Welcome to Carbon Brief’s China Briefing.
China Briefing handpicks and explains the most important climate and energy stories from China over the past fortnight.
Subscribe for free here.
Key developments
China’s emissions flat in Q3
Q3 ANALYSIS: Citing official and commercial data, analysis for Carbon Brief by Lauri Myllyvirta at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) found that China’s emissions “stayed at, or just below, last year’s levels” in the third quarter (Q3) of 2024. The analysis explained that rapid electricity demand growth caused a coal-power rebound, but this was offset by falling demand for oil, steel and cement, along with weak consumer spending due to the sluggish economy. After a rise in Q1 and a decrease in Q2, the latest trends mean China’s overall emissions in 2024 would fall if there is a drop of at least 2% in the final quarter, the analysis found. It said this looked likely, but that recent economic stimulus creates uncertainty around the outlook. It added that, either way, China will “remain off track against its 2025 ‘carbon intensity’ target [energy consumption per unit of GDP], which requires emissions cuts of at least 2% in 2024 and 2025, after rapid rises in 2020-23”.
MISSING TARGETS?: Official data reported by state news agency Xinhua also hinted that China may fail to meet its “energy intensity” target, with China’s electricity consumption growing 7.9%, faster than the GDP growth rate of 4.8% so far this year. Meanwhile, China’s top planner, the National Development and Reform Commission, continues to prepare for the switch from “dual control” of energy – covering energy use and energy intensity –to “dual control” of emissions, issuing a new work plan on establishing a “national-level and provincial-level carbon reporting system” by 2025, said China News. (Read more about the switch to “dual control” of emissions in a previous China Briefing.)
EU’s EV tariffs entered into force
STEEP TARIFFS: The EU’s new tariffs on Chinese-made electric vehicles (EVs) kicked in on 30 October, after talks between Brussels and Beijing failed to find an amicable solution to the months-long trade dispute, the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post reported. The final duty rates for the next five years were confirmed at between 7.8% and 35.3% – on top of a baseline 10% that applies to all EV imports – depending on whether the relevant firm is deemed to have cooperated with the EU probe, said the newspaper. (Read more in Carbon Brief’s Q&A on the global “trade war” over China’s booming EV industry.)
REACTIONS: The Associated Press quoted European Commission executive vice-president Valdis Dombrovskis defending the move: “We’re standing up for fair market practices and for the European industrial base. In parallel, we remain open to a possible alternative solution that would be effective in addressing the problems identified and (World Trade Organization)-compatible.” The Chinese government said it has “repeatedly pointed out” that the EU’s move was “unreasonable and non-compliant”, adding that it did “not agree with or accept the ruling”, according to Xinhua. China has “filed a complaint” with the WTO, said business news outlet Yicai.
Steel ‘overcapacity’ persisted
STEEL SLOWDOWN: The latest data from China’s National Bureau of Statistics showed China’s steel sector is among sectors “bearing the brunt of the nation’s economic slowdown”, reported Bloomberg. The outlet said the steel industry had seen cumulative losses of 34bn yuan ($5bn) in the first nine months of the year, while the oil sector saw losses of 32bn yuan ($4.5bn). Xinyi Shen, China team lead at the CREA, said in a LinkedIn post that steel sector losses continued in the third quarter despite a “significant production cut”. The losses illustrated “persistent structural overcapacity” in the sector, Shen wrote. With global markets shifting towards “greener and more efficient production practices, China’s steel industry must adapt and innovate for sustainable growth”, she added.
STEEL RETROFITS: Meanwhile, more than 140 steel enterprises, whose steelmaking capacity exceeded 620m tonnes, completed “ultra-low emission retrofitting” over the period January to August 2024, according to data from the China Iron and Steel Association (CISA), state broadcaster CCTV reported. It added that the CISA had set new standards for “low-carbon emission steel” and said that deployment of “high-grade steel materials” can cut carbon dioxide emissions by 1.35bn tonnes (GtCO2) by 2030.
