For the second time since the Paris Agreement on climate change was adopted, the US this week formally withdrew from the global pact following a 12-month mandatory period since President Donald Trump announced he would pull his country out on his first day in office in January 2025.
Since then, the US has axed most of its international climate funding and this month said it would exit the UN climate convention (UNFCCC) – which underpins the UN climate process and the Paris Agreement – the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is the world’s most authoritative climate science body, and the Green Climate Fund (GCF), the world’s biggest multilateral climate fund.
Trump to pull US out of UN climate convention and climate science body
As the Trump administration turns its back on the UN climate regime, UN climate chief Simon Stiell described the move as a “colossal own goal”, while the GCF – to which the US has failed to deliver billions of dollars in promised support – said the country would lose its board seat but operations would continue.
Climate diplomacy experts say some of the changes announced by the US president could remain symbolic or be reversed in the future, while warning that the reputation of the world’s second-biggest emitting country could suffer a big hit in the long term.
Other countries may follow US Paris exit
Marta Schaaf, Amnesty International’s climate programme director, said the US’s second exit from the Paris Agreement on January 27 (the first was during Trump’s first term) “sets a disturbing precedent” that could instigate a “race to the bottom”, encouraging other countries to leave.
“The US is one of several powerful anti-climate actors but as an influential superpower, this decision, along with acts of coercion and bullying of other countries and powerful actors to double down on fossil fuels, causes particular harm and threatens to reverse more than a decade of global climate progress under the agreement,” she said in a statement.
So far no other signatories have publicly announced they will quit the 2015 climate agreement, but Israeli media recently reported that the country is discussing a withdrawal under pressure from the US. Last year, Argentina also hinted at a possible exit but did not follow through.
COP30 chief calls for two-tier climate system to speed up action beyond consensus
COP30 President André Aranha Corrêa do Lago said himself that in the months leading up to last year’s UN climate conference in Brazil, there was “a lot of noise about possible additional exits”, after the world’s largest economy said it would withdraw.
The Trump administration has been called out in other UN processes, after being accused of employing “bullying” tactics at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to persuade smaller countries to vote against the entry into force of a green shipping deal. This pressure resulted in a delayed decision.
Allie Rosenbluth, Oil Change International’s US campaign manager, said the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement “is a betrayal of the communities at risk from climate disaster, especially those on the frontlines of the crisis in the Global South”.
Legal uncertainties around UNFCCC withdrawal
This January, in an unprecedented move, the White House also announced the US would leave the broader UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This would take effect one year after formally notifying the UN, which it had yet to do as of the time of publication.
The UNFCCC could be harder to rejoin than the Paris Agreement – which was last done through an executive order issued by former President Joe Biden – because the US Senate first gave unamimous “advice and consent” for ratification of the UNFCCC in 1992, making the legal situation more complex.
Some experts believe the US would need Senate authorisation to formally withdraw from the UNFCCC, and there are questions around whether the move would be legal at all.
Trump’s presidential memorandum says that “for United Nations entities, withdrawal means ceasing participation in or funding to those entities to the extent permitted by law”. To all intents and purposes, the US had already disengaged from the UN climate process during Trump’s first year in office, cutting funding for the UN’s climate body and not sending a delegation to COP30.
However, if the US does not formally notify the UN of its withdrawal from the UNFCCC, that could potentially ease legal concerns for the Trump administration, according to Michael Gerrard, climate change law professor at Columbia Law School.
Could the US rejoin the UNFCCC?
Gerrard told Climate Home News that if the Trump administration does not officially withdraw from the UNFCCC, “then I don’t see a legal obstacle to a subsequent administration resuming funding and participation”. “Even if the US does formally withdraw now, a new president might well be able to rely on the prior consent in rejoining; that issue has never been decided by the Supreme Court,” he added.
Sue Biniaz, the US State Department’s Principal Deputy Special Envoy for Climate until January 2025, and Jean Galbraith, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, wrote on the Just Security blog that the mainstream legal view is that the president may constitutionally withdraw the US from a Senate-approved treaty where – as here – the withdrawal is lawful under international law and neither the Senate’s resolution of “advice and consent” nor a congressional law has put limits on withdrawal.
