China’s exports of clean-energy technologies such as solar panels, batteries and electric vehicles are increasingly helping to cut emissions in other countries.
Such exports in 2024 alone are already shaving 1% off global emissions outside of China and, in total, will avoid some 4bn tonnes of carbon dioxide (GtCO2) over the lifetimes of the products.
Moreover, the global CO2 savings from using these products for just one year acts to more than outweigh the emissions from manufacturing them.
This new analysis for Carbon Brief is based on a detailed assessment of clean-technology export flows, the carbon footprint of manufacturing these products and the “carbon intensity” of electricity generation in destination countries.
Other key findings from the analysis include:
- The solar panels, batteries, electric vehicles (EVs) and wind turbines exported from China in 2024 are set to cut annual CO2 emissions in the rest of the world by 1%, some 220m tonnes (MtCO2).
- Manufacturing these products resulted in an estimated 110MtCO2 within China in 2024, implying that the upfront CO2 emissions are offset in much less than a year of operation.
- Over the expected lifetime of these products, their manufacturing emissions will be offset almost 40-fold, with cumulative CO2 savings reaching 4.0GtCO2.
- When factoring in China’s plans to build overseas manufacturing plants for clean-energy products, as well as to construct overseas clean-power projects, the avoided CO2 increases to 350MtCO2 per year. This is 1.5% of global emissions outside China and almost equal to the annual emissions of Australia.
- The largest emission reductions are associated with direct clean-technology equipment exports – particularly solar panels – followed by manufacturing at Chinese factories overseas, with overseas projects financed by Chinese investors a distant third.
- China’s clean-energy footprint almost spans the entire world, with exports to 191 of the 192 other UN member states, as well as manufacturing and project finance investments in dozens of countries.
- Clean-energy exports from China in 2024 alone, along with its overseas investments from 2023 and 2024, are set to cut emissions in sub-Saharan Africa by around 3% per year once completed and in the Middle East and north Africa (MENA) region by 4.5%.
China’s rapid expansion in clean-energy manufacturing and exports is already reshaping emissions trajectories in several key regions.
While China dominates the supply of equipment, however, most of the financing for clean-energy development outside of China is provided by others, with around three-fourths of the value from clean-energy projects and products being captured in other countries.
Nevertheless, Chinese industries stand to benefit from increased exports as global demand for clean-energy technologies grows – and there are signs that this is already starting to shift China’s political and diplomatic stance on climate action.
Clean-energy’s cumulative climate impacts
China’s booming output of clean-energy technologies is enabling rapid deployment both domestically and around the world, but their production is energy- and carbon-intensive.
The new analysis shows Chinese clean-tech exports are nevertheless having immediate global climate benefits. This contradicts many commentators who have linked China’s clean-tech boom to the rapid recent rise in its emissions.
Specifically, the analysis shows that manufacturing clean-energy equipment for export resulted in an estimated 110MtCO2 of emissions in 2024, or just 1.1% of China’s CO2 from fossil fuels.
Yet the solar panels, batteries, EVs and wind turbines exported in 2024 will avoid an estimated 220MtCO2 annually when put into operation overseas.
Moreover, these products will continue to generate emissions savings for as long as they continue operating. The clean-energy products exported in 2024 alone will avoid a cumulative total of 4.0GtCO2 across their lifetimes, as shown in the figure below.

Emissions associated with the production of China’s clean-technology exports in 2024 and the annual emissions avoided during their use (columns), as well as the cumulative impact on global emissions over the lifetime of these products, MtCO2. Source: Analysis by Lauri Myllyvirta for Carbon Brief.
The CO2-saving impact of these exports – from just one year – will compound together with emissions savings from China’s past and future shipments of clean-energy equipment.
For example, its EV exports increased by 33% in the first five months of 2025, compared with the same period in 2024, showing the potential for further growth.
Solar panel exports held steady – despite a massive spike in domestic demand – and are likely to grow in the coming years given projected growth in global capacity installations.
Looking beyond direct equipment exports, overseas clean-energy investments announced by Chinese companies in 2023-24 – building solar panel manufacturing plants, for example – will generate another 90MtCO2 of avoided emissions per year, once the projects have been built.
In addition, overseas clean-power generation projects announced by Chinese investors in 2023-24 would save another 40MtCO2 per year.
In terms of technologies, the largest avoided emissions result from solar, at 280MtCO2, followed by batteries and EVs at 50MtCO2, as shown in the figure below. Wind turbine exports are relatively small, avoiding another 20MtCO2.

CO2 emissions avoided overseas as a result of China’s clean-technology exports in 2024 and investments in 2023-24, MtCO2, broken down by technology and type of activity. Source: Analysis by Lauri Myllyvirta for Carbon Brief.
China’s overseas clean-energy footprint
Both economically and in terms of emissions reductions, exports of clean-energy equipment dominate China’s overseas footprint.