STEEL RECYCLING: Meanwhile, China launched a state-owned resources recycling company that “risks weighing down demand for metals, reported Bloomberg. China Resources Recycling Group will recycle steel scrap, as well as batteries and plastics, among other materials, the outlet said. The initiative has support from president Xi Jinping, said state news agency Xinhua. State-run newspaper China Daily anticipated the company would recycle 260m tonnes of scrap steel and iron annually. A recent action plan for the manufacturing industry by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology also set a goal for recycling 62% of “bulk industrial solid waste” by 2030, with 20% of “short-process steelmaking” relying on recycling, reported CCTV. The plan also said that, by 2030, the output of “green factories” will account for more than 40% of the total manufacturing value, added the state broadcaster. Lauri Myllyvirta, author of the above-mentioned emissions analysis for Carbon Brief, described the move as “very important” on LinkedIn, adding that steel was China’s second-largest emitting sector and had the potential, via increased recycling and other measures, to cut its emissions by “by a third or more over the next decade”.
Xi told BRICS to advance ‘low-carbon transformation’
KAZAN DECLARATION: The BRICS group of nations that includes Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – a bloc representing around 37% of global GDP and 42% of greenhouse gas emissions – issued a joint statement “reiterat[ing] that the objectives, principles and provisions of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), its Kyoto Protocol and its Paris Agreement…must be honoured”, state news agency Xinhua reported. The agreement added that such considerations must include “its principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities”. In language likely directed towards the EU’s “carbon border adjustment mechanism” (CBAM), the nations “[condemned] unilateral measures introduced under the pretext of climate and environmental concerns”, the statement said.
‘GREEN’ BRICS: State-run newspaper China Daily said Xi told the summit that China was “willing to expand cooperation with BRICS countries in green industries, clean energy and green mining”. The Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post (SCMP) quoted him telling other delegates: “Green is the background colour of this era. BRICS countries should actively integrate into the global green and low-carbon transformation.” The UN said secretary general António Guterres told the meeting that the BRICS could “play a greater role in strengthening multilateralism” and “urged the bloc to…boost climate action”.
BRI ENERGY PLAN: Meanwhile, a ministerial-level meeting on energy in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), convened in China by the National Energy Administration (NEA), resulted in an action plan for “green energy cooperation” between 2024 and 2029, China Daily reported. The action plan, state broadcaster CCTV said, focused on efforts to enhance countries’ ability to guarantee secure supply of “green energy”, particularly through cooperation on “hydrogen, new energy storage and advanced nuclear power”.
Spotlight
What to expect in China’s climate pledge for 2035
The next round of “nationally determined contributions” (NDC) to the Paris Agreement, outlining countries’ climate goals to 2035, are due by February 2025.
They are also set to be an important agenda item at COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan next month.
China has not confirmed when it will publish its next NDC. Several groups, including Climate Action Tracker, the International Energy Agency and the Centre for Research on Energy and Air, have set out what it would take to align China’s targets with the 1.5C limit or its existing national goals.
In this Spotlight, Carbon Brief asks leading experts what they expect to see in China’s 2035 NDC. Below are highlights from their answers. Their full responses will be published on Carbon Brief’s website shortly.
Todd Stern, senior fellow, the Brookings Institution and former US special envoy for climate change, in response to a question from Carbon Brief at a Chatham House event:
China is the most important country in the world right now, with respect to their [climate] target. I think that other major players – the US, EU, Japan, Canada, Korea, Australia – are…going to put in pretty ambitious, pretty strong targets of the kind that you want to see.
China now accounts for 30% of global emissions and is basically peaking carbon emissions about now…if not this year then next year. People at the Asia Society and elsewhere have done analysis…basically saying that, in order to be where we need to be, we need to see something like a 30% reduction from China. I am sure this is certainly not what the Chinese are thinking of at the moment, but we’ll see how much of a chance there is to move. If the Chinese come in with a 5-10% target, it will be very bad.
