Connect with us

Published

on

Hopeful that countries can agree on a Belém “political package” by tomorrow when President Lula comes to town, Brazil’s COP30 presidency has drawn up the first draft of a text intended to form the backbone of a deal. 

The “Mutirão” decision – which the summit’s hosts insist is not a cover text – delves into the four big issues that, although not formally on the agenda, have dominated the discussions in the humid Amazon city: emissions-cutting ambition, country’s climate plans, finance and trade.

The draft contains a menu of options reflecting a wide range of positions on the thorniest issues at stake, exposing the divisions between governments and the strong diplomatic push still needed to get an agreement over the line.

David Waskow, director of the international climate initiative at the World Resources Institute, said each bundle of options on the key topics contains both stronger and weaker elements, and countries now face a clear choice. They can get behind “the stronger elements and really reinforce the more ambitious potential outcomes or move in a weaker direction and water down what they come away with from Belém,” he added.

Mutirão decision for COP30 seen weak on fossil fuel roadmap

On efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions, a decision could encourage countries to build on the landmark COP28 agreement and convene a roundtable aimed at supporting countries to develop “just, orderly and equitable transition roadmaps”, including on reducing dependency on fuels and stopping deforestation. That appears to refer to domestic blueprints and stops short of advocating for a global roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels which more than 80 countries are now calling for. 

A second option, which analysts described as weaker, only invites countries to share opportunities and “success stories” on the transition towards “low carbon solutions”. There is a third option for no text.

The transition away from fossil fuels gets another mention in the section on how to respond to a shortfall in ambition in countries’ new national climate plans (NDCs) submitted this year.

Africa wants wiggle room on energy transition as funds fall short

The first option would see the creation of an annual forum to consider the UN’s official review of emission-cutting targets, known as a “synthesis report”, with the goal of “accelerating action” around the three energy-related outcomes agreed at COP28 in Dubai: tripling renewable energy capacity, doubling energy efficiency and transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems. All of those objectives are currently lagging behind.

Another option in the draft Mutirão” decision would instead see the establishment of a “Global Implementation Accelerator”, a voluntary initiative overseen by this year’s and next year’s COP presidencies to accelerate the implementation of commitments and support countries in turning NDC promises into action.

Under a third option, the COP30 and COP31 presidencies would coordinate the creation of a “Belem Roadmap to 1.5”, identifying ways to put the world back on track towards reaching the most ambitious temperature goal of the Paris Accord – which the UN has conceded will inevitably be breached, at least temporarily. The presidencies would produce a report summarising their work by COP31 next November.

Cosima Cassel, programme lead at UK think-tank E3G, said the current options should not be mutually exclusive and a strong outcome would include a combination of an annual stocktake on filling the ambition gap and a roadmap to wean the world off fossil fuels.

“For that to happen, the presidency will need to work hard to ensure the finance and adaptation package is robust enough to support enhanced NDCs,” she added.

Finance remains wide open, adaptation in focus

On adaptation finance, the draft text includes a proposal to triple the support provided by wealthy nations to help developing countries strengthen their resilience to climate impacts.

The language could be interpreted in two ways: either as a new standalone target of delivering an additional $120 billion per year by 2030, as proposed by the Least Developed Countries (LDC) group, or as a sub-target within the broader £300 billion annual climate-finance goal agreed last year – something likely to be more acceptable to developed countries with shrinking aid budgets.

There is also a weaker option that only goes as far as acknowledging the need to “dramatically scale up adaptation finance” and provide public and grant-based resources that do not come with strings attached or costly repayments.

After climate memo row, Gates gives $1.4bn to help farmers cope with a hotter world

On wider finance issues, the document features a sweep of options. There is the possibility of creating a three-year work programme and “legally-binding plan” on the implementation of Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, which requires rich nations to stump up cash for climate action in the developing world. That is something most developing countries have been calling for, but is highly unlikely to fly with industrialised nations.

Another option would see countries draw up four different roadmaps, including one aimed at building on the recommendations in the recently published Baku to Belém Roadmap, which charted a path to mobilise $1.3 trillion in annual climate finance for developing countries by 2035.

