Article Contents
Diplomats preparing for COP30 in the Brazilian city of Belém next month have been discussing an emerging issue that could feature for the first time at a UN climate summit: the global rush for energy transition minerals.
Metals such as copper, cobalt, lithium, nickel and graphite are vital for manufacturing clean energy transition technologies such as solar panels, wind turbines, batteries and electric vehicles – creating both new opportunities and risks for resource-rich countries.
Soaring demand for minerals – which are also used in the construction, digital and military sectors – provides an opportunity to spur economic development if mining is responsible and producing countries can turn their resources into high-value products.
But increased mining activity has fuelled environmental destruction, deforestation and conflict with communities, from Indonesia – which is opening new coal plants to power its nickel industry – to Zambia and Chile.
-
Ahead of COP30, Brazil grants Petrobras a licence to drill for oil in Amazon region
Brazil has authorised Petrobras to explore for oil off the Amazon coast, a move campaigners say undermines global climate goals -
COP30 needs an implementation forum, not another cover decision
The focus in Belém should be a plan to get results on climate action in the real world rather than haggling over a political statement
In preparatory talks over the past couple of months, developing countries with extensive mineral reserves, notably Latin American and African states, have warned that mining could become the Achilles heel of a just energy transition unless environmental and social safeguards are put in place to ensure the costs and benefits are shared fairly.
Diplomats have discussed the impacts of mining in negotiations on the social and economic implications of climate action, known as “response measures”.
They also raised the issue during talks to define the scope of a work stream to ensure that the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy is fair to workers, protects nature and support economic development, called the Just Transition Work Programme.
Civil society push for COP to tackle transition minerals
Brazil’s COP30 presidency has made an agreement with “concrete outcomes” on a just transition framework a key priority of the summit in Belém.
Separately, the government has spoken about the need for energy transition mineral production to respect human rights and promote sustainable development.
“In its interventions across international forums, Brazil has expressed support for the inclusion of principles that promote transparency, address illicit activities and corruption, encourage value addition in developing countries, and uphold environmental protection and human rights in the context of critical minerals production,” a COP30 spokesperson told Climate Home News.
The inclusion of energy transition minerals in COP30 decisions will require consensus among all countries but observers are cautiously optimistic.
Colombia proposes expert group to advance talks on minerals agreement
“The stars do seem to be aligning for COP30 to be the first to address the role of transition minerals governance in climate action but it’s still not a given,” said Antonio Hill, an advisor on the Natural Resource Governance Institute’s just transitions advocacy work.
“If achieved, it would address a glaring gap in the current global climate and energy transition agenda,” he added.
More than 200 civil society groups have signed an open letter urging countries to address energy transition minerals at COP30.
They called on them to welcome principles and recommendations of a UN panel on establishing transparent, sustainable and equitable mineral supply chains and to strengthen mineral governance.
A “timely and necessary” discussion
In a submission ahead of talks on the implications of climate measures last month, a coalition of 134 developing countries – known as the G77 and China – called for a “dedicated dialogue” on energy transition minerals.
It described it as “both timely and necessary” to enable countries to consider how growing mineral demand relates to their development priorities and climate plans.
The current dynamic “presents a serious risk of entrenching unsustainable development trajectories, undermining efforts toward industrial diversification, and jeopardising the prospects of a truly just transition for developing countries”, it said.
More than half of energy transition mineral reserves are estimated to be located on or near Indigenous land and a large majority of mines are located in biodiversity hotspots. Indigenous peoples are widely acknowledged to play a key role in preserving tropical forests that act as some of the world’s most important carbon sinks.
The issue was also raised during talks on defining a just energy transition framework.
The Independent Association of Latin America and the Caribbean (AILAC), which includes Colombia, Chile and Peru, warned that deforestation and land use changes caused by mineral extraction could undermine climate action and affect people’s rights to a healthy environment.
“A just transition approach could offer unique opportunities towards fairness and equity in the mining industry” and contribute to local development, the group said.
Colombia, which is proposing that countries discuss options for a binding agreement on minerals at the UN Environment Assembly in December, went further and called for the designation of “no-go areas” for mining.
No-go mining zones
Colombia’s demands are echoed by Indigenous groups.
Bryan Bixcul is from the Maya-Tz’utujil Indigenous group in Guatemala and serves as the global coordinator of the Securing Indigenous Peoples’ Rights in the Green Economy (SIRGE) coalition. He told Climate Home the Just Transition Work Programme will fail to be a tool for justice if it fails to directly address the harms caused by mining.
Efforts to green lithium extraction face scrutiny over water use
Key to SIRGE’s demand is for the text to make explicit references to the rights of Indigenous peoples, including those in voluntary isolation.
Bixcul said the text should include an obligation to establish “no-go” or exclusion zones on and around the land of the world’s remaining uncontacted Indigenous groups, which cannot give their consent to mining projects close to their lands. This, he said, violates the principle of no contact.
