Connect with us

Published

on

Governments have delayed for the third time a key decision on the timing of an influential climate science assessment, after failing to resolve deep divisions at a meeting of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) over whether and how to align its work with UN climate policy.

While officials agreed on the outline of the IPCC’s three flagship reports in Hangzhou, China, on Saturday, they failed to break the deadlock on when they should be delivered, despite week-long talks running into overtime with a nearly uninterrupted 30-hour session on the closing day.

Most governments spoke in favour of a proposal put forward by the IPCC’s administrative arm to conclude the scientific review process by August 2028, so that the reports would be ready in time to be considered as part of the “Global Stocktake”, a scorecard of climate action carried out under the Paris Agreement. European nations, Japan, Turkiye, small island states and most Latin American and least developed countries supported the plan, three delegates told Climate Home.

But China, Saudi Arabia and India strongly pushed back against that timeline, while South Africa and Kenya asked for further discussions to bridge concerns over the inclusivity of the process, the sources added.

At the eleventh hour, the Chinese hosts of the summit brokered an interim deal that will kick-start the assessment process in 2025, while discussions over the deadline for completing the reports will resume again at the next IPCC session later this year, for which there’s still no fixed date.

“Despite the heavy agenda, thanks to the Panel’s ability to build and achieve multilateral consensus, and the tireless work of the IPCC’s Scientific Bureau, we now have clarity on the scope of the scientific content,” IPCC chair Jim Skea said at the end of the meeting.

Oil giant Pemex fails to control methane emissions, threatening Mexico’s net zero goal

Climate policy alignment

The IPCC is in its seventh assessment cycle – known as AR7 – which is tasked with compiling global climate science into three reports: one on the physical scientific basis of climate change, another on the vulnerability of human and natural systems, and a third on options for mitigating the emissions that are heating up the Earth’s climate.

The IPCC’s sixth assessment played a key role in informing the first Global Stocktake in 2023 which culminated in countries committing for the first time to “transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems” at COP28 in Dubai.

China’s role as the host of last week’s summit was under the spotlight as observers looked for signs of leadership on global climate action as the US retreats from international climate diplomacy under Donald Trump.

Liu Zhenmin, Special Envoy for Climate Change, China. Photo: IISD/ENB | Anastasia Rodopoulou

Liu Zhenmin, Special Envoy for Climate Change, China. Photo: IISD/ENB | Anastasia Rodopoulou

At the start of the meeting, Liu Zhenmin, China’s Special Envoy for Climate Change, praised the contribution of the climate science community in informing policy responses.

“Upholding multilateralism and strengthening global climate action is the only way forward. I hope the IPCC and the UNFCCC will continue to work together in an orderly manner to advance human climate action,” he added.

But three delegates told Climate Home of a disconnect between public statements from Chinese officials and negotiating positions in closed meetings where, they said, China reinforced its national priorities.

They added that China – and some other high-income developing nations – seem keen to keep the IPCC reports out of the next stocktake as they fear the scientific findings would put them under mounting pressure to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

“Failing to reach a decision on the AR7 timeline only serves those who wish to hold back climate action, but climate vulnerable countries cannot wait,” said Zhe Yao, global policy adviser at Greenpeace East Asia, who attended the meeting. “It’s a bitter disappointment every time division leads to a decision being postponed or kicked down the road”.

Risk of financial fallout may deter Argentina from leaving Paris Agreement

Concerns over keywords removal

Technical discussions over what the IPCC reports should deal with took up the majority of the week-long session in Hangzhou.

Diana Urge-Vorsatz, a Hungarian scientist and vice-chair of the IPCC, criticised efforts to remove “key scientific concepts” from the outlines which, she said, creates concerns over the future of global climate science.

Delegates huddle after a marathon session on the final day of the IPCC meeting. Photo: IPCC Secretariat

Delegates huddle after a marathon session on the final day of the IPCC meeting. Photo: IPCC Secretariat

Writing on LinkedIn in a personal capacity, she said that keywords including “Paris Agreement”, “NDCs” and “fossil fuels” were questioned and either cut or replaced in many places.