There is also an option for no text on finance.

Finding ways to talk about trade and climate

Proposals to tackle concerns over trade also feature prominently for the first time in a draft COP decision, after emerging economies like China and India led a pushback against climate-related mechanisms like the EU’s carbon border adjustment.

Li Shuo, director of the China Climate Hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said the final deal would need to include both a political message calling for an “open, free and fair” trading environment and the definition of a process with next steps to achieve that.

Brazil’s call for COP trade forum gets lukewarm response

The draft includes a variety of options on both fronts. On the implementation front, the text suggests that the COP30 and COP31 presidencies could organise workshops examining the links between trade and climate. It also raises the option of launching a new dialogue or platform at next year’s mid-year session in Bonn and at COP31 to further discuss trade-related issues.

Another alternative is for a UN summit and an annual dialogue “on the importance of an open and supportive international economic system in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication”.

Li added that trade is expected to be one of the “pillar stones” of the COP30 outcome, but discussions are still very “open-ended” at this stage, and a lot more work needs to be done to find compromises over the coming days.

COP31 – Australia bid losing steam?

After a year-long standoff between Turkey and Australia bidding for the hosting rights for next year’s COP31, Aussie prime minister Anthony Albanese showed the first signs of backing down today, saying that a stalemate would “not send a good signal”.

Speaking at an event in Perth, Albanese said “if Turkey is chosen, we wouldn’t seek to veto that”, The Guardian reported.

COP’s host rotates every year by region, with next year belonging to the group of “West Europe and Others” – which includes Australia and Turkey. If no agreement is reached by the group, the conference would be held in Bonn, at UN Climate Change headquarters, under the standing Brazilian presidency.

Australia’s pavilion at COP30 is right next to Turkey’s – an interesting dynamic as the two battle it out to be the host of COP31 next year. (Photo: Megan Rowling)

Australia’s pavilion at COP30 is right next to Turkey’s – an interesting dynamic as the two battle it out to be the host of COP31 next year. (Photo: Megan Rowling)

Albanese said defaulting the venue to Bonn would send the wrong signal “about the unity that’s needed for the world to act on climate”. Environment minister Chris Bowen has said he wants to bring world leaders to Adelaide, in collaboration with Pacific countries.

A majority of voting countries in the group are supporting Australia’s bid, but Turkey has not withdrawn its bid with just a few days left until the end of COP30 – the deadline for choosing the next host city. COP32’s host, on the other hand, was settled last week, with Ethiopia winning the bid to host the 2027 conference in its capital Addis Ababa.

Pope keeps faith in 1.5C

The United Nations may have accepted that overshooting 1.5C of warming – at least temporarily – is inevitable – but God’s representative on Earth didn’t get the memo.

The new pope, Leo XIV, sent a video message to cardinals from the Global South gathered at the Amazonian Museum in Belém on Monday evening, saying “there is still time to keep the rise in global temperature below 1.5°C” although, he warned, “the window is closing.”

“As stewards of God’s creation, we are called to act swiftly, with faith and prophecy, to protect the gift he entrusted to us,” he said, reading from a sheet of paper in front of a portrait of the Vatican.

And he defended the 10-year-old Paris Agreement, saying it has ”driven real progress and remains our strongest tool for protecting people and the planet.” “It is not the Agreement that is failing – we are failing in our response,” he said. In particular, the American Pope pointed to “the political will of some.”

Pope Leo XIV becomes pope on May 9 2025 (Photo: Mazur/cbcew.org.uk)

Pope Leo XIV becomes pope on May 9 2025 (Photo: Mazur/cbcew.org.uk)

“We walk alongside scientists, leaders and pastors of every nation and creed. We are guardians of creation, not rivals for its spoils. Let us send a clear global signal together: nations standing in unwavering solidarity behind the Paris Agreement and behind climate cooperation,” he emphasised.

UN climate chief Simon Stiell welcomed the message, adding that the Pope’s words “challenge us to keep choosing hope and action, honouring our shared humanity and standing with communities all around the world already crying out in floods, droughts, storms and relentless heat”.