-
Colombia aims to launch fossil fuel transition platform at first global conference
The landmark summit aims to build the political and economic foundations to fast-track the shift away from coal, oil and gas, one of its organisers said -
IMO head: Shipping decarbonisation “has started” despite green deal delay
Arsenio Dominguez said the shipping industry’s net zero emissions goal is not in dispute although countries have stalled on adopting a framework to reach it
Under international law, they added, rejoining is straightforward. For the UNFCCC, a state can become a party 90 days after depositing its instrument of ratification or accession, and following that, the US could rejoin the Paris Agreement, which would take 30 days after the deposit of its instrument.
From the perspective of domestic law, the two climate law experts argued that the original Senate resolution remains in effect (unless repealed by the Senate) and provides the legal authority needed for a future president to rejoin the UNFCCC. He or she could also seek a second round of “advice and consent”, ask Congress to approve rejoining, or potentially join the UNFCCC under the president’s independent constitutional powers, they added.
Loss of US leadership and credibility
Irrespective of whether the White House does move to rejoin the UN climate regime at any point, analysts said the Trump administration’s hostile attitude and disengagement has damaged the standing of the US when it comes to global climate action and the energy transition.
Biniaz and Galbraith wrote that the world is used to the US “flip-flopping on climate”, because it refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol and quit the Paris Agreement once before, but “withdrawal from the entire regime takes US abdication of climate leadership to a new level”.
Though many countries may be relieved that the Trump administration is not participating given its current policies, they said: “in the longer term, US absence could have a negative impact on the effectiveness of the regime and the willingness of other countries to take ambitious action.”
Nikki Reisch, climate and energy director at the Center for International Environmental Law, warned that “it will not be easy for the US to regain credibility or leadership on climate.”
While an “informal withdrawal” from the UNFCCC may “avoid some paperwork” and avoid potential lawsuits, she said it would not “insulate this administration from scrutiny and legal challenge on other grounds, particularly as it continues to unwind climate progress, dismantle environmental protections, and expand production of the fossil fuels”.
Reisch noted that US states and local governments have been making efforts to “fill the void where the federal government has abdicated its duties”. “Other countries, too, should see the Trump administration’s retreat as an invitation to step up, stand together and move forward,” she added.
The post Explainer: Out of Paris, but will the US formally quit the UN climate regime? appeared first on Climate Home News.
Explainer: Out of Paris, but will the US formally quit the UN climate regime?
Energy and Transport Day at COP31 ironically saw a second morning of horrible traffic jams and over-crowded buses and trams, meaning early events at the venue had to be hastily rescheduled.
This COP has more than 68,500 registered participants, together with another 24,500 workers needing to reach the venue, which is around 25 kilometres from the centre of Antalya.
Once things finally got underway in the halls, the focus was on two main voluntary pushes: transitioning away from fossil fuels (TAFF) and the COP31 Global Electrification Pledge, meant to usher in the “age of electricity”, according to the Turkish presidency.
The pledge sets a goal of raising electricity’s share of final energy consumption from around 23% today to 35% by 2035 (known as 35×35) by electrifying transport, buildings and industry.
“This year’s energy crisis has shocked us out of our complacency and demonstrated the inherent vulnerability of dependence on energy imports. Electrifying the global economy is now essential to boost energy security, cut emissions, and drive economic growth,” COP31 President Murat Kurum said in a statement.
The COP31 presidency is “determined to chart a path forward and use the annual UN summit to build momentum”, he added. But it remains to be seen whether and how the pledge will be incorporated into the final cover decision from Antalya, as some fossil fuel-producing countries are set to oppose any mention of the electricity to meet it coming from clean sources.
Neither is it clear which countries are backing the pledge. Climate Home News understands that no list is expected this week, as Turkiye rallies governments to the cause. Australia and other recent COP host nations are on board, while the European Union co-hosts the first “Electrification Forum” on Tuesday, bringing together governments, institutions, businesses and financiers.
The International Energy Agency (IEA), meanwhile, will lead a Global Electrification Tracking Mechanism to monitor global and regional electrification trends.
The IEA says the 35×35 electrification goal is within reach with strong political backing. But a recent analysis from Climate Action Tracker shows current policies will only lead to a share of 28% for electricity by the deadline.