Yao Zhe, global policy advisor, Greenpeace East Asia:
So far, Chinese policymakers have taken a cautious approach, obviously constrained by the challenges in the domestic economy. But, in fact, stronger climate action and more ambitious targets are unmistakably an economic boon for China.
An update of the renewable energy target is expected in China’s new NDC. A stronger target for the next 5-10 years will help expand the domestic market and give industry and investors the confidence they need. It will also lay the groundwork for an ambitious NDC…However, China’s clean-energy potential can only be fully realised with clearer plans to move away from fossil fuels…The new NDC should address this by committing to no new coal power.
Anders Hove, senior research fellow, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies:
China’s past NDCs have tended to reflect trends underway and highlighted concrete targets that are already on-track to be met, rather than adopting ambitious new goals…A modest NDC would likely highlight targets related to renewable energy as a share of electricity production, continued steady growth in wind and solar capacity, and possibly electric vehicle adoption.
Byford Tsang, senior policy fellow, European Council on Foreign Relations:
A reading of policy signals from the recent past suggests that China’s upcoming climate target is going to be conservative: coal-plant approvals spiked in the years following a pledge to “strictly limit” coal power; official data showing that China is on-track to miss its own 2025 carbon intensity targets; and the country’s top energy agency has proposed an annual installation target that would slow down clean-energy deployment.
Li Shuo, director of the China Climate Hub, Asia Society Policy Institute:
At least three variables will determine the quality of China’s headline commitment: the quantum [the minimum amount] of emissions reduction; the base year from which emissions will be reduced; and the sectoral and greenhouse gas coverage…Chinese decision-makers could plant ambiguities in any, none, or all these variables.
Some believe China will adopt its emissions peak as the base year for its 2035 target…This formulation could see China not specifying when and at what level its emissions will peak…[and could] make the question of when, and based on what conditions, Beijing will confirm its emission peak ever more important. Currently, Beijing’s policymakers do not believe China’s emissions have peaked.
Niklas Höhne, part of the Climate Action Tracker (CAT) and NewClimate Institute, and and Bill Hare, co-founder and CEO of Climate Analytics, and part of CAT:
Amid discussions on China setting a percentage reduction target from peak emission levels, CAT recommends basing the 2035 NDC on a historical baseline…CAT’s modelled domestic pathways indicate that China needs to reduce emissions by 55% by 2030 and by 66% by 2035 from 2023 levels to align with the Paris Agreement. A minimum 28% reduction in total greenhouse gas emissions by 2035 is crucial for China to stay on-track for its 2060 net-zero target.
Hu Min, director and co-founder, Institute for Global Decarbonization Progress (iGDP) and Chen Meian, senior program director and senior analyst, iGDP:
China’s new NDC is expected to reflect heightened domestic momentum for decarbonisation…The new NDC might also reflect ongoing domestic adjustments to the system for evaluating mitigation progress, such as by including a carbon-budget system. This would be an encouraging move to address absolute carbon mitigation instead of [carbon] intensity.
Lauri Myllyvirta, lead analyst, Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) and senior fellow, Asia Society Policy Institute:
If it allows emissions to grow until just before 2030 and pursues slow and gradual emission reductions thereafter, China alone would use up almost the entire global carbon budget for 1.5C…As long as the policymakers think in terms of a late 2020s peak, there is little time to reduce emissions from that peak by 2035…While China needs to reduce emissions by at least 30% from 2023 to 2035…it seems more likely that the decision-makers will target a reduction that is a fraction of this, falling short of what’s needed to get to carbon neutrality before 2060.
Lu Lunyan, CEO, WWF China:
We hope China will consider setting clear and ambitious targets for total greenhouse gas emissions, including non-CO2 gases, such as methane, alongside increasing the share of non-fossil fuels, and aligning with the Paris Agreement on the path to net-zero. In addition, sector-specific decarbonisation strategies, particularly for heavy industries, transportation and power generation, will be crucial to achieving meaningful emissions reduction.