Equipment exports in 2024 were worth a total of $177bn, whereas across 2023 and 2024, Chinese firms announced overseas clean-energy manufacturing projects worth $58bn, as well as overseas power generation and storage deals worth $24bn.
(Note that these figures do not include Chinese-backed overseas fossil-fuel developments, including coal-fired power plants, which China has pledged to stop supporting.)
Once in operation, the Chinese owned or funded overseas clean-energy developments will help avoid 130MtCO2 of emissions, with 80Mt from solar, 35MtCO2 from EVs and batteries, as well as 13MtCO2 from wind and 6MtCO2 from hydropower.
Looking at this total another way, the avoided CO2 emissions from clean-energy equipment produced in Chinese factories overseas will amount to 90MtCO2, while its financing of clean-power generation will avoid an estimated 40MtCO2.
In contrast, avoided emissions from clean-energy equipment exported from China in 2024 will amount to an estimated 220MtCO2 per year.
China’s clean-energy footprint spans essentially the entire world, with exports to 191 of the 192 UN member states, excluding China, manufacturing plans in 25 countries in 12 of the 17 UN regions and clean-energy project financing in 27 countries in 11 regions.
Some countries and regions do stand out, however, as shown in the map below.

Avoided CO2 emissions from China’s clean-tech activity in 2024, MtCO2 by country. Source: Analysis by Lauri Myllyvirta for Carbon Brief.
In terms of resulting emission reductions, the largest destinations for China’s overseas clean-energy activity are south Asia and the Middle East and north Africa (MENA) region.
This reflects both the large volumes of Chinese clean-technology activity reaching these countries and their highly carbon-intensive power grids, which means that installing new solar panels offsets high-emissions generation, for example.
(By the same logic, driving a Chinese EV in these countries would have smaller climate benefits than with lower-carbon electricity. See: How avoided emissions are calculated.)
Solar exports to South Asia have boomed, with Pakistan the single largest market. Pakistan’s electricity shortages and increasing affordability of solar have prompted consumers to install.
The same dynamic has played out in South Africa, which also features in the top 10 countries where China’s exports are resulting in avoided emissions (left panel in the figure below).

Top 10 countries for avoided CO2 emissions from China’s overseas engagements, by type of activity and technology, MtCO2. Source: Analysis by Lauri Myllyvirta for Carbon Brief.
Assuming that all the overseas financing deals announced in 2023–24 are realised, the MENA region will see the largest avoided emissions due to China’s overseas clean-energy activity, resulting from a combination of solar panel exports, manufacturing and financing deals.
This includes eight solar and two wind power generation projects with a total capacity of 10 gigawatts (GW), in Egypt, Algeria, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Tunisia.
On the manufacturing side, Saudi Arabia is the main destination, with a major EV production facility, two solar factories and one for wind turbines. There are also a total of five battery manufacturing projects in Morocco and Oman.
OECD Europe is the largest destination for China’s exports and overseas manufacturing investments by value. However, relative to the volume of exports, the resulting CO2 savings are smaller than in other major destinations, due to lower carbon intensity of power generation.
The countries in the European region with the largest resulting emissions reductions are the Netherlands, Turkey, Spain, the UK, Poland and Germany.
Imports of solar power equipment are the largest category. Germany is an exception, where imports of EVs and batteries are even more significant, as is the UK, where a major battery manufacturing project could deliver larger emission reductions.
Turkey and Spain also have clean-energy manufacturing projects with Chinese involvement, while both Turkey and Germany imported wind power equipment from China in 2024.
In south-east Asia, China’s clean-energy footprint is the largest in Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia and Vietnam. Solar manufacturing plans play the largest role in Malaysia, while imports of solar power equipment are the largest category in the other countries.
Chinese financing for solar and wind power generation projects, with a total capacity of 3.7GW, plays a significant role in the Philippines and Laos, as does financing for a hydropower project in Indonesia. Vietnam imported batteries and wind turbines in addition to solar power equipment in 2024. Chinese companies also have plans for EV and battery manufacturing in Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam.
Regional emissions set to be cut by up to 4.5% a year
Another way to look at the impact of China’s clean-energy exports and investments is to consider the avoided CO2 relative to the total emissions in each region. This highlights where China’s overseas clean-energy footprint is having the biggest impact, in relative terms.
The figure below illustrates the distinction. For each region, longer bars indicate larger avoided emissions in absolute terms, whereas the furthest dots point to the biggest relative impacts.
On a relative basis, sub-Saharan Africa stands out, in addition to MENA. Specifically, China’s clean-energy exports in 2024 alone, with investments from 2023 and 2024, are set to cut annual emissions in sub-Saharan Africa by around 3% per year – and by around 4.5% in MENA.

Left: Avoided CO2 emissions from China’s overseas engagements, MtCO2 per year. Right: Avoided emissions per year relative to regional totals, %. Source: Analysis by Lauri Myllyvirta for Carbon Brief.