War’s carbon footprint grows but stays off the books

During the Leaders’ Summit that happened just before COP, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva referred to ongoing conflicts around the world, saying that “spending twice as much on weapons as we do on climate action is paving the way for climate apocalypse”. “There will be no energy security in a world at war,” he added.

But COP30’s schedule doesn’t appear to reflect his concerns, as there’s no mention of any peace initiative on the official schedule and no thematic day for peace, a marked difference from COP28 and COP29, when Baku called for a global truce for the summit’s duration. It didn’t produce the desired result.

And yet discussions about militarism and what it is costing the planet have not been absent from the COP30 halls. The first week saw the publication of ‘Accounting for the uncounted: The global climate impact of military activities’, an analysis by a group of civil society organisations and the University of Warwick that showed how global armed forces produce 5.5% of all greenhouse gas emissions.

If counted as a country, they would be the fourth-biggest emitter, topped only by the US, China and India – and producing more emissions than the continent of Africa.

    Ellie Kinney, senior climate advocacy officer with the Conflict and Environment Observatory (CEOBS), one of the organisations behind the report, explained that, while the Paris Agreement made military emissions reporting voluntary, few countries fully comply.

    China and the US, the world’s two biggest military spenders, have ceased their partial reporting on them altogether: the US has not sent its annual report to UNFCCC this year, and China said its military emissions are “not occurring”.

    Yet the research findings are alarming: the Russia-Ukraine conflict has produced 237 million tonnes of CO₂ over three years, while the Gaza conflict has already surpassed the combined annual emissions of Costa Rica and Estonia. The Afghanistan war was responsible for a staggering 400 million tonnes CO₂, and the EU’s rearmament could lock in 200 million tonnes of CO₂ mainly through the production and transportation of weapons, an activity that uses steel and aluminium, which are very carbon-intensive to produce.

    Ana Toni, COP30’s CEO, said back in March that countries that increase their military budgets should also increase their climate spending or face more wars in the future. “Wars come and go. Unfortunately, climate change is there for a long time,” she added.

    The European Parliament used its annual COP resolution this year to call on the defence sector to help tackle climate change by cutting its emissions intensity and urged EU decision-makers to formulate a proposal to increase the transparency of military emissions accounting to the UNFCCC.

    Campaigners want military emissions reporting to be mandatory, especially after 2024 – the first calendar year to surpass the 1.5C temperature goal and, with 56 wars involving 92 nations, the year with the highest number of active conflicts since WWII.

    “We can’t have this future where defence comes at the cost of climate action,” Kinney of CEOBS said. “Military security is not the only security – climate action is part of our collective security, too.”

    A Munduruku Ingenous peoples’ demonstration (Photo UNFCCC/Diego Herculano)

    The post COP30 Bulletin Day 8: Draft decision draws battle lines on fossil fuel transition, finance and trade  appeared first on Climate Home News.

    COP30 Bulletin Day 8: Draft decision draws battle lines on fossil fuel transition, finance and trade 

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Iran War Jeopardizes Global Food Security

    Published

    on

    Transitioning to sustainable practices could boost resilience to compounding geopolitical and climate threats, experts say.

    The worldwide fallout from the U.S. war in Iran isn’t limited to gas prices.

    Iran War Jeopardizes Global Food Security

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Planned offshore oil and gas expansion threatens key marine ecosystems, report

    Published

    on

    Ocean and coastal creatures are being put at risk by the spills, noise, dredging and shipping associated with new offshore oil and gas infrastructure, says a new report by a group of environmental NGOs.

    The report by a group of twelve environmental groups analysed planned new offshore oil and gas blocks covering 430,000 square kilometres – an area the size of Sweden – in 11 countries.

    Blocks in countries such as Kenya, Indonesia and Australia overlap with some of the planet’s hotspots for marine biodiversity, home to mangroves, coral reefs, sea turtles, sharks and whales.

    Oil and gas expansion is advancing in spite of the legal protections already in place, the report says, with a third of the area being licensed overlapping with marine and coastal protected areas.

      “It is alarming to see the research findings and the sheer scale of fossil fuel expansion trajectories threatening the health and future of our shared ocean,” said Tyson Miller, Executive Director of Earth Insight, one of the environmental NGOs involved in the report.

