Connect with us

Published

on

It’s been less than six months since countries struck a historic deal to “transition away from fossil fuels” after bitter fights and sleepless nights at COP28. But, in Bonn right now, discussions on what to do next about the biggest culprit of climate change seem to have largely disappeared from the agenda.

“It’s really jarring to see how quiet the conversation on fossil fuels has gone,” said Tom Evans, a senior policy advisor at E3G, adding that the trouble is this issue “doesn’t have a clear home at the UNFCCC right now”.

Last week negotiators clashed over whether that space should be the newly-created “UAE Dialogue” on implementing the outcomes of the Global Stocktake – the centrepiece of the Dubai climate summit.

Developed countries thought so and argued that talks should consider all elements of the global stocktake, including mitigation. But the Like-Minded Group of Developing Countries (LMDCs), which includes China, Saudi Arabia and India, retorted that the focus should be exclusively on finance and means of implementation. Small island states and the AILAC coalition of Latin American countries took the middle ground, pushing for discussions on all outcomes with a special focus on finance, according to observers and a summary of the discussions by the Earth Negotiations Bulletin.

Pending an agreement on that front, developed countries believe the mitigation work programme – a track set up at COP26 – is the only other natural forum to wrangle over emission-cutting measures.But negotiators there have failed to even agree on what should or should not be discussed.

An EU negotiator told Climate Home attempts to start a conversation on the way forward continue to be blocked by the LMDCs, with China and Saudi Arabia “the most vocal” among them. “The reason is that they fear this would put pressure on them to keep moving away from fossil fuels,” the EU delegate added.

The LMDCs argued that discussions over how to follow up on the COP28 agreement on fossil fuels are outside the mandate of the mitigation work programme. They have also hit back at rich nations accusing them of not doing enough to cut emissions.

Speaking on behalf of the group at a session hosted by the COP29 Presidency, the Bolivian negotiator said developed countries should be required to get to net zero by 2030. “The Annex 1 countries’ pathway to achieve net zero by 2050 does not contribute to solving the climate crisis, it is leading the world to a catastrophe,” he added.

In his intervention, the head of the EU delegation urged the COP28 and COP29 presidencies to “break the deadlock” on mitigation. “What are we waiting for?” he cried.

Shortly before, Yalchin Rafiyev, the lead negotiator for Azerbaijan’s COP29 presidency, had outlined his vision for the summit. The 1,918-word-long speech did not mention fossil fuels once.


As the negotiations focus on Loss and Damage, members of civil society demonstrate in the corridors calling for polluters to pay up. (Photo: Kiara Worth/IISD ENB)

Go slow on finance 

Monday’s session on finance ended with concerns from both the Arab Group and the US that the current text collating views on the new climate finance goal (known as the NCQG) is “unbalanced” and may not produce an outcome that is “fit for purpose” by the end of the Bonn talks on Thursday. The NCCQ is due to be agreed at COP29 in Baku in November.

The 35-page “informal paper” – from which an actual negotiating text needs to emerge – is a hotch-potch of views on what the post-2025 goal should look like (a single target for public finance from rich nations or a multi-layered target with a range of goals covering various sources and purposes); who should contribute (only developed countries or a wider pool, even mentioning countries with a space programme!); and how much money (no quantified amount, a percentage of gross national income, or about $1 trillion a year). And that’s only a taster of what’s in the document…

One major sticking point for the Arab Group on Monday wasthe lack of negotiations so far on the size – “quantum” – of the NCQG (it wants an annual $1.1 trillion plus arrears from the existing $100 billion goal). Its negotiator expressed disappointment that everything else is being discussed in Bonn apart from that.

As the session came to the end of its allotted two hours, a long list of 23 delegations had yet to take the floor, including the European Union, the UK, China, Japan, Bolivia, South Africa and many African countries. It’s going to be a tough task getting through them in the last slot this afternoon – and with just three days left when will the real horse-trading start?

