Sunday November 17th was the official day of rest for COP29 participants as negotiations stalled, the pavilion chaos closed its doors, and sessions ceased for the entire day. The result: the city of Baku was bustling to accommodate the sudden extreme influx of tourists and foreigners looking to explore the city all at once. I was among them, looking to enjoy some sight seeing and I set my sights on the historic Old City area.
After 1 full week in Baku I am finally getting a handle on how to navigate the city. Maybe. But Old City was a challenge as the cobblestone roads weave in and out of one another irregularly, most roads too narrow to accommodate more than a single person to pass. But it is certainly beautiful.

Excited to give my COP29-overloaded brain a break, I decided to visit the National Museum of History of Azerbaijan which is located just outside of the Old City. My favorite exhibitions were the ancient pottery samples which provided a window into the daily workings of Azerbaijani life going back to Neolithic times. As I moved through the exhibits, getting closer and closer to contemporary times, I noticed I was enjoying myself a little less the closer I got to today. As the exhibits’ foci shifted from historical intrigue to modern socio-political landscapes, modern war, and economy I became reminded of the reality of historical trauma that the global proletariat have endured under oppressive regimes the world over.
I learned that the very first oil industry began in Baku, Azerbaijan. As early as the 1200’s, famous Venetian traveler Marco Polo recorded his chancing upon what is thought to be an oil well in Azerbaijan. The Azerbaijanis used to procure oil for use in burning and fire, an effect of combustion and a very early precursor for the use of oil in combustion engines and global transport. According to the United Nations, fossil fuels account for over 75% of greenhouse gas emissions as well as over 90% of carbon dioxide emissions globally.
It was not lost on me how ironic it was that I traveled halfway across the world for COP29, with a mind to dismantle the global reliance on fossil fuel usage, without realizing I was also on a pilgrimage to the source of the oil industry itself.
In 1806 the Russian Empire occupied Baku and began a monopoly on Azerbaijani oil. At the National Museum of History of Azerbaijan the exhibit showcasing this time period said in plain terms: The Russian Empire exploited Baku’s oil resources, exporting Baku oil products to Russia while providing no compensation to Azerbaijan in the process. And as Vladimir Lenin famously said, ‘Soviet Russia cannot survive without Baku oil.’ — resulting in the Russians Red Army occupation of Azerbaijan until its fall in 1991. Azerbaijan finally claimed independence in 1991.
A large cause of social turmoil, oppression, and exploitation of Azerbaijan throughout history has to do with their access to a valuable commodity gifted to this area through the natural resources located on this land. Learning the history of Baku and the exploitation of land here led me to think about something I noticed at COP29 this past week that has been on my mind: the expansion of ecotourism and the well meaning greenwashing of colonial exploitation.
In many discussions occurring at COP29 this year there is a focus on solution building and how the proverbial ‘we’ will fund sustainable climate mitigation and adaptation movements. As the United Nation likes to point out, the first and worst effects of the global climate crisis are being felt by the Indigenous peoples of the world. Right now, our island relatives are already navigating devastating losses of natural habitat and shifting geography resulting in further degradation of traditional ecological knowledge systems.
The irony is that many of these island communities also support a disproportionate fraction of global tourism. In an effort to experience paradise, the Global North flock to island communities and spend portions of their salaries in these places in the process. Many sessions and government entities are now proposing efforts and techniques to expand this spending power to allow for further economic stimulus in these communities so that they may have an easier time supporting their climate adaptation efforts.
While I will never knock a hustle on the part of the Indigenous folks looking to increase earning potential in their communities, I am alarmed that we are entertaining government representatives from the Global North who are actively proposing ways for the Global South to increase the exploitation of their natural resources in order to… save their natural resources?
Why is the burden of climate adaptation being placed upon communities that contribute to the climate crisis the least?
There are generational fishing traditions in Jamaica which cannot be practiced today due to hotels and resorts monopoly on beach front property. Delicate reefs are being compromised due to tourism. Native peoples in Tuvalu are watching their ancestral coastlines dissipate within their lifetimes. The burden of funding climate adaptation, cultural preservation and environmental protections should not fall upon those who have been burdened and exploited the most themselves. Us Native folks have already lost so much and continue to find our ways are compromised in the face of the climate crisis. It is time the Global North pay their equitable share. Quit pretending these carbon credits will reverse the damage done and roll up your sleeves.
Antavia is a Climate Generation Window Into COP delegate for COP29. To learn more, we encourage you to meet the full delegation, support our delegates, and subscribe to the Window Into COP digest.

Antavia descends from the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe and grew up in South Minneapolis. She earned her associates degree at Minneapolis College as a Power of You scholar and continued her studies in chemistry at Metro State University as an Increasing Diversity in Environmental Careers Fellow, as well as abroad in Cuernavaca, Mexico as a Gilman International Scholar. Antavia has been a PhD student of chemistry at the University of Minnesota where she helped teach undergraduate analytical chemistry labs and spent time researching and synthesizing porous nanoparticles for PFAS phytoremediation as a 3M Science and Technology Fellow. In her work she develops and implements a STEM curriculum that honors and supports Indigenous ways of knowing and cultural protocol for Native American high school students in South Minneapolis. Her work in STEM educational equity has been shown to increase science interest and engagement for Indigenous girls in particular.
