As negotiations on a Belém “Mutirão” decision dragged on beyond the Wednesday deadline the COP30 presidency had targeted, UN chief António Guterres called on governments to agree a balanced political package that would require compromise and courage.
Such a package should be “concrete on funding adaptation, credible on emissions cuts, bankable on finance”, he told journalists on Thursday morning.
He rallied behind a demand from the world’s poorest countries to triple finance to help them adapt to more extreme weather and rising seas to $120 billion by 2030.
He noted that communities on the frontlines are watching the UN summit – “counting flooded homes, failed harvests, lost livelihoods and asking ‘how much more must we suffer?’” “They have heard enough excuses, they demand results,” he added.
COP30 Bulletin Day 9: Belém package elusive as Lula steals the show
He warned that an “inevitable” temporary overshoot of the 1.5C warming limit in the Paris Agreement means “more heat and hunger, more disasters and displacements”.
“For millions, adaptation is not an abstract goal,” the Portuguese official insisted. “It is the difference between rebuilding and being swept away, between replanting and starving, between staying on ancestral lands or losing it forever.”
Adaptation needs are “skyrocketing and the overshoot will push them even higher”, he added. Despite this, developed countries’ commitment to double adaptation finance to at least $40 billion by this year “is slipping away”, he warned.
Poorest countries appeal for more adaptation finance at COP30
The latest estimate of developing countries’ annual climate adaptation needs for 2035 outstrips current funding by at least 12 times, with rich nations providing just $26 billion in 2023, according to the annual UN Adaptation Gap Report.
If current trends continue, developed countries are set to miss the 2025 target that they committed to at COP26 four years ago, UNEP’s report said.
“So tripling adaptation finance by 2030 is essential,” Guterres said, adding that it is also “possible and desirable” and he hoped developed countries would “accept to engage in this objective” at COP30 if their concerns on emissions reductions are addressed.
He noted that a new fund to help countries recover from loss and damage is practically empty and called for it to be capitalised. During COP30, the fund has received tiny pledges totalling less than $16 million from Iceland, Japan and Luxembourg. It has now secured combined promises of nearly $800 million but only around half of that is in the bank.
Guterres urged funders, including wealthy governments, climate funds and development banks “to step up and prevent further tragedies”. “It’s about survival, it’s about justice – and for Indigenous peoples, it is also about protecting cultures and homelands that sustain our planet’s vital ecosystems,” he added.
To ramp up emissions-cutting efforts and bring warming back down to 1.5C, he said countries’ national climate plans (NDCs) should be the “floor not the ceiling”, with the responsibility on big emitters to do more.
He did not explicitly back a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels, as more than 80 countries are pushing for at the talks, but said governments should implement the energy shift they signed up to at COP28 and ensure it is done in a fair way.
Asked if he wanted the US to return to the UN climate process, which climate-change denier President Donald Trump has abandoned, Guterres said “we are waiting for you”, quipping “hope is the last thing that dies”.
Germany pledges €1 billion to TFFF forest fund
Germany has joined a handful of countries pledging money to the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF), but the conservation mechanism launched by Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva ahead of COP30 is still far short of the $25 billion in public funds it aims to secure.
Following talks between government ministers and Lula yesterday, Germany said it would contribute one billion euros ($1.1 billion) over the next 10 years, praising the “innovative approach” of the investment-driven multilateral fund proposed by Brazil.
The TFFF is a blended finance instrument that will invest in financial markets and pay a share of any returns to tropical countries that are protecting their rainforests. At least 20% of all payments must be allocated to Indigenous people and local communities. Read this Climate Home News explainer for more details of how the fund works.
“It’s about protecting the tropical rainforests, the lungs of our planet,” a statement by Germany’s development and environment ministers said after Wednesday’s meeting.
At a press conference this Thursday, German environment minister said the country will disburse $100 million every year over a decade in the form of a grant, which experts said could allow for larger payouts to forest countries since the fund wouldn’t have to pay interest. The money would come from the country’s foreign aid budget.
Germany’s promise of support follows a Norwegian pledge of 3 billion euros over the coming decade – which are conditional to other donors also contributing money to the fund, while Brazil and Indonesia have pledged $1 billion each, with Colombia offering $250 million. France has also said it will consider contributing 500 million euros over the next five years.
