- Formal negotiations
- Finance
- Global review
- Global report
- Digital sequence information
- Harmful subsidies
- Marine biodiversity
- Planning, monitoring, reporting and review
- Article 8(j) implementation
- Biodiversity and climate change
- Links with other bodies
- Around the COP
- Armenian presidency
- Protests
- Lobbying and influence
- Carbon and biodiversity markets
This article will be updated throughout the day and an edited version will be sent out each evening as a newsletter – you can sign up here.
Finance: Everything back on the table
Yesterday, developing countries told the co-chairs of the talks on a new climate finance goal to put all the options they wanted back into a nine-page text that had been slimmed down as a basis for negotiations. They went away last night and did so – and at 8.30 this morning they released a new text, which is 34 pages long.
Fernanda Carvalho, WWF’s climate and energy policy lead, described the ballooning length as “frustrating” because “after three years of preliminary talks, we had hoped to see a more streamlined text at this point”. She noted that the “swollen draft text puts everything back on the table – both good and bad options”.
The basic options on the structure of the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) remain the same in both texts. The first option is a goal for a certain dollar amount, consisting of finance provided by governments and private finance mobilised by their money.
The second is a provision and mobilisation goal, plus a wider investment goal that includes private and domestic finance. As this goal is “multi-layered”, it has been compared to an onion – and it’s what developed countries want.
There are several different proposals for the size of the government finance goal: $100bn+, $1tn+, $1.1tn, $1.3tn+ or $2tn. Developed countries want less and developing countries want more, with the G77 and China umbrella group jointly pushing for $1.3tn+.
On who pays, both texts include the same options – either just developed countries or various criteria to identify a larger set of contributors based on countries’ wealth and emissions. The African Group’s lead negotiator Ali Mohamed said today that attempts to widen the contributor base beyond developed countries were “why we had to reject the earlier draft”.
Newly arrived in the text are specific proposals for minimum amounts that should go to Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS). The latest text has options for $220bn for LDCs and $39bn for SIDS in grant-equivalent terms each year.
It also introduces options specifying that climate finance should transition away from fossil fuels or “emissions intensive investments”. That might seem obvious but it’s not, for example, to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank – which last year counted its investment in a gas-fired power plant in Bangladesh as climate finance.
Both the new and old texts have – outside brackets, suggesting it’s uncontroversial – commitments to phasing out “inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that do not address energy poverty or just transitions”. But the new text adds a target date of 2025 alongside the previous text’s options of 2035 and “as soon as possible”.
MDBs’ big climate-cash goal
Multilateral development banks (MDBs) say they are “walking the talk” on climate finance as pressure piles on them to channel more of their cash into developing countries’ efforts to shift to clean energy and adapt to climate change.
Their overall climate finance provision is estimated to reach $170 billion a year by 2030 – up 30% from a “record high” of $125 billion in 2023, the group of ten MDBs, including the World Bank, said in a joint statement on Tuesday.
Drilling down into the numbers, over 70% of the money ($120 billion) is expected to go to low and middle-income countries, with more than a third of that earmarked for adaptation.
Rob Moore, associate director for public banks and development at think-tank E3G, told journalists on Wednesday that this number is “significant” as it “provides a basis” for the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) to go significantly beyond the existing figure of $100 billion a year.
MDBs have been under the spotlight over the last few years as several country leaders and campaigners have called for wide-ranging reforms that would enable the financial institutions to pour more money into climate action. The World Bank – the largest among them – updated its mission to focus more on climate and made a series of technical tweaks to free up more capital for projects across the world.
Nadia Calviño, president of the European Investment Bank, said in a statement on Tuesday that “the family of multilateral development banks is walking the talk” with its new climate finance commitment. But experts think MDBs could and should go further.
Economists Vera Songwe and Nicholas Stern wrote in an influential report last year that development banks need to triple their lending to $390 billion by 2030 with a substantial chunk of the extra dollars funding climate projects.
In their statement on Tuesday, MDBs warned that their ability to do more largely depends on the commitment of their shareholders from both developed and developing countries. The group of banks urged them to show “greater ambition”, adding that “additional capital” could “unlock more MDB financing”.
Campaigners have also raised concerns over where the MDB’s climate cash actually ends up and on what terms it is provided.
In a report published this week, NGO Recourse said that the lenders’ definition of climate finance is “far from as extensive and stringent as required”, allowing for “troubling and high emitting projects”, like fossil gas, waste-to-energy incineration and airport expansion projects, to count as climate finance. It also highlighted that the majority of funding comes as loans, which contributes to “worsening the debt crisis in many countries”, the NGO said.