The post Ecotourism or Exploitation? appeared first on Climate Generation.
Climate Change
Equity, Benefit-Sharing and Financial Architecture in the International Seabed Area
A new independent study by Dr Harvey Mpoto Bombaka (Centro Universitário de Brasília) and Dr Ben Tippet (King’s College London), commissioned by Greenpeace International, reveals that current International Seabed Authority revenue-sharing proposals would return virtually nothing to developing countries — despite the requirement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) that deep sea mining must benefit humankind as a whole.
Instead, the analysis shows that the overwhelming economic value would flow to a handful of private corporations, primarily headquartered in the Global North.
Download the report:
Equity, Benefit-Sharing and Financial Architecture in the International Seabed Area
Executive Summary: Equity, Benefit-Sharing and Financial Architecture in the International Seabed Area
https://www.greenpeace.org.au/greenpeace-reports/equity-benefit-sharing-and-financial-architecture-in-the-international-seabed-area/
Climate Change
Pacific nations would be paid only thousands for deep sea mining, while mining companies set to make billions, new research reveals
SYDNEY/FIJI, Thursday 26 February 2026 — New independent research commissioned by Greenpeace International has revealed that Pacific Island states would receive mere thousands of dollars in payment from deep sea mining per year, placing the region as one of the most affected but worst-off beneficiaries in the world.
The research by legal professor Dr Harvey Mpoto Bombaka and development economist Dr Ben Tippet reveals that mechanisms proposed by the International Seabed Authority (ISA) for sharing any future revenues from deep sea mining would leave developing nations with meagre, token payments. Pacific Island nations would receive only USD $46,000 per year in the short term, then USD $241,000 per year in the medium term, averaging out to barely USD $382,000 per year for 28 years – an entire annual income for a nation that is less than some individual CEOs’ salaries. Mining companies would rake in over USD $13.5 billion per year, taking up to 98% of the revenues.
The analysis shows that under a scenario where six deep sea mining sites begin operating in the early 2030s, the revenues that states would actually receive are extraordinarily small. This is in contrast to the clear mandate of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which requires mining to be carried out for the benefit of humankind as a whole.[1] The real beneficiaries, the research shows, would be, yet again, a handful of corporations in the Global North.
Head of Pacific at Greenpeace Australia Pacific Shiva Gounden, said:
“What the Pacific is being promised amounts to little more than scraps. The people of the Pacific would sacrifice the most and receive the least if deep sea mining goes ahead. We are being asked to trade in our spiritual and cultural connection to our oceans, and risk our livelihoods and food sources, for almost nothing in return.
“The deep sea mining industry has manipulated the Pacific and has lied to our people for too long, promising prosperity and jobs that simply do not exist. The wealthy CEOs and deep sea mining companies will pocket the cash while the people of the Pacific see no material benefits. The Pacific will not benefit from deep sea mining, and our sacrifice is too big to allow it to go ahead. The Pacific Ocean is not a commodity, and it is not for sale.”
Using proposals submitted by the ISA’s Finance Committee between 2022 and 2025, the returns to states barely register in national accounts. After administrative costs, institutional expenses, and compensation funds are deducted, little, if anything, remains to distribute [3].
Author Dr Harvey Mpoto Bombaka of the Centro Universitário de Brasília said:
“What’s described as global benefit-sharing based on equity and intergenerational justice increasingly looks like a framework for managing scarcity that would deliver almost no real benefits to anyone other than the deep sea mining industry. The structural limitations of the proposed mechanism would offer little more than symbolic returns to the rest of the world, particularly developing countries lacking technological and financial capacity.”
The ISA will meet in March for its first session of the year. Currently, 40 countries back a moratorium or precautionary pause on deep sea mining.
Gounden added: “The deep sea belongs to all humankind, and our people take great pride in being the custodians of our Pacific Ocean. Protecting this with everything we have is not only fair and responsible but what we see as our ancestral duty. The only equitable path is to leave the minerals where they are and stop deep sea mining before it starts.
“The decision on the future of the ocean must be a process that centres the rights and voices of Pacific communities as the traditional custodians. Clearly, deep sea mining will not benefit the Pacific, and the only sensible way forward is a moratorium.”
—ENDS—
Notes
[1] A key condition for governments to permit deep sea mining to start in the international seabed is that it ‘be carried out for the benefit of mankind as a whole’, particularly developing nations, according to international law (Article 136-140, 148, 150, and 160(2)(g), the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea).
For more information or to arrange an interview, please contact Kimberley Bernard on +61407 581 404 or kbernard@greenpeace.org
Climate Change
North Carolina Regulators Nix $1.2 Billion Federal Proposal to Dredge Wilmington Harbor
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers failed to explain how it would mitigate environmental harms, including PFAS contamination.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers can’t dredge 28 miles of the Wilmington Harbor as planned, after North Carolina environmental regulators determined the billion-dollar proposal would be inconsistent with the state’s coastal management policies.
North Carolina Regulators Nix $1.2 Billion Federal Proposal to Dredge Wilmington Harbor
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