But campaigners were critical of the German contribution, as the world’s third-largest economy has pledged about the same amount as Brazil and Indonesia. A group of German NGOs sent a letter to government officials requesting the country to pledge at least $2.5 billion for the TFFF.
“That the German government is investing in the TFFF is important and the right thing to do. Nevertheless, the investment amount of one billion euros is a disappointment,” said Felix Finkbeiner, founder of Germany-based conservation NGO Plant-for-the-Planet.
Florian Titze, WWF-Germany Head of International Policy, also said the sum was “disappointing”, given that Chancellor Frierich Merz told world leaders at COP30 that the country would pledge a “considerable” amount. “The federal government should now successively increase the German amount and distribute it over the next few years.”
The total pledged so far to the TFFF amounts to roughly $7 billion. However, experts noted that, because Norway’s pledge is conditional and doesn’t count toward the $10bn target set by the Brazilians at COP30, the fund has been left with about a $6bn shortfall.
British climate minister Ed Miliband said on Monday the UK government was keeping “the option of an investment under review”.
Talks have also been held with China, the United Arab Emirates, Australia, Japan and Canada, Brazilian TFFF official João Paulo de Resende told Climate Home News last month. None of those countries have so far announced pledges
De Resende said securing political support was more important at this stage than funding promises, which can come later.
Roman ruins and lots of hotels – Türkiye’s pitch to host COP31
Outlining their ultimately successful bid to host COP31, Turkish officials pitched the country as a lower-emissions choice due to its location at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, and played up the rich cultural heritage and top-level tourist facilities of the resort city of Antalya.
Australian Minister for Climate Change and Energy Chris Bowen announced last night that his country was ceding the summit’s hosting rights to Türkiye, though Australia – which had greater support for its candidacy – will lead the negotiations.
Türkiye’s pitch for the talks to be held in Antalya, made in a presentation to delegates at the Bonn climate talks in June, promised to deliver a “zero-waste COP”, with a strong focus on heritage sites such as nearby Roman ruins and a shrine to Saint Nicholas of Myra, the inspiration for Santa Claus. The presentation’s slides also praised the Mediterranean city’s food and golf courses.
Turkish officials argued that a COP held in Antalya would have a smaller carbon footprint than Australia’s proposal of Adelaide due to its central geographical location, and also sought to emphasise the city’s urban transport network as well as its strong local logistics and supply chain.
Antalya, which is a similar size to Belém, with a population of roughly 1.5 million people, is popular with European and Russian sun-seekers in summer. By November, when the COP will be held, temperatures will have dropped to highs of about 21C (70F). That means COP delegates won’t have to compete with as many tourists for the 628,000 beds that the Turkish government says the city has to offer – far more than Belém.
But at a time of worries about democratic backsliding in Türkiye, hosting COP31 in Antalya may draw concerns.
Mahir Ilgaz, a Turkish regional programme director at Oil Change International, voiced concern about the decision, noting in a social media post that elected mayors – including Antalya’s – have been replaced by government-appointed trustees.
“Colleagues working on local engagement are already wondering how to operate safely and meaningfully in that context”, he wrote on LinkedIn.
Meanwhile, a former Turkish climate diplomat told Climate Home News that they were disappointed Turkiye would not hold the presidency.
“We bear the burden, but they hold the power. We have the drum but they hold the drumstick. We do the work but they make the decisions,” the official said.
The post COP30 Bulletin Day 10: UN chief backs call to triple adaptation finance appeared first on Climate Home News.
COP30 Bulletin Day 10: Talks disrupted as fire causes evacuation
Climate Change
Sewing and Painting the Future

© Harriet Spark / Grumpy Turtle Film / Greenpeace
The banner drop is a distinctive part of the Greenpeace repertoire.
The moment of the unfolding is intrinsically dramatic. It is the reveal; when the moral and scientific truth of a situation is unveiled to the world. The wrong is being labelled—not through a written submission, or a social media post, or a statement in a meeting—but in words emblazoned in real physical space, chosen and occupied with precision, for all to see. There is jeopardy and transgression. And there are consequences—for the activists and for Greenpeace, as well as for the target of the communication. One of the reasons the banner remains such an effective tool in our toolbox is because of its undeniable clarity in cutting through, driving change and accountability in a way that few other tactics can. It is naming the wrong: in giant, clear letters.
We’ve hung these massive messages at environmental crime scenes, corporate headquarters, and iconic landmarks; on government buildings, ships and planes—in locations all around the world, for years.