“Without a robust assessment of the exponentially growing experience and knowledge on the topics relevant to our global efforts, we are jeopardizing the effectiveness of these crucial multilateral processes,” Urge-Vorsatz added.

Disagreement over carbon removal report

A the IPCC meeting, countries also failed to agree on the outline of a methodology report on technologies aimed at removing carbon dioxide.

A handful of countries led by Saudi Arabia wanted the panel’s focus to include controversial marine geoengineering interventions that involve adding alkaline substances to ocean water to increase its pH and supposedly boost its capacity to absorb CO2, sources told Climate Home.

But most governments rejected the proposal, arguing it would be premature to raise the profile of technologies whose side effects are not yet fully understood. Discussion will continue at the next meeting.

“The science simply isn’t there, and the risks are immense,” said Mary Church, geoengineering campaign manager at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL).

Arctic geoengineering experiment shuts down over environmental risks

US absence ripples through

The absence of US government delegates and federal scientists loomed large over the gathering, after a stop-work order imposed by the Trump administration kept them from travelling to the meeting in China.

While it remains unclear whether the US will fully withdraw from the IPCC process, delegates said there were informal discussions in the corridors on the far-reaching implications of a US retreat.

Major concerns centre on the future of a technical support unit provided by the US State Department to the IPCC’s mitigation working group. Ending that assistance could jeopardise the work of scientists assessing methods to cut emissions.

Delta Merner of the US-based Union of Concerned Scientists said that “while this stoppage is technically temporary, if federal experts continue to be barred from participating, it would represent a major loss to the IPCC’s ability to produce rigorous and comprehensive reports”.

The post Countries fail again to decide on timing of key IPCC climate science reports appeared first on Climate Home News.

Countries fail again to decide on timing of key IPCC climate science reports

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Protecting nature is a public duty, not a Wall Street profit opportunity

Published

on

An Lambrechts is a biodiversity politics expert at Greenpeace International with extensive experience in biodiversity-related multilateral negotiations. She is the head of the Greenpeace delegation at the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) COP17 happening in Yerevan, Armenia.

In 2022, COP15 delivered the landmark Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030. With COP17 starting in Yerevan, we are now halfway to the deadline, and according to the first Global Review of progress, countries are not on track to meet the biodiversity targets, and implementation must accelerate fast.

One of the main findings of the Global Review is that funding falls far short of the scale needed to halt and reverse nature loss. But the crisis facing the world’s biodiversity is not an absolute scarcity of capital – it is a profound public policy distortion.

The global economy currently spends roughly $30 destroying nature for every single dollar invested in its protection. According to a report from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, a staggering $2.4 trillion is spent in public subsidies for fossil fuels, agriculture and water use, while global investment in biodiversity conservation and restoration stands at a mere $220 billion. 

Countries urged to ramp up “insufficient” nature policies at COP17

Yet, discussions about how to close the biodiversity finance gap continue to claim that salvation lies in mobilising private capital, scaling offsets and “derisking” investments in nature. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of both the nature of ecological stewardship and of the global financial architecture.

Biodiversity conservation is not a speculative investment portfolio – it is the foundation of human survival. The health of our planet is a  non-monetisable, non-excludable public good. Expecting profit-seeking private capital to protect nature perpetuates the structural drivers of ecosystem destruction in the first place. 

But if private market mechanisms cannot save biodiversity, where will the necessary public resources come from?

Money going to the wrong places

The answer lies in recovering the vast public wealth currently drained by cross-border tax abuse, financial secrecy and corporate impunity. Finance and environment ministers meeting in Yerevan must give a strong political signal that, to avert ecological breakdown, countries need to take swift action to reform global tax rules, eliminate harmful public subsidies and cancel unsustainable sovereign debts for the public revenues to end up where they belong.  

Extractive sectors such as industrial agriculture, fishing, timber and mining continue business-as-usual, often heavily subsidised by public treasuries, while voluntary carbon and biodiversity offset markets pose a serious risk to nature conservation. Offset schemes have delivered only a negligible fraction of the funding needed to preserve ecosystems, allowing industries to continue with their destructive business-as-usual practices.