-
COP31 outcome needs to prioritise transition away from fossil fuels
Many countries are already working on parts of their transition, such as phasing out coal or ending fossil fuel subsidies, with more expected to follow soon -
Developing countries face climate finance deficit as loan payments soar
Repayments on climate loans could overtake new lending by 2036, according to CARE analysis shared exclusively with Climate Home News
On the TAFF front, Brazil’s COP30 presidency held a high-level event to showcase its new global roadmap, which is essentially a toolkit to help countries start planning their transitions away from coal, oil and gas.
Here, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said countries should use the document to build their own concrete national roadmaps including clear timelines, responsibilities and financing needs.
By the next Global Stocktake of national climate plans in 2028, “every country should be able to show what it has done to cut fossil fuel use or production, what it will do next, and how it will measure progress,” he said, in a challenge to governments.
He added that it is “long past time to stop treating the transition away from fossil fuels as taboo or intractable” and called on COP31 to “move from discussing the transition to organising it, financing it, and delivering it”.
European nations signal support for fossil fuel roadmap, says COP30 president
As with the electrification pledge, the TAFF process remains a pick and choose effort. Some fossil fuel-producing nations are adamant it will stay that way and are likely to resist any attempt to anchor the roadmap in the cover decision or other negotiated outcomes at COP31.
Nonetheless, energy security concerns are expected to lead to an almost 60% increase in renewable capacity growth from 2026-2031 compared to the previous six years, according to the IEA, with solar power accounting for three quarters of that growth.
Declarations aim to electrify shipping and rooftops
One sector that is tricky to electrify – mainly because of a lack of chargers in the middle of the ocean – is maritime transport.
But a newly formed group of ports, shippers, campaign groups and think-tanks want electricity to be used where it can in the sector – electrifying ships on short routes like ferries, plugging ships into the electricity grid when they’re in port and electrifying the machines that handle ships’ cargo.
While the COP31 presidency has proposed a 35% by 2035 goal, this group said on Tuesday they want electricity’s share of final energy demand in shipping to rise to a more modest 20% by 2035 – up from a negligible amount today. The Danish Port of Esbjerg and Californian Port of Long Beach are among the backers of the Maritime Electrification Breakthrough Goal.
Maritime electrification projects could get a huge boost from the International Maritime Organisation’s Net Zero Fund, if it is agreed at intergovernmental talks in London starting later this month.
Also on Energy Day at COP31, a group of countries including Australia, Bangladesh, Kenya, Nigeria and Vanuatu signed onto the Global Rooftop Solar Declaration, an Australia-led initiative to try and double the number of solar-powered households to 300 million by 2030.
It’s not clear exactly how many countries are backing it. But the presidents of Palau and Pakistan also joined leaders to discuss the initiative while Indonesia’s state-operated utility PT PLN signed up too.
Australia’s climate minister Chris Bowen said in a statement: “Many countries have the sunshine, the space and the demand, but lack the finance, infrastructure and workforce needed to unlock this opportunity. This declaration is about changing that.”
Coal phase-out partnerships offer emerging economies early help
A multilateral initiative launched in Antalya aims to tackle one of the key demands from coal-producing countries in the Global South: help to access the existing pool of funding for transitioning away from fossil fuels.
Through “Coal Transition Partnerships”, the Powering Past Coal Alliance (PPCA) – a group of governments and other actors launched in 2017 – is seeking to unlock more than $23 billion by supporting developing countries to draw up their first phase-out plans.
Backers of the initiative include the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the Climate Investment Funds (CIF), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and climate research think-tanks like Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) and TransitionZero.
Julia Skorupska, head of the PPCA secretariat, told Climate Home News in Antalya that the early interventions could help developing countries access larger financial mechanisms along the lines of the Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs), which are working to help several developing countries phase out their coal fleets.
She added that countries are required to have done “a lot of work” before applying for transition funding, including having investment plans and a portfolio of projects. “For us that feels like a gap,” she said.
She added that the initiative has received “a lot of interest” and is meant to enable early-stage planning in coal-dependent emerging economies such as Kazakhstan, Indonesia and Pakistan.
By the time of the next Global Stocktake – the UN’s five-year review of climate progress – in 2028, the PPCA aims to be supporting ten of the world’s most coal-dependent countries. These include Indonesia, Vietnam, India and South Africa, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).
