- What timeline options were delegates debating?
- How did the timeline discussions unfold?
- What were the main points of disagreement?
- Why is the IPCC in a ‘serious funding crisis’?
- How have scientists reacted?
- What other issues remain unresolved?
- How are the IPCC AR7 reports progressing?
- How might the IPCC use AI and enhance gender inclusivity?
How does one come to care about a place, about a community? Is it a straightforward path of experiences and relationships and memories, or is it a winding road of growing, of learning what is important to you, what you care about and what you cherish?
Learning to value the community I now live in and the importance of sharing my climate story took some time, but I think I am on the right path.
My first steps on that path started in northern Minnesota: sledding in the winter, spending summers near the water, and exploring the trails and woods behind my house. The trail was pretty straightforward until I was 14 and my family decided to move to Dhaka, Bangladesh. Previously, I had only traveled to Montana, Arkansas, and Ontario, Canada. So, there was a TINY bit of culture shock as I stepped off the plane, and a wave of heat and humidity hit me in the face.
Growing up in a family and community of privilege, I had been sheltered from many of the realities of the world, from inequality, hunger, and polluted air. While I had to leave the US to truly start my journey of understanding the necessity of climate justice, the numerous stones I stepped on in my path led me to realize that we are all connected. We all must take action against the unjust impacts of climate change.
Follow me as I take my first step, or leap, toward that realization.
Dhaka is one of the most densely populated cities in the world, and at the time it was hard to find a natural place that was not covered in plastic and other trash. My time in Bangladesh and its surrounding countries was truly eye opening and grounding in helping me realize what people around the world face when trying to find clean water to drink, enough food to eat, and work that supports their family. While the path felt unfamiliar at the time, these were important steps in realizing the power the climate has on communities and that you cannot have climate justice without social justice.
Time passed, my trail was easy and straightforward, and I could fall back into my day-to-day activities, burying my head in the sand a bit and not worrying about ‘big issues’ like climate change or climate injustice.
Further down the path, I joined the Peace Corps and was off on a plane again, moving to far eastern Ukraine.
While learning enough Russian to be able to buy groceries and explore the industrial city of Lugansk, I noticed how reliant the local economy was on coal mining. I woke up hearing the whistles of shift change and saw workers walking down the street, covered in coal soot. The markets and bars were busy on payday, and it was clear that without the mine the neighborhood would suffer greatly. Meanwhile, many of the buildings nearby were stained black, a harsh reminder of the impact the mine was having on everyone’s health.
Another turn in the trail, and I was living in rural Wisconsin in a community of transition. The county I lived in was in the midst of a sand boom. Sand mining, removing sand for fracking for oil in Oklahoma and Texas, was changing both the economy and the relationships of the entire region. Local farmers, who for years had dealt with lower prices, had the opportunity to make quick money by selling mining rights, and many took it. This infusion of millions of dollars was sending house prices soaring and hurting community relationships; neighbors were understandably frustrated and concerned about the demolition of entire hillsides and the possible impact it could have on water quality.
Again, the path winded over a rise I couldn’t envision, and I found myself living in coastal Alaska, a step away from the most pristine wilderness I could ever imagine. Daily interactions with musk oxen, sea otters, and eagles only strengthened my understanding and resolve that while the world is a big place, there are so many connections that we cannot possibly do any of our work in isolation.
These experiences have pushed me and turned me around. They brought me back on a path toward knowing that sharing the importance of climate action is where my trail leads right now. It took me quite a bit longer than it may have for others. My privilege could easily have allowed me to keep my blinders on to how we all are impacted by climate change and climate justice, but definitely not on equal terms. My path required me to leave the country and see new experiences and cultures and people to be able to open my eyes to how my own community was, and will be, impacted by climate change.
I now know the only way my path will ultimately lead me to where I want to go is by engaging, supporting, and empowering my community to come together and demand action and resilience on the climate crisis.
Seth joined Climate Generation in 2020 and coordinates the Teach Climate Network, helping the education program to create powerful professional development opportunities for educators across the country. Seth is a member of the Midwest Climate Collaborative’s Community of Practice Fall leadership team, and coordinator of the Teach Climate Network Cohort Collation. He recently returned to his home state of Minnesota after five years in coastal Alaska and was able to see firsthand the negative impacts that climate change is having on rural communities. Seth is excited about sharing his experiences in environmental education and positive youth development with the climate change education community.
The post A Winding Journey appeared first on Climate Generation.
Continue Reading
Three countries have been named by the Paris Agreement’s compliance committee for failing to submit a nationally determined contribution (NDC) and repeatedly snubbing offers of help with their climate plans.
After months of internal debate over whether to identify serial non-responders, the Paris Agreement’s Implementation and Compliance Committee (PAICC) named the three countries which have failed to engage with it over their NDCs on Friday.
It named Democratic Republic of Congo, Senegal and North Korea in a footnote of its annual report, adding that it decided to name them “with a view to facilitating engagement”, adding that representatives of the three nations had been invited to its meeting in early 2027 “with the purpose of identifying any challenges and constraints”.
“The Committee noted the importance of Parties engaging with the Committee in a timely manner, while noting that some delays may be due to the national capabilities and circumstances of the Parties”, the report said.