This spotlight was compiled by Anika Patel.
Watch, read, listen
US-CHINA: US thinktank the Brookings Institution said in a commentary that the “next US administration’s challenges with China on climate change are threefold”: maintaining climate progress; accelerating the US energy transition; and “continuing to press for forward movement on China’s emissions reductions efforts”.
LIU’S CONFIDENCE: At an Arctic Circle climate action summit, Chinese climate envoy Liu Zhenmin said China was “confident” it would peak emissions by 2030 and reach carbon neutrality by 2060.
‘GREEN’ TRANSITION: Beijing Daily published an analysis on economic reform, technology innovation and “green transition” by economist Liu Shijin, former member of China’s National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference and former deputy president of the State Council’s Development Research Center.
EV COMEITITION: The Financial Times reported that Chinese EV giant BYD’s quarterly sales overtook the US’s leading EV producer Tesla for the first time.
230 billion
TChina’s economic losses due to “natural disasters” between July and September 2024, in yuan, equivalent to $32bn, as reported by Reuters. The figure is based on data from the Ministry of Emergency Management and Reuters calculated that the loss in the third quarter of 2024 was more than double that in the first half of the year. It said total losses of 323bn yuan ($45bn) in 2024 to date were higher than the 308bn a year earlier.
New science
Asia Pacific Science Press
A new study on the city of Wenzhou, in Zhejiang province in east China, examined the “low-carbon transition of modern cities” under China’s “dual-carbon” strategy. It found that Wenzhou has adjusted its energy structure by “vigorously developing” renewable energy sources, guided local enterprises to adopt energy-saving technologies, as well as integrated the “low-carbon concept” into urban planning. The study concluded that these methods – technology adaptation, policy support as well as “talent cultivation and recruitment” strategy – are “validated” for cities’ low-carbon transition in China.
China Briefing is compiled by Wanyuan Song and Anika Patel. It is edited by Wanyuan Song and Dr Simon Evans. Please send tips and feedback to china@carbonbrief.org
The post China Briefing 31 October 2024: Q3 emissions; EU’s EV tariff in effect; NDC expectations appeared first on Carbon Brief.
China Briefing 31 October 2024: Q3 emissions; EU’s EV tariff in effect; NDC expectations
SYDNEY, Wednesday 26 August 2026 — New 2026 Sustainability Reports released by supermarket giants Coles and Woolworths this week demonstrate the retailers are failing on their commitments to end deforestation in their supply chains.
Adele Chasson, Nature Policy Lead at Greenpeace Australia Pacific said:
“These so-called sustainability reports are revealing. Despite their public commitments in 2024 and 2025, neither Coles nor Woolworths have taken deforestation-linked beef off their shelves. Meanwhile, bulldozers continue to tear up forests and bushland, pushing wildlife closer to extinction and causing mass toxic runoff to flow into the Great Barrier Reef. Millions of native animals like koalas are losing their homes to beef pastures each year, while the big supermarkets put off action.
“Australians would be shocked to know that beef on the shelves of our biggest supermarkets could be pushing threatened species to the brink of extinction. Collectively Coles and Woolworths have made more than $2 billion in profits in the last year, profiting from the destruction of wildlife and precious Australian nature. Coles and Woolworths owe it to shoppers to deliver on their promises and end deforestation in their supply chains now.
“As big beef buyers, Coles and Woolworths have an essential role to play in keeping Australia’s unique forests standing. They can help stop the Great Barrier Reef from being poisoned by runoff and protect iconic forest wildlife by taking deforestation off their shelves. It’s time these big companies put their money where their mouths are and follow through on their promise of sourcing and supplying deforestation-free beef.”
New Zealand’s parliament has adopted a controversial new law blocking a whole avenue of climate litigation and shutting down its most advanced corporate lawsuit, which has been blamed by the government for shaking business confidence and investment.