My own memories unfurl even as I write this, but because the campaign to stop Woodside at Scott Reef is so pressing, what immediately springs to mind are two of our banners in that campaign: one on a crane outside their Perth HQ, and another on some of their corroding industrial junk at sea. What about you? Is there a particular banner that you picture when you think of Greenpeace?
The banners can attract global attention, but they have quiet beginnings. Each one is made by hand, often by volunteers. It is the invisible labour behind each spectacular public moment. One of the key pieces of equipment in our workshop at Rainbow Warrior House is the sewing machine. Sometimes our workshop is full of people and noise; at others it is quiet, the only sound being the gentle, purposeful, whir and buzz of a banner being sewn. It is usually our warehouse manager, Kieran Holmes, on the tools, head over the machine, carefully pouring over the raw canvas or tarp as the banner takes shape. Kieran’s one of those people who seems to be able to turn his hand to almost anything, but you wouldn’t know it because he’s old-school modest. In addition to being incredibly skilled, Kieran’s an all-round beaut human to have in the heart of our headquarters; never too busy to take the time to show a newcomer, or curious visitor, around his domain.
Once the banner is sewn up, the lettering needs to be outlined. This is done on a magnetic wall—a fit-for-purpose feature at Rainbow Warrior House, where the banner is held up with magnets, and the edges of the letters neatly traced from a projection.
Next comes the painting. It usually starts late in the afternoon, sometimes going into evenings and weekends, with volunteers, staff, mates crowded around, brushes in hand. It is a calming meditative feeling of shared purpose, giving each letter its visual heft, the colour building power and presence with each stroke.
Then you stand back, stretch, and look at the message, now ready.
S A V E S C O T T R E E F
Throughout history, every great push for social change has required some form of invisible labour; preparation in the form of quiet things seldom seen, but vital. It is the enabling work of love instantiated in action. And of course, so much of the time it has been women who have done this labour, so that the men could get the chance to make the speeches and stand on the podiums. The inaugural Greenpeace voyage to stop nuclear testing in 1971 had a male-only crew, but wouldn’t have happened without the ideas and work of women behind the scenes.
It is what we do together, after all, that changes the world. Sometimes that work happens on a stage, a ship on the wild seas, or up the side of a building. But mostly, it is the hidden diligence of those who care and contribute to all the enabling work that makes a change once thought impossible, inevitable. It is Kieran at his sewing machine. It was Dorothy Stowe doing the administrative work of the ‘Don’t Make A Wave Committee’ that became Greenpeace.
When we think of social change, it is the sturm and drang that we remember. The drop of the banner, the chant of the crowd, the raising of the new flag. But look behind the curtain, and there’ll be a crew of people who are taking responsibility for the administration, the sewing and the painting, making the food, checking the bus timetables, getting stuff done. And behind them are even more handsinvisibly donating time and trust; the financial, material and expert resources that make it all possible. There’s love, camaraderie and know-how at every stage.
We are social and cooperative creatures by nature. And we human beings have been stitching for millenia, sewing the possibilities of our common future. Political and corporate bullies and algorithmically manipulative platforms would have us forget this, and abandon who we are. But we should be in no doubt that the brighter prospects for ourselves and life on earth continue to be stitched and painted; collaboratively and with love, by the diligent hands of millions of people who care, each day, in every community and city across the world.
With Love,
David
Q & A
I always get great questions when interviewing prospective new team members. One that came up again recently was: “Is Greenpeace actually one organisation?”
Around the world, people know Greenpeace by our one global name, united by a shared mission: securing an Earth capable of nurturing life in all its magnificent diversity, with a particular focus on climate and biodiversity. Behind the scenes, though, we’re organised as a network of 25 legally autonomous national and regional offices, including Greenpeace Australia Pacific, working alongside Greenpeace International.
That structure gives us the best of both worlds: we work together leveraging the power of a global network on the issues that matter most, while each office remains legally independent and deeply connected to the communities, cultures and political realities where we’re embedded. Local knowledge informs global action, and global collaboration strengthens and supports local campaigns.
It’s a model that has enabled Greenpeace to take on some of the world’s biggest challenges for over five decades–while withstanding challenges and attacks from governments and corporations. Global enough to tackle global problems, local enough to understand our communities and the natural places we love.
If you’re curious to learn more, you can read about the Greenpeace Global Network structure here.
