. The Cop28 presidency left this out.

Cop28 president Sultan Al-Jaber is the head of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company. The company has a net zero by 2045 target but only for its operational emissions – not the much larger carbon impact of customers burning its products. It is set to spend $1 billion every month this decade on oil and gas production.

Bill Hare was one of the members of the UN taskforce. He accused the NZTC of being soft on investment in fossil fuels, use of carbon credits and of relying on weak voluntary standards.

“It’s a mild form of greenwashing,” he said. “They’re providing the opportunity for companies to do yet again what they’ve done in other context – to claim they’re going to net zero when no one really knows whether they are or not.”

Building on UN taskforce

After the McKenna taskforce reported, the UN’s head Guterres asked the UN climate change arm to move forward on its recommendations.

They tasked Bing Leng from China and Sarah Bloom-Raskin from the USA to lead consultations on how to do that and they will report back at Cop28.

Indonesia delays coal closure plans after finance row with rich nations

At the same time, the UN is developing a climate action portal. This will be a website which aims to put all corporate net zero targets in one place so that the public can look at them and compare them.

“That’s an essential element if the average person wants to access the data that tells you what’s really going on and have confidence that it’s real data,” Hare said.

He said that progress had been slow but it is “getting off the ground” now and more is likely to be revealed at Cop28.

The post How can corporates ‘course correct’ on climate? appeared first on Climate Home News.

Governments are set to take a decisive step at Cop28 towards making a long-awaited global carbon market governed by the UN a reality.

The Paris Agreement establishes ways for countries to “voluntarily cooperate” to meet their climate targets by allowing emission reductions and removals to be traded.

In Dubai, negotiators will finalise the architecture of a new mechanism allowing countries to sell offsets to other governments, companies and individuals under Article 6.4.

It comes at a pivotal time. The voluntary carbon market has faced more intense scrutiny than ever this year with report after report casting doubt over its integrity. But for many, carbon credits remain a valuable tool to channel much-needed finance to developing countries.

The stakes are high for the new system to get it right and correct problems with existing systems. We outline four critical questions for the outcome from Dubai.

Which activities are eligible?

Deciding which activities can produce credits is an important and fraught question.

If the criteria are too restrictive, countries may struggle to obtain any meaningful financial support from the mechanism. Too broad and projects with questionable climate credentials, or other significant environmental and social concerns, will undermine their credibility.

Over the last year, the UN’s Article 6.4 supervisory body has been evaluating the eligibility of carbon removals: activities that take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and store it. These can be nature-based, such as planting trees, or engineering-based, like machines to suck CO2.

A Direct Air Capture (DAC) plant operated by Climeworks in Iceland. Photo: Climeworks

Tensions emerged last May when an internal briefing note drafted by the UNFCCC secretariat advised against including technological solutions describing them as “unproven” and potentially risky.

While the supervisory body distanced itself from the document, it angered the industry which responded by flooding the consultation process with submissions putting their case forward.

It worked. The final recommendations, agreed upon after several extended meetings, do not directly encourage or discriminate against any type of activity.

Ministers still need to approve the package in Dubai. While a broad agreement is expected, certain groups may still have issues with it.

Papua New Guinea, representing the Coalition for Rainforest Nations, could be a blocker. It has long argued that credits issued for forest conservation under the Redd+ framework should automatically qualify for the new mechanism.

Most countries and experts disagree. “The intention of the Redd+ framework was never to generate credits”, says Pedro Martins Barata, a carbon markets expert at EDF and a former negotiator. “That mechanism is much less stringent. They should go through the same process of methodology submission and independent evaluation as all the other activities.”

Are the reductions additional and permanent?

As credits are used by governments or companies to compensate for their polluting activities, each unit must represent a real emission reduction. This has been a fundamental and long-standing issue with many carbon offsetting projects.

Among other things, rules need to make sure the activities would have not happened anyways without the carbon finance (additionality) and that any CO2 removed does not re-enter the atmosphere in a short amount of time (permanence).

The Supervisory Body has tackled those policy issues in the recommendations sent to Cop28 for approval.

On additionality, the document says that projects will have to take into account all relevant legislation and produce a detailed analysis of investment barriers to demonstrate that emission-cutting activities would have not occurred without the mechanism.

Experts told Climate Home these provisions should be stringent enough.

A community ranger standing in a mangrove forest restored as part of a nature protection project in Kenya. Photo: Anthony Ochieng / Climate Visuals Countdown

On permanence, concerns have been raised.