The Climate Change Response (Tort Liability) Amendment Bill, expected to take effect in the coming days after it is formally signed by the Governor-General, prevents all current and future civil claims for climate loss or harm under tort law.
Justice minister Paul Goldsmith said last week that the aim was to give businesses “certainty around their climate change obligations”, noting it would not alter the government’s responsibilities under the Climate Change Response Act 2002 nor business obligations under the Emissions Trading Scheme.
“Our response to climate change is best managed by the Government at a national level and not through piece-meal litigation in the courts,” he added in a statement.
Such litigation, he said, “risks developing a new regime that contradicts the framework Parliament has already enacted” to tackle climate change.
South Africa’s top court blocks Shell’s offshore oil exploration right
Constitutional Court rules that Shell and its partners failed to consult affected communities and did not properly consider environmental risksPeruvian farmer loses climate case against RWE – but paves way for future action
Experts say that despite dismissing the lawsuit, the ruling sets a precedent by confirming that climate science can establish legal liability for the damage caused by emissions
Goldsmith singled out a key domestic climate lawsuit brought by Northland iwi leader and activist Mike Smith against six big companies: dairy firms Fonterra and Dairy Holdings, energy firms Genesis Energy and Z Energy, New Zealand Steel and coal mining firm BT Mining. A seventh original defendant, Channel Infrastructure, was dropped after it permanently decommissioned its Marsden Point oil refinery.
Smith argued that these companies had caused him harm under public nuisance and negligence law, as well as a third breach of a duty to cease contributing to climate change that has yet to be tested domestically. He did not seek financial compensation, instead asking for the companies to immediately stop emitting or contributing to net greenhouse gas emissions.
In one of the most advanced corporate climate accountability lawsuits in the world, a trial had been scheduled for April 2027 after the Supreme Court unanimously allowed the case to continue.
Corporate lobbying in the shadows
Smith described the passing of the bill as “deeply concerning”, particularly as it coincided with the Supreme Court hearing another of his climate lawsuits. In that case, Smith v Attorney-General, he argues that the government’s response to climate change and its impacts on Māori communities in particular breaches rights to life and culture.
“That timing raises profound questions about the separation of powers and the rule of law,” said Smith. “Whatever one’s view of the merits of these cases, it is deeply troubling when parliament intervenes to remove a legal pathway while the courts are actively considering fundamental questions about climate responsibility, rights and the crown’s obligations.”
The bill – which says that no person (including the government) can be found liable in tort for emissions-related climate change effects – followed major lobbying efforts by the companies defending themselves in Smith’s lawsuit. They outlined a proposed legal amendment in a briefing note to the government in 2024.
The centre-right government has been fiercely criticised over its lack of transparency in relation to this lobbying activity. The national ombudsman recently found that the Prime Minister’s Office effectively withheld information requested by the Environmental Law Initiative about meetings, discussions and conversations regarding Smith’s case.
Green groups fail to stop bill
The bill sparked huge concern among environmental campaigners in New Zealand and elsewhere. Greenpeace Aotearoa called it a “shocking abuse of executive power” and the vast majority of submissions to a parliamentary inquiry said it should be rejected.
But in the end, it was adopted with little resistance, moving relatively smoothly through parliament, passing its third reading by 67 votes to 53. Sam Bookman, climate law lecturer at Melbourne Law School, told Climate Home News he was not surprised by this, given that the coalition government has a secure majority.
A complaint has been made to the UN special rapporteur on climate change and human rights by Smith, the National Iwi Chairs Forum Pou Tikanga and youth coalition Climate Clinic Aotearoa over what they see as the government’s heavy-handed approach. Smith is also challenging the new law in yet another lawsuit.
“Pathetic”: New Zealand plans to barely cut emissions between 2030 and 2035
Bookman thinks it “very unlikely” that such a challenge will succeed, noting that New Zealand’s constitution is firmly anchored in parliamentary sovereignty.
