Connect with us

Published

on

The newly appointed board of the climate finance world’s latest entry – the hard-won UN “loss and damage” fund – will likely hold its first meeting in late April after delays in agreeing members. But despite soaring needs for help, the fund itself isn’t expected to hand out any money until 2025 at the earliest, officials say.

The World Bank – the fund’s expected host – said on its website last week that its own board anticipates approving a formal plan to become the fund’s “financial intermediary” by mid-April, with a final operating deal due to be in place with the fund by the end of July.

But would-be recipients of the loss and damage fund’s resources are already jostling for position in a growing queue of nations hoping for help – and its board faces an unenviable task: figuring out how to fairly divide very little money among too many people in desperate need of it, as climate impacts accelerate in a warming world.

Timetable of steps the World Bank plans to undertake to become host of the new UN loss and damage fund (Source: World Bank)

Pakistan, for instance, is still seeking about $16 billion to rebuild roads, bridges, schools and more, after 2022 floods inundated a third of the country. In southern Africa, Zambia – hit by a severe drought that has ruined half of this season’s staple maize crop – wants support to shore up its dwindling water supplies.

Vulnerable countries – from Pacific and Caribbean island nations to Bangladesh – are looking for money to cover growing losses as warmer seas drive stronger hurricanes and cyclones. And in Senegal, where higher oceans are accelerating coastal erosion, families watching their ancestors’ skeletons float out to sea from flooded graveyards are asking for cash to rebuild crumbling coastal communities.

“The need is for trillions (of dollars) – and what we have is millions, not even billions,” said Ritu Bharadwaj, a climate finance and governance researcher at the UK-based International Institute for Environment and Development who has closely followed the new fund’s evolution. So far, it has garnered about $700 million in pledges.

With the residual costs from loss and damage projected to reach a total of $290 billion to $580 billion by 2030, according to a 2018 study, the loss and damage fund aims to ramp up its resources significantly, largely by persuading donor governments it can use their money effectively.

In partnership with a new taskforce on international taxation, it is also exploring how to harness innovative but politically tricky funding sources such as levies on fossil fuels, aviation, shipping and financial transactions.

UN’s climate body faces “severe financial challenges” which put work at risk

To make limited resources stretch further, fund observers like Bharadwaj have urged the board to consider ways to reach vulnerable people directly, such as cash transfers when a pre-set trigger point is passed – for example, a top-strength hurricane hitting an at-risk zone.

That approach would cut out middleman delivery agencies that critics say now claim too much of climate finance flows and reduce the amounts getting to the frontlines.

Bharadwaj and some others also believe the fund should consider supporting so-far inadequate efforts to build resilience to worsening climate shocks, rather than just responding once they happen – in order to curb future demands for assistance.

That could include helping Zambia’s farmers build community irrigation systems to avoid them coming back to the fund repeatedly to cover crop losses from warming-fuelled drought.

“We need to be more responsive to the comprehensive risks the communities are facing,” said Bharadwaj.

Between relief and resilience

However, Avinash Persaud, a loss and damage fund board member from Barbados representing Latin American and Caribbean nations, said the fund should focus on its core mission – helping the worst-hit communities and countries recover and rebuild after climate impacts – rather than responding to well-intentioned pleas to expand its work.

“This fund is not replacing relief agencies. This is not a resilience-building fund,” he told Climate Home. “This is doing the stuff in the middle – what happens the day after the relief agencies pack up and leave your people fed and watered but under blue tarpaulins.”

The fund could support the reconstruction of devastated towns in a safer location, repairs to roads, bridges and schools – or anything else that “reboots the community”, said Persaud, an economist noted for helping design the Bridgetown Initiative, which aims to reshape international finance flows to help debt-strapped countries boost climate protection.

Damage in a Miskito indigenous community called Wawa Bar, after being the epicenter of Hurricane Eta, on the Caribbean side of Nicaragua. The North Caribbean, one of the poorest regions of Nicaragua, was plunged into uncertainty and despair after the double blow of hurricanes Eta and Iota, which sowed death and destruction in Central America, Puerto Cabezas, Nicaragua, November 23, 2020 (Photo: Katlyn Holland/CRS / Latin America News Agency via Reuters)

With the loss and damage fund’s 26-strong board now in place – albeit several weeks late and yet to name one developing-world member with only an alternate from India listed for that seat – it is expected to start work in April to establish its operating rules

The board is set to grapple with a range of contentious discussions, including whether a share of support should be given as concessional loans rather than simple grants.

