Indigenous peoples, climate activists, feminist organisations, clowns, friars, cyclists and more came together on Saturday under Belém’s baking sun for the “Great People’s March”, a demonstration demanding climate justice and territorial protection.
Thousands joined the first march outside the COP venue in four years, as the last three summits were held in Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Azerbaijan, places where street protests outside the COP venue were not permitted by the authorities.
Week 1 of COP30 ends with uneven progress and many thorny issues still unresolved. Want clarity on what’s at stake? Sign up for our Monday event.
Saturday’s march in Belém ended peacefully at the Aldeia COP, a village designated by the Brazilian government to host the more than 3,000 Indigenous people who travelled to attend the conference.
During the first week of COP, it was mainly Indigenous people who led the two biggest civil society actions: a flotilla sailing on the Amazon River delta on Wednesday and a blockade of the conference centre’s entrance on Friday. Thousands also participated on Saturday.
The props seen at the march included a statue of US President Donald Trump riding on the back of a worker and a figure of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva using a straw to drink “oil from the Amazon”. A network of green groups dressed in black staged a funeral for fossil fuels, carrying three huge coffins emblazoned with coal, oil and gas.
One of the Indigenous leaders present, Nelson of the Amazon Munduruku people – who organised the blockade of the COP venue entrance – said they were here “to fight, to bring the people’s vindication of resistance and struggle,” and reiterated their demand for a meeting with President Lula.
The soundtrack to the march changed from group to group of marchers, ranging from Indigenous chants and Brazilian music to shouts of Free Palestine and Free Congo.
Adaptation talks held hostage by finance
Finalising a list of 100 metrics to measure progress on adapting to more extreme weather and rising seas after two years of work may have seemed like a relatively straightforward technical win for the UN climate summit in Belém. The COP30 presidency were hoping they might even get it wrapped up in week one of the talks, which winds up on Saturday.
No such luck, as the negotiating groups for Africa, Latin America and the Arab countries have decided they want to use the talks on indicators for the Global Goal on Adaptation as a place to press for more funding from wealthy governments. Earlier in the week, as we reported, they asked for two more years to discuss the metrics, which include “means of implementation” – code for how adaptation will be paid for.
By the mid-point of the talks – when negotiators compile their work into texts that are either ready to be approved or need further refinement by ministers who arrive on Monday – the latest version of the adaptation text was entirely inside square brackets, meaning that none of it has yet been agreed among countries. It will now fall to the presidency to find a way forward.
The text they’ve been handed shows no sign of any convergence of views, and includes two main options on adaptation finance – one which would have nothing at all and the other which reflects developing-country proposals for a new quantitative goal of either $120 billion (from the Least-Developed Countries) or $150 billion (Arab Group) a year by 2030.
Under a current target set at COP26 in 2021, donor governments pledged to deliver at least $40 billion a year by 2025. But with aid budgets being cut by many, current predictions are that they are on track to deliver little more than $25 billion, which leaves a huge gap compared with needs.
Global South’s climate adaptation bill to top $300 billion a year by 2035: UN
Parts of the proposed text released on Saturday also aim to prevent developing countries from being expected to fund their own adaptation measures and say that the indicators would be voluntary and left to countries to decide how to use them, in a bid to avoid being told what they should do to make their agriculture, water and health systems and other infrastructure more resilient.
Debbie Hillier, Mercy Corps’ UNFCCC policy lead, noted that the new text brings together the full spectrum of positions raised by negotiators. “The large number of options and brackets underscores how much work still lies ahead and how crucial ministerial engagement will be in resolving the core political divergences,” she said.
She pointed to the reference to providing at least $120 billion in adaptation finance for developing countries as a signal that “pressure is mounting for a serious response to the scale of adaptation needs,” adding that the text “recognises the urgency of delivering additional and predictable public finance”.
On Friday, African Group of Negotiators Chair Richard Muyungi told Climate Home News that a two-year extension of discussions on the metrics may not be needed if there is political will to unlock more funding for adaptation.
“[If] we get the means of implementation in the indicators, I think we’ll be able to agree [them] within the shortest time possible,” he added.
While adaptation finance has erupted as an issue in the discussions on the metrics, negotiators on this track don’t actually have a mandate to decide finance matters. That is why the hot topic of whether and how to set a new target is also part of talks on the broader finance goal (NCQG) that was decided in Baku last year.