“The text leaves open the question of for how many years a credit is guaranteed to correspond to an actual removal without giving specific thresholds,” says Martins Barata, adding this should be established in further work.

Another contentious point is the possibility of relieving project developers of the duty to carry out permanence monitoring after they stop issuing credits. The risk is that, for example, protected trees could burn in a fire unleashing the stored carbon into the atmosphere.

The recommendations indicate this exemption can apply when a “negligible” risk of the emission removals being reversed is demonstrated.

Jonathan Crook of Carbon Market Watch argued the text could be tightened. “How do you define negligible risk? What sources will be accepted as evidence? These are all open questions that may cause potential issues,” he added.

What happens if a country wants to take back credits?

Article 6 has a provision to ensure that emission reduction activities are not counted twice, by both the seller and buyer, towards their respective climate plans. When a country transfers a credit to a government or a company it needs to deduct that from its greenhouse gas inventory.

As a result, countries need to strike a balance between attracting revenues and being able to meet their own climate plans.

But a contested rule could give struggling governments a way out. In Dubai, negotiators will be discussing whether countries may be allowed to withdraw any credits that have been previously authorised. This could also apply in cases where the projects are causing environmental and human rights violations.

Carbon Market Watch’s Crook said this provision poses a substantial threat. “If a country can revoke credits that have already been traded, and potentially used, then you have a serious risk of double counting,” he told Climate Home. “If revocations are allowed, at the very least they shouldn’t apply to credits already sold.”

Will the new market rescue the reputation of carbon credits?

A lot is riding on the Article 6.4 mechanism because of the impact it can have on the wider carbon offsetting world.

Crook said it needs to set a “high bar”, sending a strong message to the voluntary market that there needs to be improvements.

The new mechanism is set to include some positive elements that currently don’t exist in carbon markets used by corporations.

Already agreed rules have established that 2% of any credits traded in the new market will be automatically cancelled. This means that offsetting will not just be a zero-sum game, shifting emissions cuts from one place to another.

But when it comes to individual projects, experts said it was too early to say if they will have high integrity.

“You can have the best rules but it all comes down to implementation,” said Martins Barata. “They’re off to a good start. But come back to me when they start approving projects”.

If the recommendations are approved in Dubai, the new mechanism may start issuing credits towards the end of 2024.

Paradoxically, the first batch of credits to be traded may pose some of the biggest integrity risks. A process to transition credits created under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), the now-defunct UN carbon market established through the Kyoto Protocol, into the new mechanism is well underway.

CDM credits have been widely criticised for failing to contribute to real emissions reductions and causing human rights violations.

The post Four questions for Cop28 to settle about a global carbon market appeared first on Climate Home News.

It has become a tradition for world leaders to kick off the annual UN climate conference by telling each other and the world what they’re doing to tackle climate change.

This year, some big hitters like the US’s Joe Biden and China’s Xi Jinping will stay away. Other influential leaders including Narendra Modi, Emmanuel Macron, Mohamed bin Salman, Mia Mottley, William Ruto and Lula Da Silva are due to attend.

World leader speeches at Cop28 are a chance to show off ambitious policies, bear witness to climate impacts, pledge funding and point fingers. Here are seven things to watch out for.

1. Fossil fuel phase-out

A broad coalition of nations is calling for a phase out, or at least phase down, of fossil fuels. They will face resistance from countries that rely on fossil fuels to generate revenue and keep their people content.

Any deal on a fossil fuel phase out will be struck by negotiators in closed meeting rooms towards the end of Cop28 in two weeks time.

But we will get a good sense of the strength of resistance from the first two speeches on Friday – that of UAE’s Mohamed Bin Zayed and Saudi Arabia’s Mohammed bin Salman.

Its not just Gulf petrostates that defend fossil fuels though. Several African leaders in particular want to exploit their fossil fuel reserves, they say, to bring wealth and electricity to their people.

Senegal’s Macky Sall and the Democratic Republic of Congo’s Felix Tshisekedi are among them. They may use their speeches to ask why they shouldn’t pump for new oil and gas when the likes of the US and Canada plan to increase production.

2. Tales from the frontline

After a year that had climate scientists reaching for the thesaurus to describe their shock at global temperature spikes, leaders will share how climate disasters hit their people.

In Libya, extreme rainfall overwhelmed decrepit dams and washed away much of the city of Derna in September. 