For sub-Saharan Africa, this relative measure of impact indicates that the solar power uptake in the region is rapid, in relation to the size of the region’s electricity systems.
The largest markets for China’s overseas clean-energy activity in the region are South Africa, Tanzania, Nigeria and Senegal.
China’s footprint in these countries is dominated by solar exports, except for Tanzania, where financing for a hydropower project and a small solar project make up most of the projected emission reduction. There are also significant wind power equipment exports into South Africa.
China’s role in global clean-energy supply chains
In 2024, clean-energy industries contributed more than 10% of China’s GDP for the first time, generating an estimated total economic output of $1.9tn.
This milestone underscores the scale of China’s clean-energy economy and its dominant role in the global manufacturing of solar panels, batteries and EVs.
On the surface, this may suggest that other countries have limited economic opportunities in clean energy. However, a closer examination reveals a more nuanced picture.
China’s involvement in global supply chains is still largely limited to exports and manufacturing, while most of the value is downstream.
For instance, a solar panel now accounts for approximately one-quarter of the total value of a utility-scale solar power plant. IRENA reported a global weighted average investment cost of $758 per kilowatt (kW) of capacity for utility-scale solar and an average module cost of $261/kW in 2023, or 34% of the total.
Module prices fell by 35% in 2024, further reducing the share of modules in total project costs. In the case of rooftop installations, which represented 43% of all newly added solar in 2023, the total investment costs are approximately 80% higher, implying a much lower share of the modules in overall costs.
Similarly, batteries exported at 2024 prices represent only about a quarter of the value of the EVs into which they are integrated. The average export value of a Chinese pure electric passenger vehicle was $22,000, calculated based on values and volumes in China Customs data. At a battery pack cost of $94 per kilowatt hour (kWh) of capacity, an average-sized 63kWh battery pack will cost a quarter of this. Out of the average retail price of an EV in Europe, some €46,000, the battery pack will make up only a sixth of the cost.
These figures highlight a key point: most of the economic value in clean energy lies downstream – in project development, system integration, installation and end-user services – rather than in upstream manufacturing, where China dominates.
In 2024, China exported $177bn worth of solar panels, EVs, batteries and wind turbines, making up roughly 5% of its total exports. If China maintains its current global market share, this figure could rise significantly.
(These exports could reach $1.1tn by 2035, according to a recent analysis by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) – driven primarily by a projected 12-fold increase to 2035 in the global EV market outside China – under the International Energy Agency’s 1.5C-compatible net-zero emissions by 2050 scenario.)
Trumping the $177bn value of the exports from 2024, however, the downstream value of overseas clean-energy products and projects relying on Chinese components is an estimated $720bn annually, four times the value of the exported raw components.
This includes the value of solar and wind power plants built using Chinese modules and turbines, as well as the revenue from the sales of EVs using Chinese batteries and battery materials.
Further investment in overseas manufacturing – Chinese companies building solar, battery and EV plants abroad – could lift this downstream value to an estimated $1.2tn annually.
China’s outsized role in upstream clean-energy manufacturing creates potential supply chain vulnerabilities that many countries will want to address, by diversifying supply sources and strengthening domestic capabilities.
However, China’s dominance is not synonymous with capturing the majority of the economic value in global clean-energy development. Rather, it reflects a strategic advantage in segments that other economies have often neglected, due to low value and profitability.
Implications of China’s expanding footprint
China’s rapid expansion in clean-energy manufacturing and exports is already reshaping emissions trajectories in several key regions.
In particular, markets in MENA and sub-Saharan Africa – where domestic clean-energy industries remain nascent – have benefited from lower costs and improved access to technology through Chinese imports. This dynamic has helped accelerate clean-energy deployment and shift emissions outlooks downward in these regions.
At the same time, China’s central role in global supply chains has raised concerns over supply security. Many countries are now taking steps to diversify their sourcing of key components such as solar panels, batteries and EVs.
However, given the scale and cost advantages of China’s clean-energy manufacturing sector, its products are likely to remain a large part of the global clean-energy landscape for the foreseeable future.
Economically, China’s footprint is more narrowly focused on upstream manufacturing. As clean-energy deployment continues to expand globally, there is significant potential for Chinese firms to increase their participation in downstream activities – including infrastructure development, operations and maintenance – capturing a larger share of value-added abroad.
These dynamics also reinforce China’s strategic interest in the continuation and acceleration of the global clean-energy transition.
As global demand for clean-energy technologies grows, Chinese industries stand to benefit from increased export volumes.
This economic incentive is beginning to translate into diplomatic engagement. In recent public remarks, for example, President Xi Jinping emphasised China’s role in advancing the clean-energy sector, suggesting a potential shift toward more proactive international positioning on climate and clean energy.