Sources told Climate Home News it may be more likely that adaptation could be allocated a share of the $300 billion a year developed countries agreed to mobilise for poorer nations by 2035 under the NCQG.
Future of $1.3-trillion roadmap uncertain at COP30
COP30 President André Corrêa do Lago today hosted a much-anticipated event on the Baku-Belém Roadmap, a document building on last year’s finance COP. It is meant to chart a way forward to meet a new goal to deliver $1.3 trillion-a-year for developing nations by 2035. But experts said the session failed to provide clear guidance and raised concerns that the roadmap could die in Belem.
The event, which is not part of formal negotiations, was originally scheduled for Tuesday but got pushed back to the weekend after countries failed to decide whether to start a conversation on finance at COP30.
Seven speakers – among them UN climate chief Simon Stiell – read statements for the first half of the 40-minute event, reiterating the roadmap’s main points — a shopping list of measures that could deliver the $1.3 trillion. A handful of governments and observers gave mostly positive feedback.
Ali Mohamed, special climate envoy of Kenya, proposed incorporating its short-term recommendations in the decisions made at COP30. One of those recommendations invites developed countries to consider working together on a delivery plan to achieve the $300 billion they are due to mobilise annually by 2035.
China’s delegate Chen Zhihua told the event that “greater clarity is needed on the implementation path” of that goal.
Corrêa do Lago emphasised that only the $300-billion core goal approved in Baku “is in the process of negotiation” and that the roadmap to 1.3T “is still something open”.
Roadmap to $1.3 trillion seeks to tip climate finance scales but way forward unclear
A representative of Colombia said, on behalf of the AILAC group of Latin American countries, that the report confuses actions to support developing countries with actions to transform all financing flows, and requested to discuss it formally in the UN climate regime.
Some observers were critical of the Brazil-led event at COP30, arguing that it risks leaving the formal negotiations with no clear guidance on finance.
“What happened today was not a conversation. It was not even a format that allows interaction with the presidency,” said Sandra Guzmán, director of the nonprofit Climate Finance Group for Latin America and the Caribbean (GFLAC).
She added that not enough developing countries were represented because at the time climate finance negotiators were in other rooms, attempting to carry the talks forward.
Joe Thwaites, senior climate finance advocate at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), said the risk of lacking clear guidance is that developed countries could fail to deliver the finance goal, as happened in the past with a previous $100bn goal that was delivered two years late. “I’m really worried that we’re going to be in the same position for the $1.3 trillion, which is a goal 13 times the size,” he added.
Azerbaijani lead finance negotiator Elmaddin Mehdiyev told Climate Home that the mandate to deliver the Baku-Belem roadmap has been completed and focusing on implementation is now “much more important”.
He added that getting the roadmap endorsed or welcomed formally by governments at COP30 was not key to taking it forward as it is a “non-negotiated document”.
Asked about this possibility after the event, Corrêa do Lago told Climate Home News: “There’s a movement starting, but we’ll see how the countries react. I think it’s unlikely to happen in Belém.”
Brazil launches flagship climate and trade forum
The COP30 presidency this Saturday launched a forum for countries to discuss climate and trade, seen by Brazil as one of its “flagship” initiatives outside of the formal talks.
Trade has been one of the most contentious issues at the summit in Belém, after the Like Minded group of emerging economies pushed for an agenda item on the topic at the start of the UN climate talks.
Several countries in that group – among them China, India and Iran – have been hit by US or European trade restrictions such as the recent US tariffs on solar imports. “Collaboration remains the only viable path to solving the global crisis; only through unity can we overcome it,” said Li Gao, China’s head of delegation at the launch event for the Integrated Forum on Climate Change and Trade (IFCCT).
After a week of consultations, countries have yet to agree on whether to hold such a conversation at COP30 and the first reactions to the IFCCT were lukewarm. A senior EU negotiator said on Wednesday that the bloc does not want to address trade disputes at COP that belong in the World Trade Organization.
For now, the Brazil-led forum is in a consultation phase, including on “modalities and thematic focus”, according to its official website. The IFCCT is intended to run for an initial phase of three years from early 2026 to end 2028 and is open for countries to join, it says.
The post COP30 Bulletin Day 6: COP’s climate march takes to the streets again appeared first on Climate Home News.
COP30 Bulletin Day 6: First week ends with a colourful march and much work left to do
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