-
Under US pressure, World Bank says it will back gas “where appropriate”
The US wants the World Bank to expand its gas support while climate campaigners are pushing for it to end – its head spoke this week of limited backing for the fossil fuel -
IPCC scientists vow to press on with climate reports despite political deadlock
After governments again failed to agree a timeline, nearly 120 IPCC authors pledged to complete their assessment on time and with full scientific rigour -
Paris Agreement committee snubbed over missing NDC climate plans
Many governments have still not submitted a nationally determined contribution to the UN, breaching a key requirement of the Paris Agreement
In July, PAICC said 12 countries had ignored its repeated attempts to discuss why they had not published an NDC as required every five years under the 2015 Paris accord.
Members of the committee had been divided over whether to name them, but at a September meeting decided to do so in their annual report to the annual climate COP summit.
By the time the report was published on Friday, only Congo, Senegal and North Korea “had not communicated an NDC or submitted a [Biennial Transparency Report] and had not yet responded to any of the Committee’s notifications, despite several reminders issued by the Committee in this regard”.
Rainforest and renewable energy ambitions
The silence from Congo and Senegal is notable because the former is home to much of the Congo Basin rainforest while the latter has sought billions of dollars in climate finance to support its renewable energy ambitions.
After Brazil, Congo has more rainforest than any country in the world. This forest, and the country’s peatlands, absorb huge amounts of greenhouse gas but are fast being lost to expanding farmland, charcoal production, logging and mining.
Senegal signed a Just Energy Transition Partnership with Canada and wealthy European nations in 2023, to help it meet its renewable energy targets under the-then government of Macky Sall. It was chair of the Least Developed Countries group between January 2022 and December 2023.
Tejas Rao, who is researching the PAICC as part of a doctoral thesis at Cambridge University, said the governments of the three countries should engage with the committee.
“Engagement costs these governments very little and the committee has shown it will listen,” he said.
“Silence leaves the committee with no basis to help, and it leaves the [governments] exposed to the narrative that they are simply disengaged,” he told Climate Home News.
Paris Agreement requirement
The 2015 Paris Agreement requires all parties to publish an NDC every five years outlining their emissions reduction targets, with each plan meant to be more ambitious than the country’s last NDC.
The latest set – the third round of plans, with new targets for 2035 – was due in February 2025. While most countries missed this deadline, all but around 30 – mostly small emitters but including Egypt, Vietnam and Argentina – have now submitted them.
Over the year, the PAICC – which is made up of government climate officials from developed and developing countries – has been communicating with governments that have not submitted NDCs and trying to overcome barriers to them doing so.
Some nations have cited exceptional circumstances as the reason for not submitting an NDC, a process that requires a significant amount of work in tracking emissions and consulting on how to curb them across the economy. For example, a letter from a Sudanese official to the PAICC, seen by Climate Home News, said that the country’s civil war had led to the suspension of its NDC preparation.
-
IPCC scientists vow to press on with climate reports despite political deadlock
After governments again failed to agree a timeline, nearly 120 IPCC authors pledged to complete their assessment on time and with full scientific rigour -
Under US pressure, World Bank says it will back gas “where appropriate”
The US wants the World Bank to expand its gas support while climate campaigners are pushing for it to end – its head spoke this week of limited backing for the fossil fuel -
Who shapes climate science? The equity question facing the IPCC
Early completion of the next global climate science assessment reports risks excluding research from the Global South, which is key to ensuring the findings are fair
The US and Iran are not signed up to the Paris Agreement and so do not have active NDCs, nor does Taiwan, which is not a UN member state.
Rao said that because the PAICC is “facilitative and non-punitive”, naming the countries “is meant to open a door, not close one – the invited consultation is the point”.
“In recent months, governments that explained their constraints, whether capacity, finance or domestic process, have been met with follow-up and support rather than sanction, and the number of silent governments has fallen sharply,” Rao said.
The post Paris Agreement committee names three countries snubbing it over NDCs appeared first on Climate Home News.
Paris Agreement committee names three countries snubbing it over NDCs
Countries have failed – for the sixth time running – to agree on the timeline for publishing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) next set of influential reports.
The IPCC’s 65th session (IPCC-65) was seen by many to be the final opportunity for countries to agree on a schedule where its seventh assessment report (AR7) would be published in time for the UN’s second “global stocktake” of climate action.
Before last week’s meeting in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, IPCC chair Prof Sir Jim Skea had warned that releasing the reports in time for the stocktake in 2028 would depend on a timelines being agreed by the end of 2026.
But the week-long meeting descended into fraught disagreements between governments, resulting in Skea “suspending” the talks on Friday evening with no decision made.
Countries were also unable to agree on the IPCC’s budget for the rest of the AR7 cycle, leaving the body with a “serious funding crisis”.
The IPCC has pledged to reconvene the meeting at the “earliest opportunity”; however, it has not yet given an indication of when this will be.
In his concluding remarks, Skea described the Addis Ababa summit as a “profound disappointment” and “among the most difficult IPCC meetings”, according to reporting from the Earth Negotiations Bulletin (ENB).
Some countries have reacted with dismay to the breakdown of negotiations, warning that a failure to have the IPCC’s latest assessments on climate adaptation and mitigation ready for the UN stocktaking exercise would undermine global climate action.
A climate envoy from a Pacific island state said it was a “travesty that a handful of countries continue to delay the IPCC’s reports – the science we need back home to help us save lives and livelihoods”.
Below, Carbon Brief explores the key developments, debates and disagreements at the IPCC meeting.