Protecting uncontacted Indigenous peoples
Videos have emerged showing members of an uncontacted Indigenous group warning outsiders away and begging for food on a site where forest was being cleared for nickel mining on Halmahera island in Indonesia.
NGO Survival International warned that the uncontacted Hongana Manyawa people, who live on the island, faced “a threat of genocide” because of nickel mining used to make batteries for electric vehicles.
In September, Norway’s government pension fund divested from French miner Eramet, which operates a large mine on the island, citing “unacceptable risk” of human rights violations, including forced contact. Eramet denied the presence of uncontacted groups in or near its concession.
“If countries don’t take a stance to protect the rights of Indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation, they will fail human rights, not just Indigenous people’s rights,” said Bixcul.
Brazil, which has promised the largest Indigenous participation in COP history in Belém, has called on countries to protect the demarcation of Indigenous lands as a key policy tool to address the climate crisis.
The post COP30 could confront “glaring gap” in clean energy agenda: mining appeared first on Climate Home News.
COP30 could confront “glaring gap” in clean energy agenda: mining
Continue Reading
An older teaching about land acknowledgement
As I have come to understand the spirit and intention of land acknowledgement, I often return to fond memories of my grandmother and her words of wisdom. She taught that the health of the places we call home comes first, because the wellbeing of the people depends on it.
In her teaching, land acknowledgement began with the land. Long before it became a paragraph read at the start of a meeting, it was a way of recognizing a homeland: its waters, its species, its seasons, and the spirit that revealed whether the place was well.
Her teaching echoes a practice found across many Indigenous Nations. Haudenosaunee gatherings, for example, have long opened with the Ohén:ton Karihwatéhkwen, the Thanksgiving Address, often translated as “the words that come before all else.” The speaker greets and gives thanks to the people, the earth, the waters, the plants, the animals, the winds, the sun, the moon and the stars. Only after everything that sustains life has been acknowledged does the gathering turn to its own business.
That order changes what an acknowledgement is for. Its purpose was to share the story of a place with neighbours and to draw them into the work of tending it. People entered the story second, as the ones responsible for what had just been named.
Understood this way, an acknowledgement does more than open a meeting. It asks us to reconsider where we stand, and what we owe the ground beneath us.
Nations among nations
In her teaching, people are one nation among many. The salmon are a nation. So are the cedars, the bison, the medicine plants, and the pollinators. Each belongs to a place, carries its own responsibilities, and offers gifts no other nation can give.
This idea of kinship runs through many Indigenous philosophies. The phrase “all my relations,” heard in ceremonies and gatherings across Turtle Island, is a reminder that family extends beyond people to the animals, plants, waters and lands that make life possible. Some Indigenous languages carry the same understanding in their grammar, speaking of many plants, animals and natural forces as living beings rather than objects.
Sovereignty, understood through this relationship, is a kind of standing more than a form of control. Each nation belongs fully to its place and carries its share of that place’s life. No nation thrives alone, and none thrives by taking over the whole.
The land is also the source of instruction. Over generations, people watched how a river valley or a stretch of prairie kept itself well: who arrived when, who fed whom, and how much could be taken before the giving stopped. In my grandmother’s telling, those observations became instructions, and those instructions helped shape law and protocol. They guided when to harvest, where to camp, how to enter a neighbour’s territory, and what was owed in return.
Indigenous legal scholars today often describe this as law that comes from the land itself, learned by watching how living systems sustain one another. A plainer name for it is knowing how to live somewhere.
The host and the guest
One of the clearest teachings in this understanding of the world is the relationship between host and guest. My grandmother invited us to recognize that relationship in the lives of plants and animals.
A host prepares the place before anyone arrives. A beaver family dams a stream, and the pond becomes a home for fish, frogs, birds and plants. A fallen tree becomes a nurse log, feeding the next generation of seedlings as it returns to the soil.
A host offers first. A flowering plant sets out nectar. A berry bush ripens fruit. These provisions come in their own season, not whenever a visitor happens to want them.
A host also makes its presence known. Birdsong, scent and the marks left along a trail tell newcomers that a place is already inhabited. The visitor does not arrive in an empty world.
The guest has responsibilities too. A guest attends to the season and to what the place can offer. A guest does not assume that everything within reach is theirs to take. A guest leaves something that helps sustain the relationship.
A bee takes nectar and carries pollen. Read through this teaching, that exchange offers an image of visiting well: receiving a gift while helping the host continue its life.
Many Indigenous harvesting protocols carry the same ethic into daily practice: ask before taking, take only what is needed, offer thanks, and leave enough for others and for the plant or animal to recover.
None of this suggests that every relationship in nature is peaceful or generous. These are ways of seeing responsibilities that people can learn to carry.
Everyone is both
No being is only a host or only a guest.
A tree makes room for other life while depending on soil, water, sunlight, fungi, and relationships beyond itself. People, too, may welcome others into their homes while remaining dependent on the larger homeland that sustains them.
The distinction between host and guest is therefore about roles, not ranks. Everyone receives. Everyone has something to give.
The question is whether the exchange sustains the place.
A visitor who takes without restraint leaves less for those who come next. A host who neglects the place has less to offer. Both have responsibilities, and neither can fulfil them alone.
This is the heart of reciprocity, a principle found across Indigenous philosophies: relationships stay healthy when gifts move in both directions. The Haudenosaunee teaching of the seventh generation extends that exchange across time, asking that decisions made today leave the place well for those not yet born.
Mutual benefit begins here, with the recognition that different beings carry different gifts and obligations.
What people carry forward
My grandmother’s teaching connects these relationships to the ways people meet their neighbours.
The host prepares a place, offers food and rest, and explains where the visitor has arrived. The guest makes themselves known, explains why they have come, listens to the terms of the visit, and brings something in return. The gift may be material. It may also be labour, knowledge, news, or a commitment to help.
Nations around the Great Lakes carried this ethic into treaty. The Dish with One Spoon, an agreement among the Haudenosaunee, Anishinaabe and allied Nations, describes shared hunting grounds as a single dish. Everyone eats from it with one spoon, takes only what they need, leaves enough for others, and keeps the dish clean. The Two Row Wampum, between the Haudenosaunee and European newcomers, shows two vessels travelling side by side on the same river, each keeping its own ways and neither steering the other.
In this understanding, acknowledgement is more than naming the people associated with a territory. It is learning enough about a homeland to behave responsibly within it.
Whose home is this? What sustains it? What laws and agreements guide our presence? What can we receive, and what must we return?
These questions make acknowledgement a relationship rather than a recital.
They also make it diplomatic. A guest who recognizes the host’s homeland recognizes that they have entered a place with its own relationships and responsibilities. A host who welcomes the guest makes room for an encounter governed by those relationships.
Neither arrives without standing. Neither arrives without obligations.
Beginning with place
I write from the shores of the Bay of Quinte. Here, the teaching asks me to begin with the water, the shoreline, and the life they sustain. Before I describe myself, I must attend to where I am.
That does not make people or history less important. It places them within the homeland that gives them meaning. The people, their laws, their agreements, and their responsibilities all belong to the place.
In a time of longer fire seasons, troubled waters, and uncertainty about what the next season will bring, this teaching asks something difficult and useful of us: pay attention before you speak.
An acknowledgement cannot tell the story of a place if the speaker has stopped noticing it.
The land came first. Beginning there again means learning to name what sustains us, and accepting that what sustains us also asks something of us.
By Rye Karonhiowanen Barberstock
Photo by Andrik Langfield on Unsplash
The post The Land Came First appeared first on Indigenous Climate Hub.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuels and cement are projected to fall by around 0.4% in 2026 to 38.2bn tonnes of CO2 (GtCO2), according to new figures from the Global Carbon Project.
This guest post is by:
- Dr Zeke Hausfather, Carbon Brief’s climate science contributor
- Prof Pierre Friedlingstein, chair of mathematical modelling of climate systems at the University of Exeter and part of the Global Carbon Project team.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuels and cement are projected to fall by around 0.4% in 2026 to 38.2bn tonnes of CO2 (GtCO2), according to new figures from the Global Carbon Project.
The 21st edition of the annual “global carbon budget” report, published today, says that this small decline is largely due to a 1.9% drop in emissions from oil and the energy shock triggered by the Iran conflict and the closure of the strait of Hormuz.
Emissions from coal continue to increase slightly.
The Global Carbon Project’s projections for fossil fuel and cement CO2 emissions in 2026 are preliminary, with a range that spans a fall of -1.5% to a rise of +0.6%.
This means a small increase in emissions can not be ruled out.
Emissions from land-use change, such as deforestation, are projected to rise in 2026.
This is primarily driven by peat fires and forest degradation in south-east Asia and is linked to the development of a strong El Niño event this year.
As a result, total CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and land use are projected to reach a record high of 43.3GtCO2 in 2026 – marginally above 42.8GtCO2 in 2025.
Research published alongside the report by the same team in Nature Climate Change finds that the growth in solar, wind and electric vehicles (EVs) now offsets around two-thirds of the emissions that would otherwise come from rising energy demand.
However, the deployment of these technologies is not yet enough to push global emissions into a sustained decline, according to the study.
The 2026 global carbon budget report also estimates that:
- Fossil emissions are projected to fall in China (-0.9%), the US (-1.3%) and the EU (-1.5%) in 2026, but rise by 4.4% in India.
- Oil emissions are projected to fall in every major region, with the largest drop in China (-4.6%).
- Land-use emissions averaged 4.9GtCO2 per year over 2016-25, around 21% lower than the decade before.
- Total CO2 emissions (fossil and land-use) grew by an average 0.3% per year over the past decade (2016-25), compared with 1.7% per year over the decade before.
- The remaining carbon budget to limit warming to 1.5C is 150GtCO2, or less than four years of current emissions.
- The land sink in 2025 was the highest on