Leaks reveal how McKinsey drives African climate agenda

Leaders from Iraq and East African nations may tell of extreme drought while South American leaders could address their weird winter heatwave. 

Then there are the slow, creeping climate impacts. In the Pacific, rising seas and intensifying storms are eroding narrow atolls, while expanding desert eats into the fertile land of northern Africa and mountain glaciers retreat.

3. Start-up cash for a loss and damage fund

Negotiators are set to agree at Cop28 on how to set up a global loss and damage fund for victims of the climate crisis.

A handful of pledges are expected from the EU and others to get it started. Don’t get too excited: we’re talking in the region of $0.5-1 billion, not the $100bn a year developing countries ultimately want to see flowing through the fund.

The ‘inevitable’ fossil fuel fight set to dominate Cop28

Avinash Persaud, climate adviser to Barbados’ prime minister, told Climate Home that amounts like that should not be dismissed. “Countries can’t pull billions out of a hat,” he said, “because you have to budget in advance.”

Climate Action Network’s Harjeet Singh took a stronger line. “Recovery costs are soaring into the billions,” he said, “far exceeding the expected pledges of a few hundred million.”

4. Green Climate Fund pledges 

The UN’s flagship climate fund held its four-yearly fundraising round in October. Pledges from wealthy countries totalled a disappointing $9.3bn – less than last time in 2019. 

That’s left the fund’s secretariat looking to have to scale back ambition – help fewer farmers adapt to climate change, conserve less forest, protect fewer countries with early warning systems.

A few late pledges could improve its fortunes. Italy, Sweden and Switzerland have yet to announce contributions. Their leaders are attending.

The US and Australia are not sending leaders but could announce funds elsewhere. Both now claim to be climate leaders. This is the time to prove it with cash. 

In numbers: The state of the climate ahead of Cop28

5. Bridgetown developments

Two years ago, Barbados’ prime minister Mia Mottley got some influential allies together in her capital city Bridgetown to plot how to transform the global financial system to make it work for climate. 

Since then, her speeches have become must-watch verdicts on how that mission is going and where it should go next. We’re expecting her to call for more ambition in reforming banks like the World Bank so that they spend more on climate.

Her speeches often include innovative ideas. Last year, she suggested that oil companies should pay for climate damages. With Barbados’ support, France and Kenya have set up a task force to look into making that happen, which Emmanuel Macron and William Ruto are likely to promote. So what Mottley proposes this year is worth watching.

6. Coal-to-clean updates 

Two years ago in Glasgow, the concept of a Just Energy Transition Partnership was launched. The idea was for rich countries to financially help coal-reliant emerging economies switch to renewables. 

South Africa piloted the idea, while agreements with Indonesia and Vietnam came next. All have been plagued by arguments over the pace of change and the nature of finance. 

President Cyril Ramaphosa will give an update on South Africa’s package on Friday. The most advanced of the partnerships, it nonetheless faces political challenges.

Fearing repression in Dubai, non-binary people stay away from Cop28

Vietnam is due to announce its investment plan at Cop28. Prime minister Chinh Pham Minh will no doubt talk it up, without mentioning that he’s jailed several environmental campaigners. 

The words of Indonesian president Joko Widodo could be interesting as, ahead of February’s elections, he could air his complaints about rich countries’ insistence on mainly loans not grants.

With India uninterested, there are no more in the immediate pipeline but plenty of leaders will emphasise the volume of investment needed to support clean development.

7. Bids to host Cop29

Two years ago, we already knew that we’d be in the United Arab Emirates for Cop28. Similarly, we already know that Cop30 will be in Belém in Brazil in two years time. 

But we don’t know where we’ll be this time next year. It’s up to the UN’s Eastern Europe group to decide. Various EU states have offered but Russia has vetoed them because of EU support for Ukraine.

Russia supports Azerbaijan’s candidacy but Armenia, which is at war with Azerbaijan, opposes that and wants to host itself – which Azerbaijan opposes right back. 

Meet the Italian fugitive advising Emirati start-up Blue Carbon

The various potential hosts could use their speeches to make their case. If there’s no agreement the default is for the UAE to keep the presidency with the physical conference held at the UN climate headquarters in Bonn, Germany.

For Cop31, contenders include Australia, whose leader is not on the speaker list, and Turkiye whose president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan will speak on Friday.

The post Seven things to watch out for in world leader speeches at Cop28 appeared first on Climate Home News.

Ten years ago this month, huge areas of my country were devastated by Typhoon Haiyan – the most powerful storm the Philippines had ever known.