Also up in the air is whether money should move straight to governments and local organisations or also through international partners – including development banks and UN agencies – and how much direct access to the fund vulnerable communities should have.

African dismay at decision to host loss and damage advice hub in Geneva

With the UN-backed Green Climate Fund, for example, about three-quarters of funding has been channeled to countries via international organisations and only a quarter has been delivered directly to developing countries and regions for projects.

Harjeet Singh, who has tracked efforts to establish the fund for more than a decade and is now global engagement director at the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, said he was hopeful “this fund is going to be different from the ones we’ve had so far”.

Fund with ‘a clean slate’

Michai Robertson, a climate finance negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States and a researcher at the UK-based Overseas Development Institution, said language in the agreement setting up the fund should help ensure it operates in new ways.

In making allocations, for instance, the board – which aims to disburse money far faster than existing climate funds – will have to balance the needs of countries that have sustained large climate losses with setting aside a basic floor of support for poorer or highly vulnerable nations where the overall bill is smaller but some communities are hit very hard.

Currently, small island developing states get just 2% of international climate finance and least-developed countries, largely in Africa, about 8-10%, Robertson noted.

“You don’t want one country to take up all the scarce resources,” he said.

In Somalia, Green Climate Fund tests new approach for left-out communities

The fund’s agreement also says that vulnerable countries and communities should have a large say in deciding priorities for using its money – and that Indigenous and other community knowledge of local risks should be considered as a valuable source of information, especially when climate risk modelling is lacking in some countries.

The fund will also address some “non-economic” losses and damage – such as the disappearance of nature a community relies on, or cultural institutions – in the form of finance to help rebuild a ruined museum or replant lost mangroves, Singh said.

Bharadwaj said she hoped the fund can act in a way that is catalytic, helping countries fill the gaps in other funding streams – from climate adaptation and resilience, to development and humanitarian aid.

“When an existing institution or organisation does things in a certain way, it takes a lot of effort to change that. But the loss and damage fund is not carrying any baggage behind it. Here we have a chance for a clean slate,” she said.

The post Expectations mount as loss and damage fund staggers to its feet appeared first on Climate Home News.

Expectations mount as loss and damage fund staggers to its feet

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Hurricane Helene Is Headed for Georgians’ Electric Bills

Published

on

A new storm recovery charge could soon hit Georgia Power customers’ bills, as climate change drives more destructive weather across the state.

Hurricane Helene may be long over, but its costs are poised to land on Georgians’ electricity bills. After the storm killed 37 people in Georgia and caused billions in damage in September 2024, Georgia Power is seeking permission from state regulators to pass recovery costs on to customers.

Hurricane Helene Is Headed for Georgians’ Electric Bills

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Amid Affordability Crisis, New Jersey Hands $250 Million Tax Break to Data Center

Published

on

Gov. Mikie Sherrill says she supports both AI and lowering her constituents’ bills.

With New Jersey’s cost-of-living “crisis” at the center of Gov. Mikie Sherrill’s agenda, her administration has inherited a program that approved a $250 million tax break for an artificial intelligence data center.

Amid Affordability Crisis, New Jersey Hands $250 Million Tax Break to Data Center

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Curbing methane is the fastest way to slow warming – but we’re off the pace

Published

on

Gabrielle Dreyfus is chief scientist at the Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development, Thomas Röckmann is a professor of atmospheric physics and chemistry at Utrecht University, and Lena Höglund Isaksson is a senior research scholar at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

This March scientists and policy makers will gather near the site in Italy where methane was first identified 250 years ago to share the latest science on methane and the policy and technology steps needed to rapidly cut methane emissions. The timing is apt.

As new tools transform our understanding of methane emissions and their sources, the evidence they reveal points to a single conclusion: Human-caused methane emissions are still rising, and global action remains far too slow.

This is the central finding of the latest Global Methane Status Report. Four years into the Global Methane Pledge, which aims for a 30% cut in global emissions by 2030, the good news is that the pledge has increased mitigation ambition under national plans, which, if fully implemented, could result in the largest and most sustained decline in methane emissions since the Industrial Revolution.