Climate Change
As fires burn and temperatures soar, it’s time to imagine a world beyond GDP
Steven Stone is acting director of the United Nations Environment Programme’s Office of Science
In 1934, American economist Simon Kuznets presented a paper to Congress advocating for a new way of measuring economic performance.
The United States was reeling from the Great Depression, and Kuznets – a future Novel prize winner – wanted to gauge just how badly the country’s economy had been dented.
His metric, which would come to be known as gross domestic product (GDP), was a breakthrough. But as pioneering as it was, Kuznets saw its limitations.
“The welfare of a nation can scarcely be inferred from a measure of national income,” he wrote in the 1934 paper.
Some nine decades on, we have largely forgotten that message. GDP has become a barometer of economic progress, a kind of one-number-that-rules-them-all upon which national policies turn and governments rise and fall.
With the climate crisis deepening by the day – as evidenced by the heatwaves and wildfires now searing Europe – our attachment to GDP is looking like a problem.
In a single-minded pursuit of GDP growth, humanity is inadvertently feeding several environmental crises that, over the long run, threaten to make most of us poorer, sicker and more miserable. Climate change alone could slice 20 per cent off global GDP by 2100 – a staggering number.
Clear-cutting boosts GDP not wealth
We need to broaden our vision and definition of economic success before it’s too late.
I grew up in the 1970s and 80s surrounded by the mixed hardwood forests of the northeastern United States. For me, the trees were a refuge, a place to run, discover and savor the history and mystery of the land and its people.
Those experiences with my friends were more important than the amount of money in my pocket. And they led to a realization early on in my career as an economist: that wealth is about more than just income.
This is one of GDP’s most significant oversights.
With every forest we clear cut and every ounce of fossil fuel we burn, GDP rises. But through those actions, we are whittling away at the natural world, which supplies us with food, water, medicine, clean air and countless other essentials.
By focusing only on GDP, we’re ignoring what’s happening to the natural assets on which our prosperity ultimately depends. It’s like we’re driving a car and only looking at the speedometer, not the energy remaining in the battery.
That is the difference between measuring income versus measuring wealth.
The answer to this dilemma lies in looking beyond GDP. We must start considering a broader range of indicators when making policy decisions.
From an environmental perspective, that means measuring and valuing natural assets like forests, water, soil, biodiversity and clean air. By assigning a value to nature, decision-makers can better understand the economic consequences of, say, strip-mining a mountain top or letting plastic waste overwhelm a river.
There is still some debate over how exactly to do this kind of natural capital accounting. But that’s not a reason to dismiss it, as many have done. It took years of refinement to end up with the GDP formula we have today.
Costa Rica’s example
The idea of looking beyond GDP isn’t only a theoretical debate. Countries and communities around the world have started to make economic decisions based on their natural assets. A prime example is Costa Rica, a biodiversity hotspot where a years-long effort to conserve land and seascapes has led to a boom in tourism. That in part helped elevate the country into the club of high-income nations.
This kind of environmentally focused economic decision making can pay huge dividends. By stabilizing the climate, ending pollution and halting the loss of the natural world, humanity could save millions of lives a year and create US$20 trillion in economic benefits annually by 2070, found the Global Environment Outlook 7, a 2025 report from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The report was funded by the European Union among others.
I began my career as an economist before moving to UNEP, which focuses on solving the world’s thorniest environmental problems. During that time, I’ve come to appreciate that “wealth” means more than simply “income.” True prosperity means being able to provide for ourselves now and into the future. Anything short of that is an empty kind of affluence – and ultimately doomed to be short-lived.
As deadly heat blankets our cities, species slip into extinction and the planet struggles with rising toxicity and pollution, I am convinced that we can do better at measuring what matters. And that means updating and expanding how we measure economic progress.
The post As fires burn and temperatures soar, it’s time to imagine a world beyond GDP appeared first on Climate Home News.
As fires burn and temperatures soar, it’s time to imagine a world beyond GDP
Climate Change
When taps run dry in the Caribbean, it’s not enough to blame El Niño
Amira Odeh Quiñones is a hydrologist and Caribbean organiser for the 350.org climate campaign group
El Niño, likely to be one of the strongest in modern history, has arrived on Caribbean shores.
Drought is slowly creeping up on our islands. But unlike the fiery wildfires ravaging parts of Europe, there’s no smoke signalling the damage being done, no sirens to warn of the danger. Only announcements from public health officials to stay indoors and remain hydrated — as if outdoor workers and farming communities have the luxury to heed such advice.