      At the first conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels in Santa Marta, around 60 countries floated the idea of creating “fossil-fuel-free zones”, which would seek to place limits on coal, oil and gas in areas where development would lead to severe social and environmental harm.

      As part of the landmark Kunming-Montreal biodiversity deal, governments have also pledged to protect 30% of the planet’s land and marine ecosystems by 2030. This could be used as an opportunity to limit oil and gas expansion in sensitive areas, Miller said.

      The report says the findings “reinforce the need for governments, financial institutions and companies to stop funding and supporting offshore oil and gas expansion”, and calls for the creation of fossil-fuel-free zones in “high-value marine and coastal areas”.

      Oil bidding in biodiversity hotspots

      As one of the case studies, Kenya — which is set to host the Our Ocean Conference in Mombasa later this month — has opened 50 offshore oil and gas blocks for bidding in the Lamu Basin, one of East Africa’s marine biodiversity hotspots.

      These blocks overlap with all the region’s mangroves and coral reefs, the report says, which provide nursery habitats for fish, sea turtles and the vulnerable dugong.

      These ecosystems are already under severe stress from climate change-related ocean heating and increased water acidity and could now face seismic surveys, offshore drilling, dredging, increased shipping traffic, oil spills, chemical discharge and underwater noise pollution.

      The government estimates that oil production will start by 2026, aligning with “global best practices”, and has said the Lamu basin has vast “untapped potential”. The country is expected to open bidding for the first 10 blocks by September.

      Muturi wa Kamau, network coordinator for the Kenya Oil and Gas Working Group, said in a statement that the country “is preparing to open ecologically sensitive areas for fossil fuel exploration” while positioning itself as a leader in ocean diplomacy.

      “The question is: at what cost are we willing to risk these fragile ecosystems and the livelihoods of coastal communities who have depended on them for generations?” Kamau said.

      Australia’s Otway Basin

      After a four-year pause, Australia — which will act as co-presidency of the COP31 climate summit — resumed offshore exploration in the Otway basin last year, with American energy firm ConocoPhillips among the operators approved for exploratory drilling off the country’s southern coast.

      The sites under exploration are as close as one kilometre from a series of marine reserves known as sanctuaries for pygmy blue whales, who travel thousands of kilometres to reproduce in those waters. Orange roughy, a deep-sea fish that can live for over 140 years, may also be harmed.

      In total, the report analysed new LNG export projects in Argentina, Alaska, Mexico and Tanzania, as well as expanded offshore oil and gas licensing in Australia, Cameroon, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kenya, Norway, and Trinidad and Tobago.

      The post Planned offshore oil and gas expansion threatens key marine ecosystems, report appeared first on Climate Home News.

      Planned offshore oil and gas expansion threatens key marine ecosystems, report

      Continue Reading

      Climate Change

      The scramble to stockpile critical minerals could drive up energy transition costs

      Published

      on

      As competition for minerals needed to produce clean energy technologies intensifies, a growing number of countries have resorted to an age-old mechanism to cope with the threat of scarcity: stockpiling.

      The world’s biggest economies are racing to shore up reserves of cobalt, lithium, graphite and rare earths, which are needed to produce batteries, electric vehicles, wind turbines and electric systems to wean the global economy off fossil fuels. The same minerals are also increasingly sought after to manufacture military hardware and chips for AI, adding further pressure on supplies.

      But the cutthroat scramble to build up reserves threatens to drive up the costs of the energy transition by intensifying competition and pushing up prices of key materials needed to produce clean energy technologies, research published today has found.

      “If you undermine the financial viability of [clean energy] projects through higher raw material costs, you’re going to delay their roll-out,” co-author Hugh Miller, the critical minerals lead at the Centre for Economic Transition Expertise at the London School of Economics and Political Science, told Climate Home News.

      Stockpiling “is happening, whether we like it or not”, said Miller. “But if we’re going to do it, we need to have it in a coordinated manner that means we don’t have massive market volatility and adverse implications from every country trying to go at it alone,” he added.

