Rich nations agreed to channel at least $300 billion a year by 2035 for developing countries to ramp up climate action under a new finance goal adopted at the COP29 climate summit, after bad-tempered talks in which vulnerable countries pushed for a bigger slice of the pie.
The new goal, which kicks in after 2025, replaces the existing annual target of $100bn, which was met two years late in 2022 and is widely seen as insufficient to meet rocketing needs among poorer nations to shift to clean energy and adapt to extreme weather and rising seas.
The $300bn goal – with developed countries “taking the lead” in providing money and mobilising private-sector investment – will be at the core of a wider effort to scale up financing to at least $1.3 trillion per year by 2035 “from all public and private sources”.
UN climate chief Simon Stiell described the new finance goal as “an insurance policy for humanity, amid worsening climate impacts hitting every country”.
“This deal will keep the clean energy boom growing and protect billions of lives,” he said, warning that “like any insurance policy – it only works – if the premiums are paid in full, and on time.”
In the closing plenary of the two-week summit, some developing nations, including Cuba and India, expressed dissatisfaction with the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG), criticising its “paltry size” and the weight given to funding from multilateral development banks. They said it does not respond to their requirements to grow sustainably and keep their people safe.
“The goal is too little. Too distant,” Chandni Raina, an adviser with India’s Ministry of Finance told the closing plenary. “The proposed goal shall not solve anything for us.”
Tina Stege, climate envoy for the Marshall Islands, said her Pacific island state was leaving “with a small portion of the funding climate-vulnerable countries urgently need”. “It isn’t nearly enough, but it’s a start, and we’ve made it clear that these funds must come with fewer obstacles so they reach those who need them most,” she added.
“Tale of delivery”
But EU climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra told the plenary that COP29 would be remembered “as a start of a new era for climate finance”, saying the EU believes “it is ambitious, it is needed, it is realistic and it is achievable. We are confident this will be a tale of delivery,” he added.
The agreement came after a day of drama as the COP29 talks in Baku ran overtime, with groups of the poorest nations and small island states staging a temporary walkout, raising fears that a deal would not be reached at the so-called “Finance COP”.
COP29 Bulletin Day 12: Carbon market rules adopted after walkout delays finance talks
Those vulnerable groups wanted to ensure they would get fixed amounts under the new goal, arguing they are hit hardest by the impacts of global warming and have the least resources to protect their people and go green. In the end, they compromised, settling for a process that will explore options to “design and implement” allocation floors for them.
Baku to Belem Roadmap
That effort will be part of a “Baku to Belem Roadmap to $1.3 trillion” that will look for “additional resources” to drive low-carbon, climate-resilient development and support the rollout of developed-country plans for cutting emissions and adapting to climate change.
This roadmap, which will be developed over the coming year leading up to the COP30 conference in Belem, Brazil, was put forward by the African Group, Barbados, Colombia, Honduras and Panama in Baku this week.
Details remain sketchy but Colombia’s environment minister Susana Muhamad referred to “innovative possibilities that our countries have been working on”. A taskforce co-led by France, Kenya and Barbados, for example, has been considering how to introduce levies on shipping, aviation, fossil fuels and financial transactions.
Win for China, Gulf states
The final COP29 deal on the new finance goal was a compromise between efforts by rich countries to limit the amount of additional government finance they will have to stump up – with many citing fiscal constraints – and the growing gap between funding and needs in climate-stressed parts of the world.
Developing countries rejected a strong push by wealthy governments to include their richer, more polluting members, especially China and Gulf nations, in the official donor base. The text only “encourages” developing countries to make contributions to the new finance goal “on a voluntary basis”.
Namibia uses COP29 climate summit to push for oil and gas investments
As the talks in Baku got dangerously close to ending without an agreement, the Azerbaijan presidency came in for sharp criticism for putting a proposed figure for the government-led core of the finance goal on the table too late.
It eventually did so on Friday, which should have been the final day of the two-week talks, with an initial suggestion of $250 billion a year provoking disappointment and anger from developing countries, who argued they were being forced to sacrifice their people.
Compromises
In the end, they settled for not much more in return for commitments to avoid worsening already high debt levels and easing access to funding, including from the UN’s dedicated climate funds. The text promises to pursue efforts to at least triple annual outflows from those funds from 2022 levels by 2030, rather than earmarking a percentage of the goal for them, as earlier proposed.