Farah Heliantina, energy transition official at Indonesia’s Ministry of Economic Affairs, said in a statement that the country’s experience “has taught us how challenging this transition can be”, as uncertainty in global fossil fuel markets threatens energy security at home.
Finance for the transition away from fossil fuels has proven difficult to channel effectively. At COP26 in Glasgow in 2021, South Africa was the first country to announce an $8.5bn JETP – funded by a group of donor countries including the UK, Germany and France – which included projects like early power plant retirements, reskilling workers and building transmission lines for renewable energy. However, by 2025, only around $3.8bn had been allocated.
After the war in Iran disrupted oil and gas markets this year, countries with gas-fired power fleets like China, Korea, Japan, and some European countries have turned to easier-to-source coal generation to keep their economies running, the IEA has highlighted. Skorupska said there’s a risk that new coal investments could become stranded.
“Fundamentally, we want to think about how we can help people overcome those shorter-term challenges to get the real long-term benefits of the transition away from fossil fuels,” she said.
Traffic chaos set to get worse as leaders arrive tomorrow
The first two days of COP31 have seen travel chaos which looks set to get worse tomorrow. As world leaders arrive in town and head to the conference centre, some roads will be closed so that the VIPs can be ferried in past not-so-important delegates. The COP31 presidency is warning of “severe disruptions”.
In an email to all COP participants, it advises getting to the venue by 7am. There will be more public transport than usual between 5-7am, after which time no public transport can leave the area, the email says, without specifying when it will resume.
Route schedules are still being planned and will be shared “as soon as possible”, the COP31 Transport Coordination Center says.
The 42 world leaders causing this heightened level of disruption on Wednesday will speak from 2pm local time. They include Brazil’s recently re-elected President Lula, European Commission President Ursula Von Der Leyen and China’s Vice President Han Zheng. The Turkish and Australian leaders are not on the list, but are expected to speak as COP31 co-hosts.
The speech of Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley will be worth a watch as she often uses COPs to unveil interesting and progressive new ideas. So will that – for different reasons – of Saudi energy minister Abdulaziz bin Salman Al Saud, the only minister allowed to speak on a day reserved mainly for presidents and prime ministers.
After COP28 agreed to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems, he infamously described this as just one item on an “a la carte menu”.
Another set of leaders – kicking off with the UK’s Andy Burnham – will speak on Thursday morning, including those of Nigeria, DR Congo, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Venezuela’s new President Delcy Rodriguez.
The post COP31 Bulletin Day 2: Energy Day off to slow start amid transport chaos appeared first on Climate Home News.
COP31 Bulletin Day 2: Energy Day off to slow start amid transport chaos
With rich governments and development banks delivering more climate finance as loans, developing countries could be paying back more each year than they receive in new lending by the mid-2030s, new research has found.
CARE Denmark and the CARE Climate Justice Center worked out the repayment schedules of around 17,500 climate loan records reported by developed countries and multilateral lenders between 2011 and 2024, in what the researchers say is the first analysis of its kind.
It estimates that repayments on these public climate loans, including interest and fees, nearly tripled from $6.9 billion in 2020 to $20.1 billion in 2024. That is equivalent to around a fifth of the public climate finance that developed countries reported providing that year.
If climate lending stays at its 2024 level each year and on the same terms, annual repayments on old and new loans would overtake fresh lending in 2036, the researchers found.
“By not making the backflows of climate finance visible, Global North countries cheat their public,” John Nordbo, senior climate adviser at CARE Denmark, told Climate Home News. “They give an impression that they are actually more supportive than they are.”
Finance takes centre stage at COP31
The World Bank is by far the biggest lender in the portfolio, followed by Japan and France. Overall, loans worth $489 billion will cost borrowers an estimated $663 billion over their lifetimes.
Climate finance looks certain to become a central issue at COP31 after developing nations scored an early win by getting a new work programme on climate finance added to the summit’s official agenda.
A key question looming over the talks in Türkiye is how rich countries will make good on their promise to deliver at least $300 billion a year in climate finance by 2035, amid shrinking aid budgets and spending redirected to other priorities, including defence.
-
When the oil companies leave, who pays?
Across the world, communities facing the decline of fossil fuel industries are demanding a Just Transition that gives them a say in what comes next. Establishing a strong mechanism at COP31 could help them secure it -