Winds of almost 200 mph tore through communities claiming more than 6,000 innocent lives. My family’s hometown of Tacloban – only five metres above sea level – faced a wall of seawater over seven metres tall.

As the storm left a massive trail of devastation, I was delivering a speech at the Cop19 UN climate talks in Poland.

I could not reach my brother and it was another three days before I found out he was alive. But he personally carried 78 people to mass graves. To this day, many of the headstones in the local cemetery bear the names of ten people or more, with one date of demise.

Over the last few weeks, I have joined a band of climate and human rights activists on a 1,000km walk across the Phillipines to commemorate this catastrophe and demand climate justice.

Along the way I heard countless stories of loss from people who believe that Haiyan should have been a wake-up call for the world about the dangers of climate change.

Damaged areas along the coast in Tacloban City after Typhoon Haiyan hit the area. (Photo credit: Matimtiman//Greenpeace)

I continue my journey by ship. The campaigners, researchers, journalists and photographers on board the Rainbow Warrior have met residents of Bohol province’s ‘sinking islands’. Beautiful places that are slowly but surely losing ground to the waves as sea levels rise and typhoons are super-charged by a heating climate.

Yet even while I bear witness to their stories, there are some who want to silence me.

Shell lawsuit

Earlier this month we learned that Shell is suing Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International, threatening a damages claim for millions of dollars for protesting against its continued exploration and production of planet-heating fossil fuels.

As executive director of Greenpeace Southeast Asia and as one of the activists who tried to board a drilling platform Shell was moving to the North Sea earlier this year, I am named in the court documents.

The company is not only financially attacking Greenpeace, but is seeking an injunction to prevent Greenpeace protesting on its infrastructure at sea or in port anywhere in the world forever.

Far from heeding the wake-up call, or even hitting the snooze button, they are trying to smash the alarm clock.

That is why I will be joining Greenpeace activists today in sending a clear message to the fossil fuel industry that its intimidation tactics will not silence us.

Meet the Italian fugitive advising Emirati start-up Blue Carbon

Using kayaks and small boats, we will try to block an oil tanker from docking at a major Shell refinery near Batangas, a city on the edge of the Verde Island Passage.

This idyllic 10-mile wide channel separating the islands of Luzon and Mindoro is one of the most biodiverse marine habitats on Earth, home to countless rare and wonderful species.

But it now faces an existential threat. It has become the epicentre of my country’s expanding liquefied natural gas industry, with multinational giants pouring millions into constructing new power plants and LNG terminals.

Not only does this endanger marine life – an oil tanker spilled 800,000 litres of oil into the channel earlier this year – it will greatly increase my country’s fossil fuel dependence.

Ghana’s flood victims blame government for overflowing dam destruction

Our kayaks and banners are clearly no match for a multinational oil and gas corporation.

Record profits

But as world leaders gather in Dubai for the Cop28 climate talks, we want to remind the world about the damage that Shell and the rest of the fossil fuel industry are causing to the planet and those who live on it.

All eyes at Cop28 will be on whether governments can agree how to set up a fund for loss and damage to help the most vulnerable communities recover from climate disasters. But what about the companies who have made record profits and are continuing to pump the oil and gas that is roasting our planet?

Shell recently announced third quarter profits of $6.2 billion, and further share buybacks on top of the $23 billion it has returned to shareholders so far this year.

‘I hug you deep inside my heart’: In memory of Khalil Abu Yahia

Why should the Philippines be left with a $12 billion bill for Typhoon Haiyan, not to mention other fierce typhoons that came after and future more powerful storms that scientists predict, while oil companies pile up obscene profits?

So as I reflect on the countless tales of loss I have heard, I remain focused on the road ahead.

I will cling to my banner and paddle, and if necessary face Shell in court, and together we will show oil companies that the era of fossil fuels must end and that they must pay up for the climate vandalism they continue to perpetrate. The journey ahead may be long, but we’re not stopping here.

Yeb Sano is the executive director at Greenpeace Southeast Asia 

Shell response

A Shell spokesperson said: “The right to protest is fundamental and we respect it absolutely. But it must be done safely and lawfully.”

“Boarding a 72,000 metric ton moving vessel at sea was unlawful and extremely dangerous. A judge said Greenpeace protestors were ‘putting their lives and, indirectly, the lives of the crew at risk’. The legal costs to secure two court injunctions to prevent further boarding were significant. So were the costs for the companies who had to deal with the action at sea, for example by mobilising an extra safety vessel and increasing security at the port.