How avoided emissions are calculated
The manufacturing of solar panels and EV batteries is energy- and carbon-intensive, resulting in upfront carbon emissions from manufacturing.
In the case of exports and overseas manufacturing, the avoided CO2 emissions depend on the CO2 intensity of the power grid in the country where the equipment is used.
The left-most shape in the figure below shows the CO2 intensity of electricity generation in countries taking clean-energy exports from China. The width of the shape indicates the share of exports, by value, going to countries with a given carbon intensity.
The bulge in the shape shows that on average, China exports clean-energy equipment to countries with a lower CO2 intensity of power generation than its own grid (dashed line).
This increases the CO2 emission reductions from battery and EV exports, relative to using these products in China, but reduces them from solar panel and wind turbine exports.
Specifically, the average CO2 intensity of electricity in China’s export markets in 2024, weighted by value, was 395 grams of CO2 per kWh (gCO2/kWh), compared to 580gCO2/kWh in China.
The centre and rightmost shapes in the figure below illustrate the equivalent distributions for countries hosting Chinese overseas manufacturing and project financing.

CO2 intensity of electricity generation in destination markets for China’s clean-energy exports, overseas manufacturing and project finance, weighted by the value of the relevant engagements. Dashed line shows China’s CO2 intensity. Source: Analysis by Lauri Myllyvirta for Carbon Brief.
Based on the country-by-country CO2 intensities and the volume of different clean-energy exports from China, the emissions associated with manufacturing these products are, on average, offset in less than a year of operation.
Chinese solar panels pay back their upfront manufacturing emissions in four months, on average, while wind turbines take two years and EVs and batteries three years.
There is, however, wide variance between different destinations.
For example, EVs exported to the countries with the most carbon-intensive power generation, such as Uzbekistan or Botswana, result in no reduction in CO2 emissions from their operation under current conditions. These countries would need to achieve substantial reductions in the carbon intensity of their power system to realise emissions reductions from the use of EVs.
On the other hand, EVs exported to countries with very clean grids can pay back their upfront CO2 emissions in less than a year.
Similarly, solar panels and wind turbines exported to countries where power generation is already almost fully decarbonised, such as Sweden or Ethiopia, result in no emission reductions, when assessed using the average carbon intensity of power generation.
However, this does not tell the whole story because solar and wind exports to such countries could prevent increases in power generation from fossil fuels in response to growth in demand.
Much of China’s overseas manufacturing investment, though not all, is in markets with a lower average CO2 intensity of power generation than in China itself, which shortens the CO2 payback time from clean-energy equipment produced by those overseas manufacturing plants.
In the case of calculating avoided emissions from plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs), a major question is how much they are driven with electricity and how much with fuel.
PHEVs are likely to be driven more on fuel in markets with weaker charging infrastructure and weaker incentives for using electricity. For simplicity, this analysis assumes a 50-50 split in all markets. Improving infrastructure and incentives would increase the emissions savings from existing and new PHEVs, as well as likely increasing the share of full EVs in new sales.
About the data
Data on China’s exports by country are taken from China Customs. Trans-shipments from the mainland through Hong Kong are treated as exports from China, with data on Hong Kong’s international trade – which is reported separately – taken from UN COMTRADE.
The product categories used in the analysis are as follows:
EVs: electric and hybrid motor vehicles, including freight, public transport and tractors (HS codes 870122, 870123, 870124, 870220, 870230, 870240, 870340, 870350, 870360, 870370, 870380, 870441, 870451, 870460).
Battery: Lithium-ion accumulators and primary lithium cells (850760, 850650).
Solar: PV generators, photovoltaic cells, solar panels, solar-grade silicon and inverters (850171, 850172, 854140, 854142, 854143, 854149, 854150, 850440, 280461, 381800).
Wind: Wind-powered electric generators (850231).
Data on overseas manufacturing and power generation deals is taken from a mapping project by Climate Energy Finance.
Emission reductions from solar panels and wind turbines were calculated using the average utilisation – sometimes referred to as the “capacity factor” – of each technology in the destination country, along with its average CO2 intensity of power generation in 2024, both taken from Ember data.
This is a conservative assumption, as new solar and wind will mainly replace fossil-fuelled power generation, resulting in higher emission reductions in countries where fossil fuels make up a small share of total power generation.
Emission reductions from EVs and plug-in hybrids were calculated using the following assumptions for the size of the battery pack in kilowatt hours (kWh), the mileage, the emissions of an internal combustion-engine (ICE) alternative and the fuel use per 100km:
| BEV | PHEV | Heavy-duty vehicle (buses and trucks) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battery pack, kWh | 63 | 15 | 350 |
| Mileage, km/year | 15,000 | 15,000 | 80,000 |
| ICE emissions, g/km | 230 | 230 | 800 |
| EV electricity and fuel use, per 100km | 21kWh | 15kWh + 4 litres | 150kWh |
Emission reductions from battery exports are calculated assuming that the batteries are installed in BEV and PHEV passenger vehicles, with an equal split.