Developing countries also capitulated on demands for sub-goals to channel more money to under-funded work on adaptation, as well as repairing growing loss and damage from droughts, floods, storms and rising oceans. These sub-goals were left out of the agreed text.
Climate justice activists slammed the new goal for being far too low and failing to set a target that would prioritise grants over loans.
Champa Patel, executive director of governments and policy with the Climate Group, said $300bn a year “doesn’t even come close to the transformational finance needed to tackle the climate crisis”.
Don’t mention fossil fuels
As drama unfolded over finance, countries also adopted at COP29 a weakened decision on cutting carbon emissions, which failed to explicitly mention last year’s pledge to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems. A second text on mitigation was postponed to mid-2025, after it was also weakened by opposition from Saudi Arabia.
The adopted Mitigation Work Programme, a non-binding process meant to enhance climate mitigation, was adopted at the closing plenary. The adopted version fails to mention last year’s landmark decision to reduce reliance on fossil fuels, which it did include in earlier versions.
A second text meant to be the main outcome on cutting emissions in Baku did not reach consensus, after also getting weakened. The “UAE Dialogue” follows up on last year’s review of climate policies known as the Global Stocktake (GST) – the main decision from last year’s COP in Dubai.
The last version of the UAE Dialogue referenced “paragraph 28” of the UAE consensus, where the fossil fuel transition was included, but the text falls short of explicitly mentioning the landmark pledge to reduce fossil fuels.
Instead, the latest draft reaffirmed the role of “transitional fuels” also mentioned in last year’s GST, which experts interpreted to mean fossil gas among other technologies.
Saudi Arabia successfully blocked any fossil fuel language at COP29, after their negotiators said at a plenary session on Thursday that they would “not accept any text that targets any specific sectors including fossil fuel”. The Saudi government has also blocked this in other major environmental summits, among them the biodiversity COP16 and the G20.
In the last draft, the COP29 presidency also removed two proposals to expand energy storage capacity to 1,500 gigawatts by 2030 and to add 25 million km of power grids by 2030. Both would have been new targets building on the decision to triple renewable energy capacity by the same date.
At the closing plenary, several country groups expressed their disappointment with the text and said they could not accept it in its current form.
“We are concerned to see attempts to backtrack the agreements made last year,” said Chilean lead negotiator Julio Cordano. “The text does not enjoy consensus”.
“We made historic commitments a year ago, including to transition away from fossil fuels. We came here to translate that commitment into meaningful action, and quite simply, we have fallen short,” said a delegate from Canada.
In the end, COP president Mukhtar Babayev opted to defer the text until next year, when countries will review the process again in mid-year talks in Bonn. A final decision is expected at COP30.
The UAE Dialogue was one of the key agreements meant to inform the upcoming round of new nationally determined contributions (NDCs). Most of them will now have to make progress without an explicit mandate from the COP.
As COP29 came to a close, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said in a statement that he “had hoped for a more ambitious outcome – on both finance and mitigation – to meet the great challenge we face. But this agreement provides a base on which to build,” he added.
(Reporting and editing by Megan Rowling, Joe Lo and Sebastian Rodriguez)
The post Fractious COP29 lands $300bn climate finance goal, dashing hopes of the poorest appeared first on Climate Home News.
Fractious COP29 lands $300bn climate finance goal, dashing hopes of the poorest
Climate Change
DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report
Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.
This week
Blazing heat hits Europe
FANNING THE FLAMES: Wildfires “fanned by a heatwave and strong winds” caused havoc across southern Europe, Reuters reported. It added: “Fire has affected nearly 440,000 hectares (1,700 square miles) in the eurozone so far in 2025, double the average for the same period of the year since 2006.” Extreme heat is “breaking temperature records across Europe”, the Guardian said, with several countries reporting readings of around 40C.
HUMAN TOLL: At least three people have died in the wildfires erupting across Spain, Turkey and Albania, France24 said, adding that the fires have “displaced thousands in Greece and Albania”. Le Monde reported that a child in Italy “died of heatstroke”, while thousands were evacuated from Spain and firefighters “battled three large wildfires” in Portugal.
UK WILDFIRE RISK: The UK saw temperatures as high as 33.4C this week as England “entered its fourth heatwave”, BBC News said. The high heat is causing “nationally significant” water shortfalls, it added, “hitting farms, damaging wildlife and increasing wildfires”. The Daily Mirror noted that these conditions “could last until mid-autumn”. Scientists warn the UK faces possible “firewaves” due to climate change, BBC News also reported.