The MDBs added on Tuesday that they aimed to mobilise an additional $130 billion a year from the private sector by 2030. The development lenders have repeatedly stressed their role as multipliers of climate finance, using relatively modest amounts of public money to unlock much higher private capital.
But a Climate Home investigation earlier this year found private-sector climate projects enabled with the World Bank’s backing included the renovation of luxury hotels in Senegal, while a vulnerable fishing community next door struggled against rising seas with almost no support.
Meanwhile, some leaders are continuing their search for “innovative” ways to fill up the climate coffers. Barbados’ Prime Minister Mia Mottley used her speech on Tuesday to point out that putting levies on shipping companies, airlines, and bonds and stocks, as well as taxing fossil fuel extraction, could raise hundreds of billions of dollars.
Fourteen countries – including France, Spain, Kenya, Senegal and Colombia – plus the European Commission and the African Union are trying to make those ideas more concrete through a “Coalition for Solidarity Levies”. It announced five new developing-country members in Baku on Tuesday and said it will target carbon-intensive industries.
In brief…
Fossil fuel emissions still rising: Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuels worldwide are expected to grow 0.8% in 2024, belying predictions of a peak, according to the Global Carbon Project. That’s higher than the average growth rate of 0.6% per year over the past decade and follows a rise of 1.4% in 2023. Global fossil CO2 emissions are now 8% higher than in 2015, when the Paris Agreement was negotiated. Emissions from coal use are set to increase 0.2% in 2024, hitting another record high, due to growth in India and China.
Youth take on NDCs: Youth-led organisations are calling for a “Universal NDC Youth Clause” to be included in countries’ updated national climate plans, urging governments to involve young people more actively in climate strategies. The proposed clause has three pillars: recognising young people as essential drivers of climate action, collaborating with youth in developing the NDCs, and educating young people on the impacts of climate change. At the launch, the organisations noted that “several governments” are expected to announce commitments to the clause in the coming days.
The post COP29 Bulletin Day 3: New finance text and development banks’ 2030 offer appeared first on Climate Home News.
COP29 Bulletin Day 3: Finance text balloons and Brazil presents new NDC
Continue Reading
Prepared by a coalition of nine Western Australian union, industry, conservation, and community organisations—including UnionsWA, the Conservation Council WA, and the Smart Energy Council—the WA Clean Energy, Jobs & Industry Plan provides a practical roadmap to transform Western Australia into a clean energy powerhouse while creating thousands of secure local jobs.
Western Australia stands at a pivotal crossroads: lead the global clean energy economy or watch investment, future industries, and secure jobs go elsewhere. The WA Clean Energy, Jobs & Industry Plan outlines a transformative blueprint to harness the state’s world-class solar and wind resources. Discover how legislated renewable targets, green iron manufacturing, and a dedicated regional training strategy can generate tens of thousands of local jobs, lower household bills, and build a resilient, net-zero future for all Western Australians.
WA needs a clear and forward-thinking plan if it is going to become a competitive renewable energy powerhouse and maintain its economic strength through the energy transition.
“Western Australians know a faster renewable energy transition will lower their household expenses and prevent harmful climate pollution. But the community also needs clear direction to ensure this transition will create jobs, lower costs and not cause undue environmental harm.
“Here, sectors representing a broad range of interests have laid the groundwork for those outcomes, clearly outlining what is needed to create a future for WA that is good for the environment, for the climate, for workers and for the economy.
Summary
The WA Clean Energy, Jobs & Industry Plan sets out a strategic roadmap to position Western Australia as a global clean energy superpower while creating thousands of secure local jobs.
The report establishes three overarching goals:
- Creating local employment.
- Maintaining industrial competitiveness.
- Lowering household energy costs
To realize this vision, the framework details actionable measures to follow on from the recent WA Government announcement of a 75% Renewable Energy Target by 2031 for the South West Interconnected System. This includes developing a statewide Renewable Energy Target, coordinating statewide workforce and training pipelines, strategically planning regional infrastructure to safeguard high-value biodiversity and cultural heritage, and ensuring equitable benefit-sharing through household electrification incentives and First Nations equity partnerships. Ultimately, the plan highlights that establishing clear policy and regulatory certainty will unlock lower energy bills, boost power reliability, and secure the state’s global competitiveness in emerging green commodity export markets.
Key Findings
- Statewide Renewable Energy Target and Emissions Reduction Targets: The report calls for a statewide RET and 1.5°C aligned emission reduction targets to remove policy risk, lower capital costs, and attract clean energy investment.