But the expert in climate law does not see the bill as the end of legal action in the country, noting that New Zealand has a “sophisticated climate litigation landscape with a growing number of specialist and experienced lawyers and NGOs”.
The country is also approaching its next general election in November, and some opposition parties have pledged to restore access to the courts if elected.
Amanda Larsson, global project lead on agriculture for Greenpeace International, said: “This law deserves to be tested, and I strongly encourage the international climate litigation community to unite and help defend New Zealanders’ fundamental right to hold polluters accountable before this becomes a global blueprint.”
Copycat legislation on the rise
New Zealand’s move is part of a small but growing legislative effort to shut down climate litigation around the world.
In the US, Republican politicians introduced legislation in the House and Senate in April that would shield fossil fuel firms from climate liability lawsuits. Similar laws have already been passed at state level in Tennessee, Utah, Iowa and Louisiana.
The German state of Bavaria has put forward a similar proposal to the Federal Council, aiming to block private climate claims as well as the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments imposing such liability. There are also proposals to limit available remedies and actions in the Netherlands and Belgium.
UN General Assembly backs “climate obligations” set by world’s top court
Bookman said he expects more efforts to counter climate damages litigation and advised plaintiffs to think about how to respond, including drawing on broader support in opposing them.
“Even though it’s very hard for plaintiffs to win these types of cases, companies are very eager to avoid the expense, embarrassment and political accountability that come even with unsuccessful lawsuits,” he said.
The post New Zealand moves to protect business with law curtailing climate litigation appeared first on Climate Home News.
New Zealand moves to protect business with law curtailing climate litigation
Bhima Yudhistira Adhinegara is the Executive Director of the Center of Economic and Law Studies (CELIOS), an Indonesia-based economic think tank. Muhammad Zulfikar Rakhmat is the Director of the China-Indonesia desk at CELIOS.
Indonesia produces around 60% of the world’s nickel, a metal used to manufacture batteries for electric vehicles (EVs) – more than any other country in the world. But in 2026, the government sharply reduced how much of its nickel can be extracted from the ground.
Production quotas were reduced by around 40% this year compared to 2025. Weda Bay, the largest nickel mine on Earth, had its allowance cut by more than 70% and exhausted its full-year quota by the end of May, halting mining entirely; it cannot resume large-scale extraction until next year unless regulators grant an extension.
The policy has sparked a vivid debate in Indonesian policy circles: how can the country shift its strategy from a decade of mining vast quantities of cheap nickel to producing a high-value and low-carbon material that the rest of the world wants for EV batteries.
The cuts aren’t a silver bullet to clean up Indonesia’s nickel industry, whose smelters are powered by coal – the most polluting fossil fuels. But alongside stricter enforcement of environmental rules, it is one side of efforts to produce more sustainable nickel for a premium.
Restricting Indonesia’s nickel output
Production quotas were introduced to stop the collapse of nickel prices because of oversupply in the market. Prices had fallen more than 40% in 2023 alone and kept sliding as Indonesian supply kept growing, hitting a four-year low of around $13,900 a ton in late 2025.
Critics called the recent tightening of production quotas proof that Indonesia’s nickel strategy has failed, arguing that the industry shouldn’t need to throttle its own output to survive. But when assessed against what the policy was supposed to do – push up nickel prices – it has worked. Prices jumped to $20,000 a ton in May, the highest since 2024.
-
Big banks’ lending to coal backers undermines Indonesia’s green plans
Foreign banks involved in Indonesia’s $20-billion Just Energy Transition Partnership have also funded companies working on coal power expansion, a TBIJ and Climate Home News investigation reveals -
Southeast Asia’s fragile grids threaten billions in clean energy investment
Renewables developers need reliable electricity infrastructure and stable policies to help the region meet climate goals and surging demand for power
Chinese industry groups representing companies that have invested billions to mine and refine the country’s nickel were furious, warning Indonesia’s president Prabowo Subianto that the cuts put $50 billion worth of investment at risk. But much of that Chinese capital is sunk into smelters and processing plants built specifically to run on Indonesian ore, and cannot simply be moved elsewhere. That gives Jakarta more room to hold its ground than the warning suggests.