Combustion-engine vehicle CO2 emissions are estimated based on average real-world fuel efficiency and CO2 emissions from petrol and biofuel production, as well as from combustion.
Annual mileage for passenger vehicles is based on data for China, the EU and the US, while it is based on US data for heavy duty vehicles. Upfront manufacturing emissions from EVs are the additional emissions compared with building a fuel-burning vehicle.
The value of solar projects using Chinese equipment is based on averages for total investment costs in 2023 from IRENA, adjusted for the reported 35% fall in module costs in 2024.
As the IRENA cost data is for utility-scale solar, the average across the utility-scale and distributed segments, such as rooftops, is estimated assuming that rooftop installations have 80% higher costs and make up a share of 43% of all newly added solar, based on data for 2023.
The total volume of solar equipment and materials exports from China in 2024 is conservatively calculated based on the reported value of solar module exports from China Customs and module export volume, as well as estimating the volume of the exports of polysilicon, wafers and solar cells using the same average value per GW as for solar modules.
The value of EVs sold overseas using Chinese batteries is estimated based on the total value of the EV market by region and market share of Chinese batteries and battery materials globally.
The market share in the overseas market is calculated based on 2024 power battery installations in China and globally, assuming that the market share of Chinese battery materials is 100% in China. The value of EVs exported from China is subtracted from this value to avoid double counting.
CO2 emissions from overseas manufacturing were calculated using the above estimates for emissions from production in China, adjusted to the average intensity of power generation in the host country.
The post Analysis: China’s clean-energy exports in 2024 alone will cut overseas CO2 by 1% appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Analysis: China’s clean-energy exports in 2024 alone will cut overseas CO2 by 1%
Climate Change
Fossil fuel expansion threatens COP31 hosts’ credibility, experts warn
Türkiye and Australia risk losing their credibility as hosts of this year’s COP31 UN climate summit if they keep betting on fossil fuels at home, climate policy experts have warned.
As governments are expected to continue fraught talks over how to advance the global transition away from oil, coal and gas in Antalya this November, both of the co-host countries are pursuing fossil fuel expansion at home, without a national timeline to phase out their use.
Türkiye has accelerated its rollout of wind and solar energy in recent years. But that progress has yet to make a dent in the country’s dependence on fossil fuels for power, as demand growth has outpaced the renewables build-out, new analysis by Climate Action Tracker (CAT) has found.
The share of electricity generated by burning coal and fossil gas – 56% in 2025 – has barely changed since 2019, and total fossil fuel use in the power sector, and the emissions it produces, are still rising, according to the report released on Friday.
The Turkish government has also signalled that fossil fuels will remain a central component of its energy mix and has outlined plans to expand the country’s burgeoning domestic gas production in the Black Sea.
‘Need to demonstrate seriousness’
Australia, which will chair the Antalya negotiations, relies on fossil fuels for over 60% of its electricity, with coal alone still supplying 45%. According to experts, it lacks an ambitious plan to shift away from fossil fuels at home, relying heavily on carbon offsetting to reach its climate targets.
Australia is also the world’s third-largest fossil fuel exporter and has plans to expand its coal and gas production, which is backed by significant government subsidies. It recently upset climate groups by approving an extension of the Saraji open-cut coal mine in Queensland.
Türkiye says it has “final decision” at COP31 despite Australia running negotiations
Jennifer Morgan, a senior fellow with the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and former climate envoy for Germany, said Türkiye and Australia need to demonstrate their seriousness about their COP presidency roles by leading by example on the energy transition.
“They have made progress in renewable energy,” she told reporters this week. “But I think their credibility – and their ability to therefore bring momentum and good outcomes to the COP – will depend on their taking further action at home.”
Türkiye’s electrification homework
The co-hosts’ fossil fuel policies are being scrutinised in the run-up to the annual UN climate summit, with much riding on the signal climate diplomacy sends on the energy transition.
Türkiye has so far stopped short of putting any overt political capital behind the fossil fuel transition itself. It has instead been rallying support for a new global electrification target of 35% by 2035, seen as the centrepiece of this year’s non-negotiated Action Agenda put forward by Ankara.
COP31 president Murat Kurum said last week the push to electrify economies – through measures like electric vehicles and heat pumps – will “automatically” lead to a reduction in the use of fossil fuels.
Türkiye’s own energy plan projects the country’s electrification rate would fall short on the global target and only hit 25% by 2035, according to the CAT report, which called for a “substantial step-change” in electrification policies and the deployment of more renewable power and grid infrastructure.
Coal still dominant
CAT’s analysts also warned that, without a parallel phase-out of fossil fuels, rising electricity demand risks being met in part by coal and gas, failing to deliver the emissions reductions the electrification target is meant to achieve.