Iskander Erzini Vernoit, founding director of the Imal Initiative for Climate & Development, a Morocco-based think-tank, told journalists on Tuesday finance talks in Bonn had “not advanced significantly beyond where we started”, with the text going no further in resolving the fundamental debates. The way forward to Baku on the NCQG is “murky”, he warned.


World Bank greenlights role in L&D Fund 

On Monday, the World Bank’s board approved the bank’s role as trustee and host of the secretariat for the new “Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage” for an interim period of four years. This is a procedural step – which had to be taken before a deadline of June 12 – on the road to getting the UN-agreed fund up and running this year.

In a short statement announcing the decision, the bank stressed that the fund’s independent board will determine “key priorities, including financing decisions, eligibility criteria, and risk management policies”. The bank also made clear that it won’t play a role in raising money for the fund or deciding how to spend its so-far meagre resources.

Climate activist and loss and damage expert Harjeet Singh said the next step is to push on with setting up the fund’s secretariat, including appointing an executive director. The World Bank must facilitate the receipt of pledged funds while the fund’s board (which next meets in July) needs to adopt key policy decisions to enable earliest possible disbursement to affected countries, he said.

“It is crucial that the success of the Loss and Damage Fund is measured by how quickly and adequately those facing the harsh realities of the climate emergency receive support for recovery,” he told Climate Home.

At COP28, countries – including the host nation UAE – pledged close to $700 million for the new fund, but substantive discussions about how to mobilise the amounts needed to cover fast-rising losses from extreme weather and rising seas have yet to take place.

In Bonn, climate justice activists are lobbying hard for the L&D Fund to receive finance under the new post-2025 goal. But developed countries are pushing back, saying there is no basis for this under the Paris Agreement, which refers to them providing financial resources only for mitigation (measures to reduce emissions) and adaptation to climate impacts.

The post Bonn bulletin: Fossil fuel transition left homeless appeared first on Climate Home News.

Bonn bulletin: Fossil fuel transition left homeless

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Analysis: Half of nations meet UN deadline for nature-loss reporting

Published

on

Half of nations have met a UN deadline to report on how they are tackling nature loss within their borders, Carbon Brief analysis shows.

This includes 11 of the 17 “megadiverse nations”, countries that account for 70% of Earth’s biodiversity.

It also includes all of the G7 nations apart from the US, which is not part of the world’s nature treaty.

All 196 countries that are part of the UN biodiversity treaty were due to submit their seventh “national reports” by 28 February, of which 98 have done so.

Their submissions are supposed to provide key information for an upcoming global report on actions to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030, in addition to a global review of progress due to be conducted by countries at the COP17 nature summit in Armenia in October this year.

At biodiversity talks in Rome in February, UN officials said that national reports submitted late will not be included in the global report due to a lack of time, but could still be considered in the global review.

Tracking nature action

In 2022, nations signed a landmark deal to halt and reverse nature loss by 2030, known as the “Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework” (GBF).

In an effort to make sure countries take action at the domestic level, the GBF included an “implementation schedule”, involving the publishing of new national plans in 2024 and new national reports in 2026.

The two sets of documents were to inform both a global report and a global review, to be conducted by countries at COP17 in Armenia later this year. (This schedule mirrors the one set out for tackling climate change under the Paris Agreement.)

The deadline for nations’ seventh national reports, which contain information on their progress towards meeting the 23 targets of the GBF based on a set of key indicators, was 28 February 2026.

According to Carbon Brief’s analysis of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity’s online reporting platform, 98 out of the 196 countries that are part of the nature convention (50%) submitted on time.

The map below shows countries that submitted their seventh national reports by the UN’s deadline.

Map of the world showing that half of nations published their seventh national nature reports on time
Countries that submitted their seventh national reports to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity by the deadline of 28 February. Data source: Convention on Biological Diversity.

This includes 11 of the 17 “megadiverse nations” that account for 70% of Earth’s biodiversity.

The megadiverse nations to meet the deadline were India, Venezuela, Indonesia, Madagascar, Peru, Malaysia, South Africa, Colombia, Mexico, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Australia.

