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 woseneed, the need for climate finance is greater and the US pledge has stagnated. The US can and must do better,” she said.
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".
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.
US tees up Congress battle with $3bn Green Climate Fund pledge
Climate Change
The Pacific made history in the courts – now we must do it in the negotiations
Vishal Prasad is director of Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change.
When the International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered its advisory opinion on climate change last year, it marked a turning point not just for the Pacific, but for international climate law.
The court was unambiguous: states have legal obligations to protect the environment from greenhouse gas emissions, and they face accountability when they fail. For those of us who carried this campaign from a classroom in Vanuatu to Europe and New York, it was a moment of profound validation.
World’s top court opens door to compensation from countries responsible for climate crisis
But we have always said that the advisory opinion was a tool, not an endpoint. The ICJ affirmed what many in the Pacific have been saying for some time. Now we have a legal blueprint, we must carry this momentum from the courtrooms to the negotiating rooms.
Potential to shape climate politics
The advisory opinion has already begun to reshape the climate landscape. At COP30 in Belém, we saw countries that had supported the campaign citing the opinion in their interventions, while those blocking progress were clearly concerned of its implications. Its potential to shape climate politics and policy is significant.
This year we have arrived at the mid-year climate negotiations in Bonn not only with the advisory opinion, but with a UN General Assembly resolution endorsing it. Despite a fierce campaign from the usual suspects, just eight countries, including the USA, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran voted against. That is a victory for multilateralism at a moment when multilateralism is under strain.
UN General Assembly backs “climate obligations” set by world’s top court
But we know that advisory opinions alone are not enough. Legal clarity will not automatically translate into reduced emissions, increased finance flows or stronger national climate plans. That translation requires political will in the negotiating rooms, both here in Bonn and all the way through Fiji and finally in Antalya this November.
What the Pacific needs from this negotiating year
The Pacific put significant political capital into the joint Australia-Pacific bid for COP31. It is fair to say that the compromise of Australia holding the role of president of negotiations while the COP is held and presided over by Türkiye is not what we imagined.
But we in the Pacific are used to looking for silver linings. Both Australia and Türkiye have acknowledged the important role the Pacific will have at COP31, through the appointment of Pacific champions and the hosting of a Pacific Pre-COP in Fiji with a leaders event in Tuvalu. These are genuine opportunities to bring the world to our shores and ensure that Pacific issues are front and centre going into the final negotiations.
But we are not naive. Envoy positions and meeting locations are just the architecture of goodwill. We need to see that goodwill converted into concrete negotiating outcomes and finance.
COP31 leaders unveil global targets, with spotlight on electrification
The Pacific helped put Australia’s climate minister Chris Bowen in this important position, so we expect to see Australia advocate not only for us, but to turn a mirror towards itself as one of the world’s biggest fossil fuel exporters.
At Bonn, and then in Antalya, we need ambition on mitigation that reflects the ICJ’s clarity on state obligations and the science. That means action on fossil fuels.
We need climate finance that is new, additional and accessible to the countries that need it most. In the Pacific we have already demonstrated what that looks like.
The Pacific Resilience Facility is the first climate finance facility designed, governed and managed by Pacific people, built specifically to reach the grassroots and community initiatives that larger funds routinely bypass. We need the international community to meet that ambition with contributions that reflect climate justice, starting with pledges to meet the $500-million capitalisation goal.
And we need the oceans – which are the lifeblood of the Pacific and a critical part of the global climate system – treated as a central element of the negotiations rather than a thematic aside.
Energy crisis driven by imported fossil fuels
The days of speaking about climate and fossil fuels purely as a moral issue are long gone. Pacific ministers recently adopted the Tassiriki Call for a Fossil Fuel Free Pacific, in the context of a deepening energy crisis that has triggered states of emergency in several Pacific nations. Our dependence on imported fossil fuels is both a climate and an economic vulnerability.
Conflict in the Middle East is pushing our region into an energy crisis. We are dependent on imported fossil fuels for 80% of our energy needs. My home country of Fiji could see an increased fuel bill of nearly three times our annual healthcare budget.
Comment: COP31 must persuade countries to make fossil fuel transition plans
We need the technical and financial support to transition to 100% renewable energy. Not only because it is what the world owes us for decades of carbon pollution that continue to render parts of our home uninhabitable, damaging ecosystems and culture. But because we must be part of that transition. Fossil fuels have proven to be the greatest source of damage to our climate, and with their volatility, to our sovereignty as well.
What next?
The demands have not changed. Greater action on mitigation, adaptation, finance, loss and damage: these remain the substance of what the Pacific requires from the international community. What has changed is the legal foundation beneath them.
The ICJ has affirmed that these are not requests. They are obligations. The task this year is to make the negotiations reflect that.
The post The Pacific made history in the courts – now we must do it in the negotiations appeared first on Climate Home News.
The Pacific made history in the courts – now we must do it in the negotiations
Climate Change
Biscayne Bay Is Slowly Becoming the Ocean
A 20-year record reveals an estuary tipping toward a saltier, more acidic state. These conditions threaten its hammerhead shark nursery and the aquifer that supplies Miami’s drinking water.
In the shadow of Miami’s skyline, in water churned daily by boats and jet skis, juvenile great hammerhead sharks—a critically endangered species—spend the first two years of their lives. A few miles from downtown, researchers recently pulled a 12-foot critically endangered sawfish from the same shallows. The species has been dying off in alarming numbers across South Florida’s waters since 2024, in an event scientists suspect was set in motion by record ocean heat.
Climate Change
An Old Well Gushed Waste, Not Oil, in a Small West Texas Town
The Railroad Commission of Texas shut down injection wells to control a leak in a church parking lot. But 1.5 million gallons of toxic wastewater still spilled to the surface.
GRANDFALLS, Texas—An old oil well sprang back to life under the parking lot of the First Baptist Church of Grandfalls in April.
An Old Well Gushed Waste, Not Oil, in a Small West Texas Town
-
Climate Change10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases10 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
-
Renewable Energy8 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