Türkiye has had some success in its clean energy build-out: the share of electricity generation from wind and solar rose to 22% in 2025, up from 12% in 2020, according to the CAT report.
But coal’s role in Türkiye’s electricity mix has also grown, in both its share and absolute terms, over the past decade. And while reliance on fossil gas has declined overall, it still plays an important role in Ankara’s energy policy, which is pushing to boost domestic gas production in the Black Sea.
Dr Niklas Höhne from the NewClimate Institute said the government could demonstrate leadership as COP31 president by building on its recent successes in increasing its renewable energy capacity and announcing targets and plans to phase out coal and gas ahead of the summit.
According to CAT, Türkiye should phase out coal by 2040 and fossil gas by 2045 at the latest to align its power sector with global efforts to limit the rise in global temperatures to 1.5C above preindustrial times.
Türkiye quiet on fossil fuel roadmap
Ümit Şahin, coordinator of climate change studies at the Istanbul Policy Center (IPM), said Türkiye’s strategy is to approach the fossil fuel debate exclusively from the “end-use point of view”.
“I don’t expect any push from the Turkish presidency to the producer countries in terms of fossil fuel production,” he told reporters.
Neither does Şahin believe the Turkish presidency will throw its political weight behind another big-ticket item for COP31: a new global roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels.
Brazil took on the responsibility to voluntarily draft this document outside of the formal negotiations as a way to break the deadlock at last year’s UN summit in Belém when governments clashed over whether to develop one.
The outgoing COP30 presidency will deliver the roadmap in early November – but it will be up to Türkiye and Australia to guide countries towards a decision on how the blueprint will be taken forward, either inside or outside the negotiations.
Leadership needed
Australia’s Chris Bowen, COP31’s president of negotiations, promised to lobby producing countries to deliver a “meaningful step forward” on the fossil fuel transition in an interview with The Guardian earlier this year. But he has been quiet on the role Australia sees for the fossil fuel transition roadmap.
Natalie Jones, senior policy advisor at the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), said the COP31 co-presidents “must provide clear leadership” on this process.
“This roadmap cannot be left in a dusty drawer,” she told journalists. “Rather, it must be translated into action, with all countries identifying what elements they can adopt or develop in their own national roadmap.”
Like Türkiye, Australia has yet to produce a national blueprint for winding down coal, gas and oil. Rather than moving toward a phase-out, state and federal governments have kept expanding fossil fuel licensing over the past year, according to a new analysis published this month by Climate Analytics.
Under existing policy, both coal and gas are on track to remain in Australia’s power system as late as 2050 – a trajectory the report defines as incompatible with the 1.5C limit the country says it’s committed to.
No binding end dates for the Netherlands
Analysts are watching out for national transition roadmaps as a bellwether for governments that claim to be leaders in the global shift away from fossil fuels.


The Netherlands, which co-hosted the first fossil fuel transition conference in Santa Marta this year, published its own domestic roadmap earlier this week. The document followed through on a pledge that “leadership on transitioning away from fossil fuels must be backed by concrete action, not just ambitious words”, said a spokesperson for Stientje van Veldhoven, the Dutch minister for climate policy.
But experts criticised the plan for failing to set a binding end date for the country’s fossil fuel production and use. While targeting a rapid increase in renewables capacity, the Dutch government only commits to phasing out oil, gas and coal “in the energy and feedstock system to eventually zero, and to minimise fossil use” by 2050.
Yvo de Boer, a former Dutch diplomat and executive secretary of the UN climate body, said the Dutch roadmap falls short of what’s needed to give industry the confidence to deploy capital in support of the energy transition with greater predictability.
“Ultimately, a roadmap without deadlines is nothing more than a footpath paved with good intentions,” he added, writing on LinkedIn.
The post Fossil fuel expansion threatens COP31 hosts’ credibility, experts warn appeared first on Climate Home News.
Fossil fuel expansion threatens COP31 hosts’ credibility, experts warn
Climate Change
How clean energy can boost business for Africa’s food producers
Despite millions of dollars in grants and technical help for African businesses to power farming and other food production activities with renewable energy, most efforts remain stuck at the early stages because they struggle to find the investors, markets and expertise they need to grow.
This was the message from a coalition of global institutions working on energy, water and agriculture at this month’s Africa Food Systems Forum in Kigali, Rwanda.
“Energy, agriculture, water and nutrition actors rarely design solutions together,” the Agri-Energy Coalition said in a Call to Action on powering food systems with clean energy.
Using more renewables – especially solar power – to drive food systems would reduce food losses, ensure year-round availability and affordability of healthy foods, and improve productivity, income and resilience among farmers, food processors and other small enterprises, the coalition added.
In an interview with Climate Home News at the forum, Olamide Niyi-Afuye, CEO of the Africa Minigrid Developers Association (AMDA) – a body representing private-sector developers of small-scale, off-grid electricity systems across the continent – said its members are starting to recognise this interdependence and are increasingly considering businesses that combine energy with agricultural activities.