The bad news is this is still short of the 30% target. The decisive question is whether governments will move quickly enough to turn that bend into the steep decline required to pump the brake on global warming.

What the data really show

Assessing progress requires comparing three benchmarks: the level of emissions today relative to 2020, the trajectory projected in 2021 before methane received significant policy focus, and the level required by 2030 to meet the pledge.

The latest data show that global methane emissions in 2025 are higher than in 2020 but not as high as previously expected. In 2021, emissions were projected to rise by about 9% between 2020 and 2030. Updated analysis places that increase closer to 5%. This change is driven by factors such as slower than expected growth in unconventional gas production between 2020 and 2024 and lower than expected waste emissions in several regions.

Gas flaring soars in Niger Delta post-Shell, afflicting communities  

This updated trajectory still does not deliver the reductions required, but it does indicate that the curve is beginning to bend. More importantly, the commitments already outlined in countries’ Nationally Determined Contributions and Methane Action Plans would, if fully implemented, produce an 8% reduction in global methane emissions between 2020 and 2030. This would turn the current increase into a sustained decline. While still insufficient to reach the Global Methane Pledge target of a 30% cut, it would represent historical progress.

Solutions are known and ready

Scientific assessments consistently show that the technical potential to meet the pledge exists. The gap lies not in technology, but in implementation.

The energy sector accounts for approximately 70% of total technical methane reduction potential between 2020 and 2030. Proven measures include recovering associated petroleum gas in oil production, regular leak detection and repair across oil and gas supply chains, and installing ventilation air oxidation technologies in underground coal mines. Many of these options are low cost or profitable. Yet current commitments would achieve only one third of the maximum technically feasible reductions in this sector.

Recent COP hosts Brazil and Azerbaijan linked to “super-emitting” methane plumes

Agriculture and waste also provide opportunities. Rice emissions can be reduced through improved water management, low-emission hybrids and soil amendments. While innovations in technology and practices hold promise in the longer term, near-term potential in livestock is more constrained and trends in global diets may counteract gains.

Waste sector emissions had been expected to increase more rapidly, but improvements in waste management in several regions over the past two decades have moderated this rise. Long-term mitigation in this sector requires immediate investment in improved landfills and circular waste systems, as emissions from waste already deposited will persist in the short term.

New measurement tools

Methane monitoring capacity has expanded significantly. Satellite-based systems can now identify methane super-emitters. Ground-based sensors are becoming more accessible and can provide real-time data. These developments improve national inventories and can strengthen accountability.

However, policy action does not need to wait for perfect measurement. Current scientific understanding of source magnitudes and mitigation effectiveness is sufficient to achieve a 30% reduction between 2020 and 2030. Many of the largest reductions in oil, gas and coal can be delivered through binding technology standards that do not require high precision quantification of emissions.

The decisive years ahead

The next 2 years will be critical for determining whether existing commitments translate into emissions reductions consistent with the Global Methane Pledge.

Governments should prioritise adoption of an effective international methane performance standard for oil and gas, including through the EU Methane Regulation, and expand the reach of such standards through voluntary buyers’ clubs. National and regional authorities should introduce binding technology standards for oil, gas and coal to ensure that voluntary agreements are backed by legal requirements.

One approach to promoting better progress on methane is to develop a binding methane agreement, starting with the oil and gas sector, as suggested by Barbados’ PM Mia Mottley and other leaders. Countries must also address the deeper challenge of political and economic dependence on fossil fuels, which continues to slow progress. Without a dual strategy of reducing methane and deep decarbonisation, it will not be possible to meet the Paris Agreement objectives.

Mottley’s “legally binding” methane pact faces barriers, but smaller steps possible

The next four years will determine whether available technologies, scientific evidence and political leadership align to deliver a rapid transition toward near-zero methane energy systems, holistic and equity-based lower emission agricultural systems and circular waste management strategies that eliminate methane release. These years will also determine whether the world captures the near-term climate benefits of methane abatement or locks in higher long-term costs and risks.

The Global Methane Status Report shows that the world is beginning to change course. Delivering the sharper downward trajectory now required is a test of political will. As scientists, we have laid out the evidence. Leaders must now act on it.

The post Curbing methane is the fastest way to slow warming – but we’re off the pace appeared first on Climate Home News.

Curbing methane is the fastest way to slow warming – but we’re off the pace

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com