      The rise of stockpiles

      A growing number of governments have adopted national stockpiling programmes in response to heightened geopolitical tensions around mineral supply chains.

      Earlier this year, US President Donald Trump announced the establishment of a critical mineral reserve known as “Project Vault” to protect American businesses from shortages after China imposed export restrictions on rare earth supplies.

      Marco Rubio gives a speech in front of a large sign that reads "critical minerals ministerial"
      US Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivers opening remarks at the Critical Minerals Ministerial in Washington DC (Credit: Official State Department photo by Freddie Everett)

      Beijing suspended the measures until November as part of a trade truce with Washington but the episode spooked Western governments and exposed how strategic materials can be weaponised to achieve geopolitical objectives.

      Australia, China, the EU and India have also announced measures to create strategic mineral reserves. Japan and South Korea already have long-standing mineral stockpiling programmes.

      “Legitimate concerns”

      “There are legitimate concerns with regards to potential global shortages of these minerals,” said Miller, citing rapidly rising and concurrent mineral demand for the energy transition, AI, data centres, and military technologies, combined with underinvestment in new supplies for some minerals, such as copper.

      While stockpiling can serve as an emergency response mechanism during acute shortages, it does nothing to address the underlying concentration risks in mineral supply chains. The Democratic Republic of Congo holds around 70% of the world’s cobalt reserves, for example, while China dominates the processing of 19 out of 20 minerals deemed critical by a large number of nations.

        Uncoordinated stockpiling programmes risk heightening the price volatility they are designed to hedge against, according to the report.

        Researchers found that if Australia, China, the EU, India, Japan, South Korea and the US simultaneously built reserves of minerals to cover six months of imports, the aggregate stockpile demand could represent up to 34% of global annual cobalt supply and over 10% of global lithium, graphite and copper supply. That could cause a shock to the market, triggering the shortages and price spikes they are trying to avoid.

        Miller said it was unlikely that every country would stockpile at that rate, but aggregate stockpiling demand of just 5% of global mineral supply would have an impact on prices.

        Coordinating stockpiles: a role for the IEA?

        Researchers found that avoiding the negative impacts of stockpiling requires global coordination over how mineral stocks are accumulated and released – a mechanism which already exists for other commodities, including oil.

        Coordination should include agreed rules for countries to build up their stocks over a slow and staggered timeline and pre-agreed conditions for releasing reserves to provide market predictability and reduce the risk of price spikes.

        The International Energy Agency (IEA), which was established after the 1970s oil crisis to coordinate emergency oil stock releases among member countries, is best placed to oversee such a mechanism, they say.

        Earlier this year, IEA member countries called on the agency to strengthen its work on critical minerals, including by providing support to countries “that choose to establish and expand critical minerals stockpiling systems”.

        But Miller and his co-author Pau Morandi, a policy fellow at the Centre for Economic Transition Expertise, argue that members should go one step further and mandate the IEA to coordinate the security of supplies, rather than only helping individual governments.

        The IEA has been contacted for comment.

        A call to action for the G7

        Miller said he hoped the research could be picked up by the G7 group of wealthy countries, which could lead on mandating the IEA to take on this coordination role.

        France, which is presiding over the group this year and is hosting leaders in Evian on the shores of Lake Geneva in mid-June, has made strengthening the resilience of critical minerals value chains a priority.

        In a communique last month, finance ministers agreed to “deepen and expand our cooperation among G7 members and with like-minded partners” to strengthen and diversify critical mineral supply chains and to continue discussions “on how to best organise analytical cooperation”.

        Sebastien Treyer, executive director of the Paris-based Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI), said he hoped the G7 leaders’ summit can help move the discussion on critical minerals towards greater international cooperation to secure the resources the world needs to build a clean economy.

        From inclusive and mutually beneficial partnerships to mine resources to stockpiling minerals, “we need to coordinate more like a trade organisation than something that is about securing supply,” he said.

        The post The scramble to stockpile critical minerals could drive up energy transition costs appeared first on Climate Home News.

        The scramble to stockpile critical minerals could drive up energy transition costs

        Continue Reading

        Trending

        Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com