This, Niyi-Afuye added, could lead to greater supply and use of clean power for key processes like irrigation, food processing and storage, creating new sources of revenue for both sectors.
CHN: Conversations at the Africa Food Systems Forum highlighted how organisations working in energy and agriculture often operate in silos. What has hampered their collaboration, and how has that affected Africa’s economic development?
A: Most mini-grid companies in Africa were primarily incentivised to achieve connections. If you look at some ongoing projects, you see a cost-per-connection model [of revenue]. When a subsidy is tied to achieving a connection, regardless of whether it is a productive connection, you might not notice the problem until five years down the line, when you realise the cash flows are not what you projected.
Despite African walkout, fractious land COP ends without drought deal
So now we’re in a “come-to-Jesus moment” as an industry, where we’re righting the wrongs and adjusting our business models to make sure companies do not go bust and there is some level of sustainability over the long term.
The saying is not wrong that we’ve been working in our own silos because we’ve focused on the smaller things instead of the helicopter view. There needs to be cross-pollination [between the energy and agriculture sectors] because, if we are thinking about industrialisation, energy is a key driver of industrialisation. We will not achieve that if we’re not in the room and part of those conversations.
CHN: Productive use of energy is intended to ensure electricity access goes beyond lighting homes to improving livelihoods, creating jobs and powering equipment. But what happens when farmers cannot afford the equipment they need to do that? How can energy, agriculture and equipment players work together to make the transition more accessible?
A: That’s why we’re having conversations with companies set up to de-risk the agriculture sector. By leveraging that connection, we’re able to aggregate potential energy needs and develop instruments that make equipment more affordable through bulk procurement.
We can have arrangements that make it easier for farmers and food producers to lease equipment and eventually own it over a period. There’s no real pressure to recover the capital very quickly because you’re looking at scale.


There is a whole lot across the agricultural value chain that needs energy, from farming and harvesting to food processing and value-addition. We need to understand the energy needs across the value chain and bring our members in to provide solutions.
Developers do not necessarily need to provide every productive-use solution themselves. They can partner with equipment suppliers, financiers, agribusinesses and other service providers to enable customers to use electricity productively. The objective is simple: do not just electrify communities; enable economic activity that uses that electricity.
CHN: When Africa’s industrialisation is discussed, you hear things like renewables cannot provide enough baseload, while some food processors are sceptical about switching to renewable energy because of these concerns about reliability. What is your response?
A: It’s not a controversial statement to say that a typical baseload is usually from the grid, and it’s usually from multiple sources including renewable energy. For large-scale operations, we can look at blending multiple sources of energy. But how do we solve the problem of a mid-sized farmer? We can solve it with a mini-grid using renewable energy.
Comment: Every country needs a model to help optimise its energy transition
If you go to a small farmer in a rural area, they don’t care about what source of energy they’re getting. They just want something that can help them get from A to B. If you look at the direct energy needs of farmers and food processors, I’m sure 90 percent of their consumption can be solved by renewable energy. Let’s start with that problem first. Then, as they scale, they might need to ramp up, and we can start talking about a bigger baseload.
CHN: How much agricultural value is lost because farmers and food businesses lack reliable, affordable electricity?
A: If you look at, for example, the fact that we need to maybe plant tomatoes or strawberries in Jos before it gets to Lagos [Nigeria], which most likely is by road, I can assure you that a good chunk, if not stored properly, would be bad by then. So the fact that we do not have energy is in itself a lost opportunity to maximise the potential of the agriculture sector. So until we’ve solved the energy problem, we will not salvage waste – and for me that is a lost opportunity.
CHN: AGRA, an institution focused on scaling agricultural innovations to help smallholder farmers, estimates a massive shortfall between current investments in the continent’s food systems and what is actually needed to build a resilient, profitable agricultural economy – to the tune of $180 billion per year. Can integrating energy into food systems help bridge that gap?
A: Yes – if energy can help unlock the potential to earn more money, investors will follow the money. Investments go where there is certainty, and until there is certainty around cash flow and revenue, investment will be limited.
My vision is to see more Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) being signed between energy players and the agriculture sector. We can start by getting people into the room, understanding their pain points, crafting a framework and documentation that works for both parties, and then seeing deals happen.
This interview was shortened and edited for clarity.
The post How clean energy can boost business for Africa’s food producers appeared first on Climate Home News.
How clean energy can boost business for Africa’s food producers
Climate Change
Human security relies on adapting to the world’s new climate reality
Cristina Rumbaitis del Rio is a senior advisor on adaptation and resilience with the United Nations Foundation and Mattias Söderberg is global climate lead at Danish NGO DanChurchAid.