It also includes all of the G7 nations (France, Germany, the UK, Japan, Italy and Canada), excluding the US, which has never ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity.

The UK’s seventh national report shows that it is currently on track to meet just three of the GBF’s 23 targets.

This is according to a LinkedIn post from Dr David Cooper, former executive secretary of the CBD and current chair of the UK’s Joint Nature Conservation Committee, which coordinated the UK’s seventh national report,

The report shows the UK is not on track to meet one of the headline targets of the GBF, which is to protect 30% of land and sea for nature by 2030.

It reports that the proportion of land protected for nature is 7% in England, 18% in Scotland and 9% in Northern Ireland. (The figure is not given for Wales.)

National plans

In addition to the national reports, the upcoming global report and review will draw on countries’ national plans.

Countries were meant to have submitted their new national plans, known as “national biodiversity strategies and action plans” (NBSAPs), by the start of COP16 in October 2024.

A joint investigation by Carbon Brief and the Guardian found that only 15% of member countries met that deadline.

Since then, the percentage of countries that have submitted a new NBSAP has risen to 39%.

According to the GBF and its underlying documents, countries that were “not in a position” to meet the deadline to submit NBSAPs ahead of COP16 were requested to instead submit national targets. These submissions simply list biodiversity targets that countries will aim for, without an accompanying plan for how they will be achieved.

As of 2 March, 78% of nations had submitted national targets.

At biodiversity talks in Rome in February, UN officials said that national reports submitted late will not be included in the global report due to a lack of time, but could still be considered in the global review.

Funding ‘delays’

At the Rome talks, some countries raised that they had faced “difficulties in submitting [their national reports] on time”, according to the Earth Negotiations Bulletin.

Speaking on behalf of “many” countries, Fiji said that there had been “technical and financial constraints faced by parties” in the preparation of their seventh national reports.

In a statement to Carbon Brief, a spokesperson for the Global Environment Facility, the body in charge of providing financial and technical assistance to countries for the preparation of their national reports, said “delays in fund disbursement have occurred in some cases”, adding:

“In 2023, the GEF council approved support for the development of NBSAPs and the seventh national reports for all 139 eligible countries that requested assistance. This includes national grants of up to $450,000 per country and $6m in global technical assistance delivered through the UN Development Programme and UN Environment Programme.

“As of the end of January 2026, all 139 participating countries had benefited from technical assistance and 93% had accessed their national grants, with 11 countries yet to receive their funds. Delays in fund disbursement have occurred in some cases, compounded by procurement challenges and limited availability of technical expertise.”

The spokesperson added that the fund will “continue to engage closely with agencies and countries to support timely completion of NBSAPs and the seventh national reports”.

The post Analysis: Half of nations meet UN deadline for nature-loss reporting appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Analysis: Half of nations meet UN deadline for nature-loss reporting

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Dow Asks Texas to Legalize Plastic Pollution from its Seadrift Complex

Published

on

Facing multiple lawsuits, Dow requests an “unprecedented” permit amendment to authorize its discharge of polyethylene pellets into coastal waters.

Two weeks ago, when Texas sued a massive Dow petrochemical plant over water pollution, state environmental regulators were already considering a novel proposal from the company that would effectively legalize discharges of plastic material from the 4,700–acre complex into waters feeding San Antonio Bay and the Gulf of Mexico.

Dow Asks Texas to Legalize Plastic Pollution from its Seadrift Complex

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Why Electricity Bills Are So High—and How the Blowback Could Hit Trump

Published

on

As Democrats and climate activists seize on energy costs as a political issue, new data shows electricity rates rose 5 percent nationwide in 2025. The figures were much higher in some states.

COLUMBUS, Ohio—Protestors stood in the snow outside the offices of Ohio’s utility regulator in January to say they were fed up with rising electricity rates.

Why Electricity Bills Are So High—and How the Blowback Could Hit Trump

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com