    In advanced economies, public funding often actively undermines biodiversity. In Europe, over €5.3 billion in public subsidies is funnelled annually into intensive forest biomass harvesting under renewable energy directives, degrading primary forest ecosystems and undermining long-term climate resilience. Pleading with private investors to fill a “finance gap” while pouring billions into ecological destruction is an exercise in futility.

    Developing countries struggle with debt burden

    For developing countries, reliance on private finance is further compounded by a crushing sovereign debt crisis. In 2024, public debt in developing economies reached record levels, with net interest payments alone absorbing $921 billion. A record 61 developing countries now spend more than 10% of government revenue on foreign debt service, with many climate-vulnerable nations spending twice as much servicing external debt as they receive in climate and biodiversity finance combined.

    This burden acts as a structural driver of ecosystem destruction. Under pressure from external creditors and international financial institutions to avoid default and secure foreign exchange, governments are routinely forced into austerity measures and pushed to expand raw commodity exports into pristine biomes. 

    Comment: World Bank and IMF should lead the financial system in responding to the climate crisis

    The current negotiations for a United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation (UNFCITC) also offer a way forward. An estimated $492 billion in tax revenue is lost every year to offshore tax havens. Multinational corporations account for around $348 billion of this total by shifting profits away from the countries where real economic extraction and environmental degradation occur.

    In the mining sector alone, developing nations lose tens of billions annually to corporate tax dodging. Furthermore, international financial secrecy shields environmental criminals, with illicit financial flows from illegal logging draining between $51 billion and $152 billion annually.

    At COP17, leaders must seize the opportunity to build a bridge between the two conventions and enhance cooperation. Governments must put the world on a firm path to securing predictable, sufficient, sovereign public finance for biodiversity conservation. It’s the only path to a restorative, rights-based future for people and the planet.

    The post Protecting nature is a public duty, not a Wall Street profit opportunity appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Protecting nature is a public duty, not a Wall Street profit opportunity

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Greenpeace delivers 47 metre-long petition with half a million signatures to Woodside HQ following major gas protest

    Published

    on

    Greenpeace delivers 47 metre-long petition with half a million signatures to Woodside HQ following major gas protest

    PERTH, Monday 19 October 2026 — Dozens of Perth community members delivered a giant petition, signed by almost half a million people, to Woodside’s corporate headquarters this morning, calling on the government to save Scott Reef from Woodside’s reckless Browse gas proposal.

    • Photos and video available here and here. More will be uploaded throughout the day.

    Dressed in sea creature costumes and hats, supporters carried one of Australia’s biggest environmental petitions to Woodside’s headquarters, and a local choir performed a ‘Scott Reef’ rendition of Angie McMahon’s iconic cover of ‘Reckless’ by Australian Crawl.

    On the sidelines of the Perth Global Citizen Now event, it comes following a two day-long protest at Woodside’s Scarborough gas platform that saw activists scale and occupy the Floating Production Unit calling to “Stop Woodside’s Dirty Gas” and “Save Scott Reef”. The activists were taken from the platform by police helicopter on Sunday afternoon.

    David Ritter, CEO at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “Less than a day after two Greenpeace Australia Pacific activists were arrested for their peaceful protest at Woodside’s Scarborough gas platform to save Scott Reef, we are here again with another message to Woodside: half a million of us do not want your dirty gas at Scott Reef.

    “Community pressure on Woodside is rising. Today we are here to show Woodside that they can’t ignore half a million people who want Scott Reef protected, not turned into an industrialised gas zone.

    “Woodside can’t be trusted with our oceans. Woodside’s plans to drill up to 57 toxic wells at Scott Reef, Australia’s largest oceanic reef, putting endangered pygmy blue whales at risk, and jeopardising a nesting ground for unique green sea turtles.

    “We Australians love our oceans and this is an opportunity for our governments to do the right thing, to reject Woodside’s reckless drilling plans, and save Scott Reef.”

    -ENDS-

    Media contact

    Kate O’Callaghan on +61 406 231 892 or Emma Sangalli on +61 431 513 465

    Greenpeace delivers 47 metre-long petition with half a million signatures to Woodside HQ following major gas protest

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Greenpeace Australia Pacific activists in police custody after two-day protest against Woodside’s Browse gas project at Scott Reef

    Published

    on


    PERTH, Sunday 18 October 2026 — Two Greenpeace Australia Pacific activists are in police custody after occupying a gas platform at Woodside’s Scarborough gas project, in peaceful protest of the fossil fuel corporation’s plans to drill for oil and gas at Scott Reef.

    NEW footage and photos of the peaceful protest available here and on Instagram

    The activists used specialised climbing equipment to scale and attach themselves to a Floating Production Unit (FPU), a key piece of gas processing infrastructure at the Scarborough gas field over 200km off the coast of Exmouth, at around 05:45am AWST on Saturday and proceeded to occupy the platform for two days, displaying banners reading “Stop Woodside’s Dirty Gas. Save Scott Reef.”

    Special police forces landed a helicopter on the FPU at around 11:30am AWST. The activists safely removed themselves from their equipment before being taken into police custody around 1:00pm AWST. At the time of writing, no charges have been laid.

    David Ritter, CEO at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “It takes guts and conviction to do what our activists have done, peacefully protesting Woodside’s reckless gas plans at Scott Reef.

    “Woodside’s plans to drill up to 57 toxic wells at Scott Reef are outrageous. If allowed to go ahead Woodside would turn Scott Reef, Australia’s largest oceanic reef, home to nesting green sea turtles and elusive pygmy blue whales, into an industrial gas zone. Around half a million people have called on our governments to stop Woodside and to save Scott Reef.

    “Our activists are highly trained and experienced in these activities. West Australia has a proud history of peaceful, democratic protest at sea, to protect our oceans from environmental threats. From whaling in Albany in the seventies, to Woodside’s threat to Scott Reef today, there’s more than fifty years of history, of Greenpeace taking action off WA’s coast to protect the places we love.

    “Peaceful protest has long been part of what has given us so many of the things that are great about Australia and is part of the fabric of our democracy and our national identity.”

    “The right to peaceful protest is fundamental to a healthy democracy. From Australia to the Arctic and the Amazon, Greenpeace has been peacefully protesting for more than 50 years to expose the biggest environmental threats around the world. We will not be silenced by corporations like Woodside who actively try to stop everyday people from speaking out against their reckless plans.

    “Woodside’s reckless proposal to drill at Scott Reef is an unacceptable risk to Scott Reef and to the climate, which our government should emphatically reject.”

    Speaking from the Rainbow Warrior, Captain of the Rainbow Warrior Hettie Geenen, said:

    “It felt powerful watching from the Rainbow Warrior as these brave activists scaled Woodside’s enormous and imposing gas infrastructure, which has no place at Scott Reef. We are all out here because we feel an urge to act, in the face of Woodside’s grave threat to Scott Reef and to our climate. Now we ask for the Australian government to act too, and reject Woodside’s reckless Browse project.

    “Just before this peaceful protest, the Rainbow Warrior sailed to Scott Reef, where our whole crew got to witness the magic of an untouched, healthy reef ecosystem full of marine life. It was my second time visiting Scott Reef with the Rainbow Warrior. When you see Scott Reef up close and witness its magic first hand, it is impossible not to feel driven to try and protect it.”

    The activists sailed to Scarborough on the Rainbow Warrior, Greenpeace’s flagship vessel, which is in the region campaigning to protect Australia’s oceans, including Scott Reef.

    -ENDS-

    Media contact

    Greenpeace Australia Pacific media team in Perth on +61 406 231 892 or +61 407 581 404 or email media.au@greenpeace.org

    Greenpeace Australia Pacific activists in police custody after two-day protest against Woodside’s Browse gas project at Scott Reef

    Continue Reading