“The safety of the protestors – as well as the crew – was paramount. Rightly, we did not hesitate to put in place measures to protect all people involved. Shell and its contractors are entitled to recover the significant costs of responding to Greenpeace’s dangerous actions.

“Our intent has been misrepresented. This is simply about preventing activities at sea which could endanger peoples’ lives — as happened earlier this year — nothing more.”

The post Ten years on from Haiyan, Shell’s intimidation won’t silence me appeared first on Climate Home News.

Cop28, marking a key stress test for the Paris Agreement, will be about facing the facts, correcting course and giving solutions a real chance.

The UAE talks cap a year that saw the world’s climate scientists lay out the unequivocal need for steep and immediate emissions cuts to limit warming to 1.5ºC and ways to get there.

A year in which the International Energy Agency set out a narrow but feasible 1.5ºC aligned pathway for the decline of fossil fuels and acceleration of renewables.

Fossil fuels are relentlessly and undeniably killing us, but renewable energy promises a better future, where no one is left behind.

Primer: The ‘inevitable’ fossil fuel fight set to dominate Cop28

Take my homeland of Denmark as an example. For more than 80 years Denmark has allowed exploration for hydrocarbons and since 1972, oil – and later gas – has been produced in the Danish offshore waters of the North Sea.

In 2019 alone, Denmark produced a total of 3.2 billion cubic meters of fossil gas. So we’ve certainly done our part in causing this crisis.

Wind is winning

Yet, now we’re proving the impossible possible. Wind energy, which was long seen as a nice-to-have but not good for energy security, is already delivering over half of all Denmark’s power needs, largely thanks to community commitment and political ambition.

Furthermore, the Danish Parliament announced in 2020 that it would cancel all future licensing rounds for new oil and gas exploration and production permits in the Danish part of the North Sea and end existing production by 2050.

In numbers: The state of the climate ahead of Cop28

The Nordic nation hasn’t stopped there as it initiated the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance, an international alliance of governments and stakeholders working together to facilitate the managed phase-out of oil and gas production.

Launched at Cop26 and led by the governments of Denmark and Costa Rica, the alliance aims to elevate the issue of oil and gas production phase-out in international climate dialogues, such as those we will shortly see in Dubai.

Denmark doesn’t have it all sorted out though as oil and gas production is projected to increase over the coming years before peaking in 2028 and 2026 respectively and will start declining hereafter.

Make polluters pay

Rising emissions and planned expansion of fossil fuel production, wherever in the world, are wildly out of sync with the direction of progress needed on the international stage, while financial support to reduce emissions in poorer countries, along with finance to address escalating climate impacts, remains completely inadequate.

Meet the Italian fugitive advising Emirati start-up Blue Carbon

The last thing the world needs is new fossil fuel developments. At Cop28, governments must do their utmost to agree to end expansion and instead rapidly phase out coal, oil and gas, and accelerate the renewable energy transition.

It doesn’t end there. Citizens, like me, of wealthy countries, like Denmark, with historical responsibility for the climate crisis, need to make sure our governments take accountability for finding and channeling money from where it sits to where it’s needed – from polluters to those least responsible and most in need as they transition to renewable energy and build climate resilience.

We need a credible finance package that includes the launch of a new Loss and Damage Fund, and steps to start making polluters pay for the destruction and harm they have caused.

The climate crisis is not in some far-off future. It is here right now and the planet is not coping despite the credible solutions on offer.

A world free of fossil fuels is possible as much as climate resilient frontline communities, but it won’t feel that way until it is done. It’s time for governments to get it done and stop the climate emergency. Dubai awaits.

Mads Flarup Christensen is the executive director of Greenpeace International

The post The Cop28 climate summit must set us free from fossil fuels appeared first on Climate Home News.

In just over two weeks nearly 200 governments will signal what they believe the world needs to do next to tackle the climate crisis.

The final outcome of Cop28 will – when it finally lands around 12-13 December – offer the best assessment of how far and how fast leaders are willing to go to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

That deal will not be easy for Cop28 President Dr Sultan Al-Jaber to deliver. But given revelations by the BBC that the UAE planned to use Cop to cut oil deals, he will be under intense scrutiny and pressure to deliver a high ambition outcome that charts a pathway to fossil fuel phaseout.