Around the world
- GRID PRESSURES: Iraq suffered a “near nationwide blackout” as elevated power demand – due to extreme temperatures of around 50C – triggered a transmission line failure, Bloomberg reported.
- ‘DIRE’ DOWN UNDER: The Australian government is keeping a climate risk assessment that contains “dire” implications for the continent “under wraps”, the Australian Financial Review said.
- EXTREME RAINFALL: Mexico City is “seeing one of its heaviest rainy seasons in years”, the Washington Post said. Downpours in the Japanese island of Kyushu “caused flooding and mudslides”, according to Politico. In Kashmir, flash floods killed 56 and left “scores missing”, the Associated Press said.
- SOUTH-SOUTH COOPERATION: China and Brazil agreed to “ensure the success” of COP30 in a recent phone call, Chinese state news agency Xinhua reported.
- PLASTIC ‘DEADLOCK’: Talks on a plastic pollution treaty have failed again at a summit in Geneva, according to the Guardian, with countries “deadlocked” on whether it should include “curbs on production and toxic chemicals”.
15
The number of times by which the most ethnically-diverse areas in England are more likely to experience extreme heat than its “least diverse” areas, according to new analysis by Carbon Brief.
Latest climate research
- As many as 13 minerals critical for low-carbon energy may face shortages under 2C pathways | Nature Climate Change
- A “scoping review” examined the impact of climate change on poor sexual and reproductive health and rights in sub-Saharan Africa | PLOS One
- A UK university cut the carbon footprint of its weekly canteen menu by 31% “without students noticing” | Nature Food
(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)
Captured
Factchecking Trump’s climate report
A report commissioned by the US government to justify rolling back climate regulations contains “at least 100 false or misleading statements”, according to a Carbon Brief factcheck involving dozens of leading climate scientists. The report, compiled in two months by five hand-picked researchers, inaccurately claims that “CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed” and misleadingly states that “excessively aggressive [emissions] mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial”80
Spotlight
Does Xi Jinping care about climate change?
This week, Carbon Brief unpacks new research on Chinese president Xi Jinping’s policy priorities.
On this day in 2005, Xi Jinping, a local official in eastern China, made an unplanned speech when touring a small village – a rare occurrence in China’s highly-choreographed political culture.
In it, he observed that “lucid waters and lush mountains are mountains of silver and gold” – that is, the environment cannot be sacrificed for the sake of growth.
(The full text of the speech is not available, although Xi discussed the concept in a brief newspaper column – see below – a few days later.)
In a time where most government officials were laser-focused on delivering economic growth, this message was highly unusual.
Forward-thinking on environment
As a local official in the early 2000s, Xi endorsed the concept of “green GDP”, which integrates the value of natural resources and the environment into GDP calculations.
He also penned a regular newspaper column, 22 of which discussed environmental protection – although “climate change” was never mentioned.
This focus carried over to China’s national agenda when Xi became president.
New research from the Asia Society Policy Institute tracked policies in which Xi is reported by state media to have “personally” taken action.
It found that environmental protection is one of six topics in which he is often said to have directly steered policymaking.
Such policies include guidelines to build a “Beautiful China”, the creation of an environmental protection inspection team and the “three-north shelterbelt” afforestation programme.
“It’s important to know what Xi’s priorities are because the top leader wields outsized influence in the Chinese political system,” Neil Thomas, Asia Society Policy Institute fellow and report co-author, told Carbon Brief.
Local policymakers are “more likely” to invest resources in addressing policies they know have Xi’s attention, to increase their chances for promotion, he added.
What about climate and energy?
However, the research noted, climate and energy policies have not been publicised as bearing Xi’s personal touch.
“I think Xi prioritises environmental protection more than climate change because reducing pollution is an issue of social stability,” Thomas said, noting that “smoggy skies and polluted rivers” were more visible and more likely to trigger civil society pushback than gradual temperature increases.
The paper also said topics might not be linked to Xi personally when they are “too technical” or “politically sensitive”.
For example, Xi’s landmark decision for China to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060 is widely reported as having only been made after climate modelling – facilitated by former climate envoy Xie Zhenhua – showed that this goal was achievable.
Prior to this, Xi had never spoken publicly about carbon neutrality.
Prof Alex Wang, a University of California, Los Angeles professor of law not involved in the research, noted that emphasising Xi’s personal attention may signal “top” political priorities, but not necessarily Xi’s “personal interests”.