Recent extreme events – from wildfires and heatwaves in Europe to flash flooding following a glacier collapse in Nepal – have shocked and devastated communities, bringing years of warnings about such climate impacts to the doorstep of communities around the world.
One thing is certain: the new climate reality is here – and the adaptation strategies designed for yesterday’s world are no longer sufficient.
Attribution science has since shown that the hotter and more frequent heatwaves we’re experiencing around the world would have been virtually impossible without today’s high concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Climate shocks are now so severe that they reverberate through supply chains, food and water systems, financial markets and the movement of people.
They must be a catalyst for a new way of thinking about adaptation and resilience, and how we finance solutions that work. A failure to invest in adaptation in one region can create costs far beyond it, which is why the concept of shared resilience is critical for leaders to grasp.
Investment not charity
At the UN General Assembly (UNGA 81) this month, leaders have an opportunity to translate today’s urgency into concrete commitments on adaptation and loss and damage finance ahead of COP31.
Those commitments are needed to underpin global stability, shared prosperity and human security. Governments should use this moment to show what a new response looks like: finance that reaches communities faster, supports locally grounded solutions, strengthens national systems, and helps countries prepare before the next shock arrives.
If we want sustained economic growth, food and water security, and resilient and prosperous societies across every region, adaptation must be at the heart of today’s development and security agenda. It cannot be just a future planning consideration or a narrow issue for climate ministries. Adaptation is now everyone’s business – and it must be financed fast and fair.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres has repeatedly framed climate finance as an investment rather than charity, warning that “a world in climate chaos cannot be a world at peace” and describing human security as freedom from the chronic and sudden disruptions that climate change multiplies.
What’s more, adaptation delivers a real return-on-investment, with researchers estimating that every dollar invested produces $10 in benefits, saving lives, protecting livelihoods, and reducing the costs of future disasters.
Hitting adaptation limits
The urgency to scale adaptation systematically is growing. The newly released “Limiting Overshoot” report from the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) confirms what scientists have long warned: exceeding global warming of 1.5C is now unavoidable under current policies. Yet, how high temperatures rise – and how long the world remains above the 1.5C threshold – will determine whether communities, economies and entire ecosystems can keep pace.
There are limits to adaptation. When we breach those limits, lives and livelihoods are lost, and people and ecosystems suffer greatly. We cannot simply build yesterday’s infrastructure a little stronger and assume it will be enough.
Nepal flood destruction shows “limits to adaptation”, scientists say
We need to fundamentally change the systems that determine how societies anticipate, absorb and recover from both immediate and evolving non-linear climate shocks. This includes transforming physical systems, such as infrastructure, and the governance systems that affect where and how we live to how we maintain our health and wellbeing.
Finance today is nowhere near the scale of the challenge.
The UNEP “Adaptation Gap Report 2025” estimates the shortfall in adaptation finance in developing countries at $284 billion–$339 billion a year – roughly 12 to 14 times current international public flows of around $26 billion. That gap is a development, economic and human security problem, especially for the most vulnerable populations who have contributed the least to causing the climate crisis.
Building resilience into financial systems
There are already signs of what a more systemic adaptation response could look like. Communities around the world are delivering practical solutions at local level, even as adaptation finance remains notoriously, and appallingly, difficult to access. Cyclone-resistant homes, local forecasting capacities, drought-resistant crops, heat insurance for pregnant informal workers and mangrove restoration are rooted in local knowledge and lived experience, while delivering benefits far beyond the communities where they originate from.
But local innovation alone is not enough; the systems around it need to be resilient too.
Jamaica offers one example. The country has built a multi-layered disaster-risk financing framework, including a catastrophe bond and contingency funds, through sustained fiscal discipline and proactive investment. Its debt-to-GDP ratio fell from around 147% in 2012 to around 62% in 202-25. That groundwork matters when disaster strikes.
Hurricane Melissa’s destruction shows need for climate resilience push
Following Hurricane Melissa, Jamaica was able to secure billions of dollars in reconstruction financing from multilateral banks – finance that might otherwise have been much harder to access. The lesson is clear: resilience can be built into the financial architecture of a country before a crisis arrives. That is the shift we now need to make at scale.
The foundations already exist – in Kingston’s fiscal reforms, in early-warning systems from the Sahel to the Pacific, and in every community that adapted before disaster struck. What is still missing is the political will, and the finance, to take what works and put it to work everywhere, at the speed our world’s new climate reality demands.
To hear more on this issue from high-level officials and experts, sign up for this event during Climate Week NYC, at 8am EDT on September 24 (in person or online), moderated by Climate Home News Editor Megan Rowling: Adapting to the New Climate Reality: Why Accelerating Impacts Demand New Responses.
The post Human security relies on adapting to the world’s new climate reality appeared first on Climate Home News.
Human security relies on adapting to the world’s new climate reality
-
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 Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
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”
-
Renewable Energy11 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits







