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

Every country needs a model to help optimise its energy transition

Published

on

Claver Gatete is Executive Secretary of the UN Economic Commission for Africa. Jason Veysey is Energy Modeling Program Director and Senior Scientist at the Stockholm Environment Institute. Lisa Sachs is Director of the Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment at Columbia University.

The case for global energy transition has rarely been clearer. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz earlier this year exposed the cost of unplanned, fossil-dependent systems, while the falling cost of renewables, the rising penetration of electric vehicles, and the growing value of demand flexibility have made the direction of travel obvious. The benefits of a clean, secure, integrated system are no longer in dispute. What remains unclear is how to build it.

Countries around the world have called for faster renewable energy deployment and alternative energy arrangements. A secure, affordable, resilient, decarbonised system requires specific investments in specific places in a specific sequence, optimised across sectors and borders. But very few governments have the analytical foundation to translate those imperatives into investment.

The two instruments that are supposed to determine investment priorities for decarbonisation – Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and country platforms – cannot answer the most basic question facing any country undertaking an energy transition: what should the energy system look like?

    To close this gap, every country needs a bankable, economy-wide optimisation model for its energy system. A model is not a plan, but it can help answer the critical question of what the future energy system should look like. It shows how optimal scenarios vary as assumptions and policies are adjusted, calculates investment requirements and sequencing, and quantifies how system costs are affected by assumptions, policies, and exogenous variables like trade policy and financing terms.

    Tool for efficient investment

    Optimisation is a simplified way of simulating an energy system, but it can be an extremely powerful tool for moving energy planning from reactive (how do we manage the disparate actions in the energy system?) to intentional (what energy system underpins our national objectives?). A model can show how optimal scenarios vary as assumptions and policies are adjusted, and how investment requirements are quantified and sequenced.

    Optimisation models can treat the energy system and the sectors it serves as an integrated whole, optimising across sectors and projects in ways that can be mutually reinforcing. If considered independently, growth in industrial demand, transport electrification, and digital infrastructure can add stress to the energy system. But an optimised plan can arrange these and other changes in an efficient, synergistic way.

    Two to tango: How governments can unlock private investment for national climate goals

    New load can be added where low-cost power is available; industrial customers can ensure the viability of investments in energy supply; electric vehicle charging policy can smooth load curves and reduce costs for all consumers.

    Additionally, optimisation modeling can also change the financeability of investments. Taken alone, each project faces uncertainty about the rest of the system, which raises the cost of capital and causes projects to stall or unwind after contracts are signed. A coherent, optimised plan makes visible the coordination that private capital would otherwise have to bet on: identified offtake, sequenced and committed transmission, contracted power supply, and so on.

    What COP31 and COP32 should do

    The upcoming COPs in Turkey and Ethiopia can shift the center of gravity of international climate cooperation from fragmented commitments to planning. Three moves are urgently needed.

    First, optimised, economy-wide, long-term energy system planning must be the foundation on which any meaningful NDC, country platform, or finance commitment rests. NDCs are typically drafted by environment or single-line ministries, with limited cross-sectoral input from ministries of energy, finance, and planning. They contain targets, derived from sectoral strategies or national commitments, not from an analytically grounded picture of what the energy system should look like and what investments would make it work. Country platforms are generally a portfolio of investments assembled from existing project pipelines, rather than derived from a system-level analysis of what an optimised, decarbonised energy system would require.

    Second, recognise regions as a key planning unit. Modern integrated energy systems are inherently regional. Renewable endowments are unevenly distributed; balancing variable supply across borders lowers aggregate cost, reduces redundant backup capacity, and unlocks economies of scale no individual nation can achieve. Many energy investments in Southeast Asia, East Africa, Southern Africa and Central Asia may only be financeable in a regional context. Assessing domestic infrastructure without regional optimisation perpetuates the perception that decarbonisation is more expensive than it is.

    COP31 leaders unveil global targets, with spotlight on electrification

    Third, finance the planning capacity. A coordinated commitment by multilateral development banks, bilateral donors, and philanthropic partners to help every region and its constituent countries develop and maintain their own modelling capability, with open-source tools and regional analytical hubs, would close the most consequential gap in the current architecture. The cost is small relative to current spending on country platforms, failed project preparation, and misallocated infrastructure investment.

    This includes supporting regional institutions such as the ASEAN Centre for Energy, the African Energy Commission, regional power pools, and the Latin American and Caribbean Energy Organization to determine what optimised regional systems require. Country-by-country pledging, repeated at every COP, will not deliver what meaningfully integrated systems can.

    The 2026 energy crisis made the cost of unplanned, fossil-dependent systems newly visible. That window of clarity will close. The international community should seize the moment to build the planning foundation that has been missing for thirty years, rather than commissioning another round of NDCs or pledges, striving for outcomes neither was designed to deliver.

    The post Every country needs a model to help optimise its energy transition appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Every country needs a model to help optimise its energy transition

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Explainer: How the ‘super El Niño’ will reshape the world’s weather

    Published

    on

    The world is currently experiencing what is expected to become the strongest El Niño on record – dubbed a “super El Niño” by many.

    El Niño is the warm phase of a recurring climate pattern in the tropical Pacific that releases heat from the ocean into the atmosphere.

    This temporarily raises global temperatures and reshapes rainfall and extreme weather around the world – impacting the lives of billions of people.

    The current El Niño event began in June and is expected to last into 2027.

    El Niño is part of a wider climate pattern called the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) cycle.

    The ENSO cycle also has a cool phase, known as La Niña, as well as a “neutral” phase. El Niño and La Niña events typically last between nine and 12 months, but can go on longer.

    Below, Carbon Brief explains how the ENSO cycle works, its impacts on extreme weather and global temperatures and why this El Niño event is projected to be the most intense since records began.

    The post Explainer: How the ‘super El Niño’ will reshape the world’s weather appeared first on Carbon Brief.

    https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/el-nino-explainer/index.html

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Analysis: The two largest reservoirs in the US have hit record-low levels

    Published

    on

    The second-largest reservoir in the US reached a record-low water height on Saturday – just days after the country’s largest reservoir broke its own record. 

    Both Lake Mead and Lake Powell are located on the Colorado River.

    They provide water for populations across seven US states in the south-western US, with around 40 million people getting some or all of their municipal water from the Colorado River.

    The river also provides water for around 5.5m acres (22,258 square kilometres) of farmland across Colorado, Arizona, California and the other states in the river basin.

    Experts tell Carbon Brief that climate change, population growth and over-consumption are all contributing to the current record-low levels of the reservoirs.

    Record lows

    At full capacity, Lakes Mead and Powell can hold a combined 68 cubic kilometres of water – enough to supply all household consumption in the contiguous US for nearly 1.5 years. However, the water level in both reservoirs has been declining for decades.

    The chart below shows the water level of Lake Mead, in metres above mean sea level. The reservoir, which began to fill in 1935 following the construction of the Hoover Dam, has a “full pool” maximum capacity of 347.60 metres. The water level in Lake Mead reached a record low of 317.11 metres on 7 August.

    Lake Mead, the larges reservoir in the US, reached record-low water levels in early August.

    The following chart shows the water level of Lake Powell, in metres above mean sea level. Lake Powell’s full-pool level is 1,127.76 metres.

    While the reservoir reached its maximum capacity several times in the 1980s, it has not done so since. On 15 August, the water level in Lake Powell was recorded at a new record-low of 1,072.87 metres.

    Lake Powell, the second-largest reservoir in the US, reached record-low water levels in mid-August

    Both reservoirs have continued to decline in the days since breaking their respective records. The downward trend will largely continue in both lakes until next spring, when the snowpack in the mountains of the Upper Colorado River Basin begins to melt, says Dr Jack Schmidt, a senior research scientist at Utah State University’s Center for Colorado River Studies. He tells Carbon Brief:

    “The big dilemma of the moment is that we’re only in the middle of August, and we have no assurance of what the coming winter will be. The only thing we can be sure of is that we will be depleting overall total basin reservoir storage from now until, roughly, early April.”

    Compounding factors

    The record lows across the two reservoirs are the result of several compounding factors, experts tell Carbon Brief.

    Since the turn of the 20th century, the amount of water flowing along the Upper Colorado River has declined by about 20%. Research suggests that half of this decline can be attributed to human-induced climate change.

    Most of the river’s streamflow comes from the snowpack of the Upper Colorado River Basin, which stretches across five western US states but is primarily located in Colorado and Utah.

    This region has been gripped by a historic “megadrought” for more than a quarter of a century. Nearly half of the megadrought’s intensity over 2000-18 is attributable to climate change, according to a 2020 study.

    At the same time, the increasing population in the US south-west has put added pressure on the Colorado River’s water supply. The number of people obtaining some or all of their water from the Colorado system has grown by 15 million (around 60%) since 1992.

    Schmidt tells Carbon Brief:

    “There’s an ultimate cause of the present water crisis, and there’s a proximate cause. The ultimate cause is a warming climate, a warming planet and a pretty clear correlation between warming conditions and decreased runoff in the Colorado River Basin.

    “The proximate cause is that in this messy democratic republic of ours, big policy decisions that match the variability of the climate occur painfully slowly – with intense political negotiations – and only incrementally.”

    On 31 July, the US Bureau of Reclamation, which manages water resources in the western US, released an environmental impact statement on its proposed post-2026 strategy for managing Lakes Powell and Mead. The strategy itself has not been released yet.

    Schmidt notes that the statement does appear to give the Bureau flexibility to “respond to crisis” by reducing the delivery of water to several states. However, he adds:

    “They acknowledge it won’t work if we just stay critically dry, and of course every climate model for the 21st century, especially with a continually warming planet, says that that’s exactly what’s going to happen.”

    The post Analysis: The two largest reservoirs in the US have hit record-low levels appeared first on Carbon Brief.

    Analysis: The two largest reservoirs in the US have hit record-low levels

    Continue Reading

    Trending

    Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com