As sharp divisions at UN talks stall progress on a shift away from fossil fuels, 24 countries have backed a first global conference on the transition, saying the summit in Colombia next April is needed to speed up efforts to wean the world off planet-heating oil, gas and coal.
The conference aims to bring together governments, experts, industry leaders and Indigenous people among others, to chart “legal, economic and social pathways” for a fair and just phase-out of fossil fuels, Colombia’s Environment Minister Irene Vélez Torres told journalists at COP30 on Friday.
Supporters of the initiative include major fossil fuel producers Australia and Mexico, as well as several European, Latin American and Pacific island nations.
Colombia and the Netherlands will co-host the event on April 28-29 in the Colombian port city of Santa Marta, which plays a significant role in coal exports.
Speaking after the release of a COP30 draft decision text that failed to mention fossil fuels, Vélez Torres told a packed-out room: “We know that this conversation cannot end here.”
“We must keep the momentum, lead with bravery, rise to the challenge, and build a coalition of the willing,” she added.
The conference is meant to sit alongside discussions taking place under the UN climate regime, where all 198 signatories need to reach decisions by consensus.
Conference to feed into COP31
Vanuatu’s climate minister Ralph Regenvanu said the Colombia-led coalition is needed to advance discussions over the transition regardless of what happens at COP30. The conference “will strengthen the process here next time we meet in Turkiye” at COP31, he added.
Australia, a backer of the initiative, announced this week that it will run negotiations at COP31 next year even though the conference will take place in the Turkish coastal city of Antalya.
The 24 countries signed a joint declaration supporting calls to develop a roadmap for the shift away from fossil fuels and setting out the conditions for a just and equitable transition.
Those include consideration of national circumstances and the need to support workers and vulnerable communities, as well as the importance of financial and technological support and of promoting diversified economies that reduce reliance on fossil fuel revenues.
Alex Rafalowicz, director of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, described the declaration as “historic”. That’s because for the first time a fossil-fuel producing country like Australia “recognises that production, licensing, subsidising and consumption [of fossil fuels] are matters of international concern”, he added.
Matthew Webb, associate director for Global Clean Power Diplomacy at think-tank E3G, said the coalition demonstrates “the growing and unprecedented level of support at COP30 to deliver a process for a roadmap to the just transition away from fossil fuels”.
With Australia now on board, there is a clear path for such a roadmap to be landed in Belem and taken forward into COP31, he added. Current draft texts do not refer to a fossil fuel transition roadmap, to the chagrin of some including the European Union, as well as Latin American and Pacific island states.
“Securing our survival”
Tuvalu’s climate minister Maina Talia expressed disappointment over the lack of a “survival map” for quitting fossil fuels at COP30, as his country faces an existential threat from rising sea levels.
He added that “after 30 years, this process is still failing us, so we will not wait” and instead work on a different process “to secure our survival”.
Johanna Gusman, senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law, described Colombia’s 2026 conference as “a step towards good-faith international cooperation to actually tackle the climate crisis”.
“We need a time-bound plan to curb [fossil fuel] production and use, end new licensing and subsidies, and mobilise finance for developing countries,” she added in a statement.
The post Colombia seeks to speed up a “just” fossil fuel phase-out with first global conference appeared first on Climate Home News.
Colombia seeks to speed up a “just” fossil fuel phase-out with first global conference
Climate Change
A Tiny Caribbean Island Sued the Netherlands Over Climate Change, and Won
The case shows that climate change is a fundamental human rights violation—and the victory of Bonaire, a Dutch territory, could open the door for similar lawsuits globally.
From our collaborating partner Living on Earth, public radio’s environmental news magazine, an interview by Paloma Beltran with Greenpeace Netherlands campaigner Eefje de Kroon.
A Tiny Caribbean Island Sued the Netherlands Over Climate Change, and Won
Climate Change
Greenpeace organisations to appeal USD $345 million court judgment in Energy Transfer’s intimidation lawsuit
SYDNEY, Saturday 28 February 2026 — Greenpeace International and Greenpeace organisations in the US announce they will seek a new trial and, if necessary, appeal the decision with the North Dakota Supreme Court following a North Dakota District Court judgment today awarding Energy Transfer (ET) USD $345 million.

ET’s SLAPP suit remains a blatant attempt to silence free speech, erase Indigenous leadership of the Standing Rock movement, and punish solidarity with peaceful resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline. Greenpeace International will also continue to seek damages for ET’s bullying lawsuits under EU anti-SLAPP legislation in the Netherlands.
Mads Christensen, Greenpeace International Executive Director said: “Energy Transfer’s attempts to silence us are failing. Greenpeace International will continue to resist intimidation tactics. We will not be silenced. We will only get louder, joining our voices to those of our allies all around the world against the corporate polluters and billionaire oligarchs who prioritise profits over people and the planet.