During El Niño, strong atmospheric winds alter rain patterns and trap heat across the Caribbean. But while we have experienced El Niño many times before, it has become very visible in recent years how climate change is making this natural phenomenon worse.
Across the Greater Antilles, temperatures are soaring past 38°C (100°F), with real-feel indexes reaching a gruelling 43°C in parts of Puerto Rico where I live. Cuba has it worse. Widespread power outages mean that methods for cooling down are unavailable for most of the day, leaving millions of vulnerable people at risk of heat stroke when temperatures hit 38°C.
Santa Marta coalition tested as co-chair Colombia turns back to fossil fuels
During the last strong drought a decade ago, I had water only two days a week in my home. Today, there are many families whose taps are about to run completely dry. Water authorities have already begun strict rationing in some municipalities, with more on the list scheduled for rationing if conditions don’t change.
Water rationing is far more than an inconvenience; it is an immediate health risk. This means thousands of people need to constantly haul heavy buckets up flights of stairs just so they could bathe, cook, stay hydrated – the basics of survival.
Heat causes health problems
Puerto Rico is home to roughly 300,000 elderly residents. Many live alone, isolated and without support. They risk severe physical injury when carrying heavy water containers, and are wont to suffer from silent heat exhaustion in unventilated rooms.
Furthermore, when water shortages force residents to store water in open household containers, it inadvertently creates breeding grounds for Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. Paired with scorching temperatures that tend to shorten the mosquito breeding cycle, the region is facing explosive outbreaks of dengue fever that endanger our most vulnerable: children and the elderly.
The economic fallout is equally devastating. Dry fields mean millions of dollars in lost crops, forcing small agricultural businesses to collapse, needing urgent government relief to survive. Extreme fuel shortages have already paralyzed Cuba’s agricultural sector, cutting food output by 60% – the El Niño dry spell threatens to decimate it.
At sea, warmer ocean waters fuel massive influxes of sargassum seaweed. Rotting sargassum chokes our beaches, destroying the local tourism industry that so many working families rely on. Tangled seaweed also damages nets and boat engines, slashing fish catches and driving up equipment costs for local fishers.
In the south of Puerto Rico, the coastal town of La Parguera is currently witnessing a historic amount of sargassum on its shores. This has halted most of the boating activity in the area, which is the seaside town’s main tourist draw and economic driver.
All over the Caribbean, from town halls to local group gatherings, the story I hear is always the same: constant headaches, lost work hours, failing health, and a sense that quality of life is silently being stolen. The compounding effects of heatwaves, drought, and marine destruction are exhausting our people, our islands.
Climate change to blame
Climate change makes each El Niño year hotter and more damaging. Higher baseline global temperatures increase the energy and moisture available for extreme weather. Latest projections show that El Niño may push the monthly global average temperature past 2°C of warming for the first time in early 2027. In the Caribbean islands, that will not just be breaking records – it’ll be breaking lives.
Recently, I had the opportunity to share a panel with climate scientists behind what is known as the field of “attribution science” – or the science that compares today’s climate conditions to what the Earth’s climate would be like without human activity, particularly burning fossil fuels. They’re unequivocal: it’s no longer a question of whether extreme weather is caused by climate change, it’s just a question of how much.
Attribution science recently got a boost from the U.S.’ top scientific advisory body. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine recognized that researchers’ methods have advanced considerably in recent years, resulting in better assessments on how much extreme weather can be attributed to human-caused climate change. It noted that attribution findings could be relevant in some types of legal cases, including those seeking damages from oil companies for climate impacts.
This crisis, which is already taking a heavy toll on our communities’ survival, needs real, urgent, and structural action that goes beyond aid. With similar droughts now gripping parts of Asia and Africa, we’re falling into the familiar narrative of treating the looming humanitarian crisis as if no one was to blame, as if it is being caused solely by a natural phenomenon we can’t control.
It’s not. The world was already on fire before its regular visitor, El Niño, came. While we need humanitarian action, we need climate action too, in order to permanently put out the flames.
The post When taps run dry in the Caribbean, it’s not enough to blame El Niño appeared first on Climate Home News.
When taps run dry in the Caribbean, it’s not enough to blame El Niño
-
Climate Change12 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases12 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