Stronger environmental enforcement
Since the start of the year, Indonesia’s forestry task force has seized more than four million hectares of land from mines and plantations operating illegally in protected forests, collecting over two trillion rupiah ($113 million) in fines.
This included 148 hectares seized from Weda Bay for lacking a forestry permit. The share of nickel produced from illegal small-scale mining also fell from about a quarter in 2022 to roughly 10% by 2024.
The crackdown responds to serious environmental damages in the nickel industry. On Obi Island, a waste pond collapsed after heavy rain in June 2025, flooding three villages and killing a resident. Internal company tests found chromium-6 – a carcinogen – in the water, in quantities far above the legal limit. The footprint of another mine near Raja Ampat, which is home to some of the world’s richest coral reefs, grew 60-fold in just eight years.
The market is responding to early cleanup efforts. Low-carbon nickel now sells for a real premium, roughly $18,800 to $19,300 a ton compared with $17,900 to $18,300 otherwise, as carmakers seek to source cleaner materials to comply with the European Union’s new emissions rules for imports.
In turn, this is incentivising the industry to do more to green its operations. Vale Indonesia’s smelter in South Sulawesi now runs almost entirely on hydropower, for example.
None of this addresses coal use, however. Major Indonesian nickel producers still emitted an estimated 15 million metric tons of greenhouse gases in 2023. Indonesia may be cracking down on illegal mining and rewarding cleaner producers but it is still running its mines on the dirtiest fuel available.
Unequal benefits
For Indonesia to truly benefit from producing cleaner and high-value nickel, it needs to reap the economic benefits too. Although the industry has boosted the country’s economic growth, the reality on the ground tells a different story.
Konawe in Southeast Sulawesi is home to a major smelting complex. Growth in the district jumped from 6% to 22% between 2015 and 2023, driven almost entirely by the nickel industry, according to a study by the Lowy Institute study. At the same time, poverty levels increased slightly and unemployment remained unchanged.
-
Nickel mining for electric vehicles is destroying lives in Indonesia
Indonesia’s abundant nickel reserves are crucial for a low carbon world. But extracting them is ruining local peoples’ lives and causing rampant deforestation -
Indonesia turns traditional Indigenous land into nickel industrial zone
Indonesia supplies the EV industry with critical battery materials but the sector’s rapid expansion is infringing the rights of Indigenous peoples -
Indonesia’s failing Just Energy Transition Partnership is a cautionary tale
The government has abandoned its plan to shut down a major coal plant, which was a key part of the deal, raising doubts about the donor-backed approach
In Halmahera, another epicentre of the nickel industry, spending by the poorest fifth grew just 5% between 2019 and 2022, compared with 28% for the wealthiest fifth, according to a separate study.
Part of the reason for this inequality is the system for transferring mining royalties to district authorities where the mines are located. In theory, they are entitled to the largest share. But in practice, payments are delayed, companies routinely dispute what they owe and royalties are pooled and distributed across a larger area.
The Natural Resource Governance Institute has found that decentralisation handed local governments power to approve new mines faster than they could build their capacity to manage them. Higher output raises national income on paper, but local governments remain constrained by fiscal rules and infrastructure costs that scale with mining.
None of this makes the 2026 quota cuts a mistake. Indonesia has every right to defend its pricing power over a resource it controls. But limiting extraction isn’t going to fix underlying issues around environmental enforcement and revenue-sharing. That requires rules that are consistently enforced, royalties that reach communities living by the mines, and a plan to wean smelters off coal.
The post Indonesia’s nickel production cuts are not enough to create a sustainable industry appeared first on Climate Home News.
Indonesia’s nickel production cuts are not enough to create a sustainable industry
-
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
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy10 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
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