This meeting comes at an exceptionally difficult time globally and with the backdrop of many tensions, the war in the Middle East being the most recent addition. Yet the annual UN climate summit is no stranger to diplomatic heat.

The ‘inevitable’ fossil fuel fight set to dominate Cop28

In the near 30 years of these meetings tensions have often been high: this in itself cannot be used as an excuse for failure.

Governments are faced with a clear challenge. This year will be the hottest year on record. Global greenhouse gas emissions are at all time highs. Climate impacts are hitting home, driving up food inflation, choking the Panama canal, drying the Amazon, killing crops in Africa, burning vast swathes of North America and leaving areas of India, China underwater.

Given the scale of the crisis, the benchmarks for success at Cop28 are high. The evidence – as presented in the Global Stocktake – must inform the results and that means a high ambition outcome.

Fossil fuel phaseout

For one, Cop28 must land a collective plan for a just and equitable phaseout of coal, gas and oil – the key drivers of the climate crisis.

To keep 1.5C within reach, the energy transition needs to accelerate.

Slow or insufficient action on fossil fuels would mean more economic instability through the 2020s and 2030s.

If “abatement” technologies are applied in some sectors, they need to capture all emissions, not delay action.

Cop28 decisions can send a clear signal that “business as usual” and relying on uncertain future abatement technologies is no longer viable.

Renewables and efficiency

Second, countries are expected to commit to triple renewable energy by 2030 and double energy efficiency.

Many are on track for this already but a common – united goal – will send market signals and can strengthen the fossil fuel phase out. Setting a framework for delivering this at Cop28 with measures to track progress is essential.

Finance

Three, clean energy and measures to beef up adaptation and resilience of countries to extreme weather need finance.

That the $100 billion has now been met  is good news, but it’s far short of the $1 trillion a year that’s required to support poorer nations.

We need agreement at Cop28 from major development banks and donors that access to finance will be faster and at lower costs. No finance, no future.

Stocktake

Four, a flotilla of new climate plans for 2035 are due in around 15 months.

The Global Stocktake outcomes should be used to ensure 2025 sets a new standard for governments to meet.

That means tougher targets covering more sectors. It also means ensuring that adaptation is treated as a priority: scaling up plans to cope with future disasters is essential, as is the cash to support that.

Loss and damage

Five, delivery of the loss & damage fund at Cop28 will be a major milestone. Success will depend on funding.

We’ll need to see this during and after the World Leaders Summit from 1-2 December to rebuild trust and reassure poorer nations that those with the resources have their back when extreme weather hits.

A final deal without these five pillars is not credible. It would deny the realities faced by the poorest and most vulnerable countries and leave them in the lurch.

No number of assorted voluntary “pledges” or “statements” at Cop28 can make up for a concrete agreement by all countries under the UN.

Carefully worded press releases and neat spin from major PR firms will be tomorrow’s recycled paper. A “Dubai Deal” under the UN will have a legacy, and one the UAE could be proud of.

In numbers: The state of the climate ahead of Cop28

Landing these five pillars takes diplomatic leadership. It requires the EU, the UK and Canada to step up and build an alliance with small islands, low income nations and African leaders like Kenya’s William Ruto by recognising and meeting asks for support.

At a time when confidence in the “West” is low and accusations it is not supporting developing countries are rife, Brussels, London and Washington need to deliver – on more than just rhetoric.

Cop28 offers a platform for leaders in India, China and Brazil to address on the global stage the deep risks their populations face as the world warms, and recognise the profound reward they will gain from leaning into a strong outcome.

All three nations are clean energy powerhouses; all three have key resources for the clean transition; all three have an interest in deals that deliver jobs, prosperity and curb the rising cost of living.

Fearing repression in Dubai, non-binary people stay away from Cop28

Most of all success at Cop28 also depends on Dr Sultan Al-Jaber’s ability to make this summit his country’s moment to stand tall and deliver globally.

A presidency that pursues its own domestic and regional interests is one that usually fails.

Given his role as CEO of an oil giant, Al-Jaber will need to work harder than most to underline his climate credentials.

Deliver on the above and this could be the UAE’s greatest achievement.

Fail and he will blow a glorious opportunity to cement the UAE as a global player and confirm the worst fears of those who said his heart was never in it.

Alex Scott is E3G’s climate diplomacy and geopolitics programme lead, based in London

Linda Kalcher is executive director at the Strategic Perspectives think tank, based in Brussels

The post Here’s how the oil-rich UAE delivers a Cop28 ‘win’ appeared first on Climate Home News.