“With hard-won freedoms under threat and the climate crisis accelerating, the stakes of this legal fight couldn’t be higher. Through appeals in the US and Greenpeace International’s groundbreaking anti-SLAPP case in the Netherlands, we are exploring every option to hold Energy Transfer accountable for multiple abusive lawsuits and show all power-hungry bullies that their attacks will only result in a stronger people-powered movement.”
The Court’s final judgment today rejects some of the jury verdict delivered in March 2025, but still awards hundreds of millions of dollars to ET without a sound basis in law. The Greenpeace defendants will continue to press their arguments that the US Constitution does not allow liability here, that ET did not present evidence to support its claims, that the Court admitted inflammatory and irrelevant evidence at trial and excluded other evidence supporting the defense, and that the jury pool in Mandan could not be impartial.[1][2]
ET’s back-to-back lawsuits against Greenpeace International and the US organisations Greenpeace USA (Greenpeace Inc.) and Greenpeace Fund are clear-cut examples of SLAPPs — lawsuits attempting to bury nonprofits and activists in legal fees, push them towards bankruptcy and ultimately silence dissent.[3] Greenpeace International, which is based in the Netherlands, is pursuing justice in Europe, with a suit against ET under Dutch law and the European Union’s new anti-SLAPP directive, a landmark test of the new legislation which could help set a powerful precedent against corporate bullying.[4]
Kate Smolski, Program Director at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “This is part of a worrying trend globally: fossil fuel corporations are increasingly using litigation to attack and silence ordinary people and groups using the law to challenge their polluting operations — and we’re not immune to these tactics here in Australia.
“Rulings like this have a chilling effect on democracy and public interest litigation — we must unite against these silencing tactics as bad for Australians and bad for our democracy. Our movement is stronger than any corporate bully, and grows even stronger when under attack.”
Energy Transfer’s SLAPPs are part of a wave of abusive lawsuits filed by Big Oil companies like Shell, Total, and ENI against Greenpeace entities in recent years.[3] A couple of these cases have been successfully stopped in their tracks. This includes Greenpeace France successfully defeating TotalEnergies’ SLAPP on 28 March 2024, and Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International forcing Shell to back down from its SLAPP on 10 December 2024.
-ENDS-
Images available in Greenpeace Media Library
Notes:
[1] The judgment entered by North Dakota District Court Judge Gion follows a jury verdict finding Greenpeace entities liable for more than US$660 million on March 19, 2025. Judge Gion subsequently threw out several items from the jury’s verdict, reducing the total damages to approximately US$345 million.
[2] Public statements from the independent Trial Monitoring Committee
[3] Energy Transfer’s first lawsuit was filed in federal court in 2017 under the RICO Act – the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, a US federal statute designed to prosecute mob activity. The case was dismissed in 2019, with the judge stating the evidence fell “far short” of what was needed to establish a RICO enterprise. The federal court did not decide on Energy Transfer’s claims based on state law, so Energy Transfer promptly filed a new case in a North Dakota state court with these and other state law claims.
[4] Greenpeace International sent a Notice of Liability to Energy Transfer on 23 July 2024, informing the pipeline giant of Greenpeace International’s intention to bring an anti-SLAPP lawsuit against the company in a Dutch Court. After Energy Transfer declined to accept liability on multiple occasions (September 2024, December 2024), Greenpeace International initiated the first test of the European Union’s anti-SLAPP Directive on 11 February 2025 by filing a lawsuit in Dutch court against Energy Transfer. The case was officially registered in the docket of the Court of Amsterdam on 2 July, 2025. Greenpeace International seeks to recover all damages and costs it has suffered as a result of Energy Transfers’s back-to-back, abusive lawsuits demanding hundreds of millions of dollars from Greenpeace International and the Greenpeace organisations in the US. The next hearing in the Court of Amsterdam is scheduled for 16 April, 2026.
Media contact:
Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
Climate Change
Former EPA Staff Detail Expanding Pollution Risks Under Trump
The Trump administration’s relentless rollback of public health and environmental protections has allowed widespread toxic exposures to flourish, warn experts who helped implement safeguards now under assault.
In a new report that outlines a dozen high-risk pollutants given new life thanks to weakened, delayed or rescinded regulations, the Environmental Protection Network, a nonprofit, nonpartisan group of hundreds of former Environmental Protection Agency staff, warns that the EPA under President Donald Trump has abandoned the agency’s core mission of protecting people and the environment from preventable toxic exposures.
Former EPA Staff Detail Expanding Pollution Risks Under Trump
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 months 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
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
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 Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