- Transformative Job Creation: Accelerating the transition offers massive employment prospects, including up to 8,800 solar and battery jobs by 2050, as well as 24,000 ongoing and 11,000 construction jobs in a commercial green iron industry.
- Industrial Electrification & Competitiveness: Requiring large gas users to adopt binding electrification timetables and providing concessional financing will protect existing energy-intensive manufacturers from rising energy costs and impending domestic gas shortfalls.
- Green Commodity Export Leadership: Western Australia can build new export markets in green iron, green ammonia, and offshore oil/gas decommissioning by constructing shared common-user infrastructure and setting dedicated Green Commodity Export Targets.
- Coordinated Workforce & Training Pipeline: To address critical skill shortages the plan recommends establishing a WA Clean Energy Jobs Plan 2050, three regional training hubs, and dedicated pathways for female and under-represented apprentices.
- Environmental Safeguards & Community Benefits: Fast-tracked development must be paired with State Planning Policies that avoid high-biodiversity and cultural heritage lands, mandate new data centres to run on additional renewable power, and deliver household electrification rebates and First Nations equity partnerships.
What you can do
WA has an opportunity to lead on sustainable, clean energy and associated industries. You can help by:
- Sending an email to Environment Minister Murray Watt and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, calling on them to reject Browse.
- Sharing this story to help more Australians understand what’s at stake.
- Encouraging your friends and family to take action.
Countries have completed the first “global review” of their progress towards reversing nature loss by 2030 at the COP17 biodiversity talks in Yerevan, Armenia.
The review “notes with deep concern” that, unless action is “rapidly accelerated”, the goal to reverse nature loss and meet a set of 23 targets by 2030 “will not be achieved”.
It “urges” countries to accelerate action, including by “increased ambition in addressing the gaps”.
Much of the discussions in Yerevan focused on how to raise the necessary funds to help developing countries protect nature.
Some major economies pushed to expand the range of nations that are expected to provide finance, with countries agreeing at the end of the two weeks of talks that non-donors that want to contribute can “signal interest” before COP18.
This came after developed countries failed to meet a target to significantly ramp up nature finance over the last few years.
It also came as a landmark fund agreed at COP16 in Colombia to pay communities for the genetic resources derived from nature stands nearly empty two years on.
The Yerevan talks marked the halfway point of the “Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework” (GBF), the “Paris Agreement for nature” first made in 2022 and due to be achieved by 2030.
During the nearly 12-hour-long final plenary, countries voted for Quito, Ecuador, to host the COP18 nature talks, which will be held in 2028.
Countries managed to sign off on all the major negotiation texts, marking a stark contrast to COP16, which ran so far over time that the Colombian presidency lost “quorum”, forcing talks to resume in Rome months later.
Below, Carbon Brief has detailed analysis of all of the key outcomes from COP17.
Formal negotiations
Finance
Finance, predictably, was at the heart of the discord and deadlock at the Yerevan talks.
At COP17, discussions on finance had to achieve several outcomes.
The first part – to take stock of biodiversity finance mobilised so far to meet the nature deal’s goals – fell under the global review.
As the global report noted, developed countries failed to meet their commitments to raise “at least $20bn a year by 2025” for nature. Delegates pointed to falling aid levels and a sharp 27% decline in environmental funding for the 2026-30 period.
The second part was to agree on how to mobilise resources for the next four years, to meet the GBF’s goals and targets.
Calls to “broaden the contributor base” of who pays to protect nature – and whether that should include emerging economies – became the most fraught element of the talks.
Eventually, countries agreed on what Switzerland described as a “super, mega-delicate” text. It hinged on major “political compromises”, with “no major winner or loser”, according to Kenya.
Per the decision, countries that want to be included on a list of developed country donors can “signal interest” through bilateral, confidential consultations before COP18 and every alternate COP after.
Finally, countries also agreed on criteria to shape and resource a new, permanent financial mechanism to protect nature after 2030.
However, this did not immediately take the form of a new fund under the COP that biodiverse countries have demanded since 2022, deferring the mechanism’s institutional structure to COP18.
Resource mobilisation discussions at the GBF’s halfway mark were supposed to agree on how to close the “biodiversity finance gap” and to “increase resources from all sources” to “at least” $200bn per year by 2030, as set out in target 19 of the GBF.
The talks were largely dominated by a push, led by the JUSCANZ bloc of developed countries, to “broaden the contributor base”. This could see emerging economies, such as Qatar, China, Saudi Arabia and India,