By not emphasising climate, he said, Xi may be trying to avoid “pushing the system to overprioritise climate to the exclusion of the other priorities”.
There are other ways to know where climate ranks on the policy agenda, Thomas noted:
“Climate watchers should look at what Xi says, what Xi does and what policies Xi authorises in the name of the ‘central committee’. Is Xi talking more about climate? Is Xi establishing institutions and convening meetings that focus on climate? Is climate becoming a more prominent theme in top-level documents?”
Watch, read, listen
TRUMP EFFECT: The Columbia Energy Exchange podcast examined how pressure from US tariffs could affect India’s clean energy transition.
NAMIBIAN ‘DESTRUCTION’: The National Observer investigated the failure to address “human rights abuses and environmental destruction” claims against a Canadian oil company in Namibia.
‘RED AI’: The Network for the Digital Economy and the Environment studied the state of current research on “Red AI”, or the “negative environmental implications of AI”.
Coming up
- 17 August: Bolivian general elections
- 18-29 August: Preparatory talks on the entry into force of the “High Seas Treaty”, New York
- 18-22 August: Y20 Summit, Johannesburg
- 21 August: Advancing the “Africa clean air programme” through Africa-Asia collaboration, Yokohama
Pick of the jobs
- Lancaster Environment Centre, senior research associate: JUST Centre | Salary: £39,355-£45,413. Location: Lancaster, UK
- Environmental Justice Foundation, communications and media officer, Francophone Africa | Salary: XOF600,000-XOF800,000. Location: Dakar, Senegal
- Politico, energy & climate editor | Salary: Unknown. Location: Brussels, Belgium
- EnviroCatalysts, meteorologist | Salary: Unknown. Location: New Delhi, India
DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
The post DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report appeared first on Carbon Brief.
DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report
Climate Change
New York Already Denied Permits to These Gas Pipelines. Under Trump, They Could Get Greenlit
The specter of a “gas-for-wind” compromise between the governor and the White House is drawing the ire of residents as a deadline looms.
Hundreds of New Yorkers rallied against new natural gas pipelines in their state as a deadline loomed for the public to comment on a revived proposal to expand the gas pipeline that supplies downstate New York.
New York Already Denied Permits to These Gas Pipelines. Under Trump, They Could Get Greenlit
A “critical assessment” report commissioned by the Trump administration to justify a rollback of US climate regulations contains at least 100 false or misleading statements, according to a Carbon Brief factcheck involving dozens of leading climate scientists.
The report – “A critical review of impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on the US climate” – was published by the US Department of Energy (DoE) on 23 July, just days before the government laid out plans to revoke a scientific finding used as the legal basis for emissions regulation.
The executive summary of the controversial report inaccurately claims that “CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed”.
It also states misleadingly that “excessively aggressive [emissions] mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial”.
Compiled in just two months by five “independent” researchers hand-selected by the climate-sceptic US secretary of energy Chris Wright, the document has sparked fierce criticism from climate scientists, who have pointed to factual errors, misrepresentation of research, messy citations and the cherry-picking of data.
Experts have also noted the authors’ track record of promoting views at odds with the mainstream understanding of climate science.
Wright’s department claims the report – which is currently open to public comment as part of a 30-day review – underwent an “internal peer-review period amongst [the] DoE’s scientific research community”.
The report is designed to provide a scientific underpinning to one flank of the Trump administration’s plans to rescind a finding that serves as the legal prerequisite for federal emissions regulation. (The second flank is about legal authority to regulate emissions.)
The “endangerment finding” – enacted by the Obama administration in 2009 – states that six greenhouse gases are contributing to the net-negative impacts of climate change and, thus, put the public in danger.
In a press release on 29 July, the US Environmental Protection Agency said “updated studies and information” set out in the new report would “challenge the assumptions” of the 2009 finding.
Carbon Brief asked a wide range of climate scientists, including those cited in the “critical review” itself, to factcheck the report’s various claims and statements.
The post Factcheck: Trump’s climate report includes more than 100 false or misleading claims appeared first on Carbon Brief.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-trumps-climate-report-includes-more-than-100-false-or-misleading-claims/
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year 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 Change1 year 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”
-
Carbon Footprint1 year agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Why airlines are perfect targets for anti-greenwashing legal action
-
Renewable Energy2 months ago
US Grid Strain, Possible Allete Sale
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Some firms unaware of England’s new single-use plastic ban