Connect with us

Published

on

Tucked on the edges of a biodiversity hotspot, the Tumring project in Cambodia is supposed to prevent a rainforest the size of Chicago from being chopped down.

Its supporters claim it has been doing exceptionally well. The Cambodian government hailed it as the “most successful” community-based forest conservation scheme on the carbon market and a climate solution.

Satellite images tell a different story. Tumring is experiencing dramatic deforestation, losing over 22% of trees in the project area since the scheme began. The Cambodian government does not account for this loss in official monitoring reports.

Nor is this an isolated case. In a joint investigation, Climate Home and Unearthed found similar discrepancies in two Brazilian projects, based on data from two different satellite monitoring platforms. Companies like Uber, ArcelorMittal and Marathon are still using credits from these three projects to offset their emissions – and there is nothing to stop them.

It raises serious questions for Verra, the largest standard setter in the voluntary carbon market, which oversees the projects.

Project owners disputed the findings, while Verra said it “is committed to refining and improving its methodologies based on the best available science and data”.

Mind the gap

By protecting trees the Tumring project generates carbon credits – or offsets – which are then used by polluters to compensate for their own emissions elsewhere. Texan oil firm Marathon is a major buyer, while the Cambodian and Korean governments, project partners, are planning to use a portion of the credits as part of their national net zero plans.

But the emissions avoided through the project are likely to be overstated given the deforestation rate appears to be higher than claimed. Project owners recorded just 3,450 hectares (ha) of forest loss in monitoring reports between 2015 and 2019, the most recent data submitted. Our analysis using the online tool Global Forest Watch showed forest loss was four times higher in that period, at 14,000 ha.

Climate Home and Unearthed looked at offsetting projects after a source raised concerns about apparent discrepancies between what project owners were declaring in their monitoring reports, and what could be seen through satellite images.

The team compared project filings with data developed by the University of Maryland and made available on the Global Forest Watch online platform. A second source of satellite data, Forobs, developed by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre, was used to check the findings. This showed a similar trend.

Redd+ weaknesses

Verra is a major proponent of the UN-backed scheme Redd+, which stands for “reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries”. It is designed to protect areas at risk of being deforested. Companies can buy carbon credits from these projects to discount their own emissions.

Critics have long raised concerns about weak quality control of this kind of project. An investigation published by The Guardian and Die Zeit earlier this year alleged more than 90% of Verra’s Redd+ projects were not driving emission reductions, largely because developers exaggerated the threat forests were facing. Verra disputed the findings.

Climate Home and Unearthed found that, in addition to inflated baselines, underreporting of forest loss throughout a project’s lifetime and light-touch regulation can lead to far too many credits being generated.

“The findings point out deep flaws in the forest carbon offset mechanism”, said Souparna Lahiri. The fact deforestation is increasing, instead of going down, “is deeply concerning” and “strengthens our conviction that the mechanism of offsetting cannot be fixed”, he added.

Self-reported deforestation

Each carbon credit represents a ton of CO2 kept from being released into the atmosphere by protecting trees. If a larger portion of forest is cleared than project developers claim, the volume of emissions they avoid will be overstated. When used by companies or governments to compensate for their emissions elsewhere, these credits would have a negative climate impact.

Verra says its role is to make sure that, when a company does invest in a carbon project, it has integrity and meaning, verified by the best standards and science. Monitoring reports are a crucial part of how progress is measured, since they disclose setbacks such as rising deforestation.

Monitoring reports are audited by third parties, then submitted publicly on a project’s page, alongside a host of other documents. In practice, they can be difficult for the public to understand and evaluate. There’s no standardised way to monitor projects.

The way the Cambodian government and its partners monitor deforestation in the Tumring area is opaque. They use national land cover data produced by Cambodia’s environment ministry that is not available publicly. It has a low tree cover threshold, meaning an area needs as little as 10% of trees to be counted as forested. To put it another way, you could chop down 90% of tree cover in a previously untouched section and still claim the forest was intact.

Exposed: carbon offsets linked to high forest loss still on sale

Cambodia has one of the highest deforestation rates in the world, according to Global Forest Watch. Photo: Un Yarat / US Embassy Phnom Penh

The Cambodian government has previously tried to discredit independent analysis showing that deforestation is higher in the country than state records.

Wildlife Works, which worked as a technical consultant for project validation and verification, said it “had no connection to the project” since completing the job and directed questions to the Cambodian government.

The Cambodian government did not respond to a request for comment. The Korean government told Climate Home and Unearthed that only credits from 2021 onwards would be used to offset national emissions.

Industry transparency

The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market, an independent governance body for the industry, has called for greater transparency, urging offsetting projects to make all their information accessible to a “non-specialised audience” so a project’s climate impact can be better assessed.

Gilles Dufrasne, from the NGO Carbon Market Watch, said: “Current practice on the market simply isn’t up to standard and this lack of transparency needs to be plugged. More credible, and transparent, use of forest monitoring data is part of this.”

Sylvera, a carbon offsets analytics provider, noted in its 2022 State of Carbon report that the majority of the company’s D-rated projects, of which Tumring is one, “grossly under-reported the deforestation in the project area and have exceeded the baseline emissions”.

Samuel Gill, Sylvera co-founder and president, told Unearthed and Climate Home: “The technology to largely resolve issues like underreporting or overcrediting already exist and are being deployed.” He added: “These improvements take time to filter through the system and in the next few years we should see considerable uplift in project quality as a result.”

In theory, Verra already has various mechanisms to prevent worthless credits linked to deforestation from flooding the market and to punish project developers responsible for any irregularities.

Project owners are required to set aside in a “buffer pool”: a portion of credits that cannot be traded on the market. These act like an insurance policy: if trees meant to be protected end up being felled or burned in a fire, credits in the pool should be cancelled to ensure the integrity of the credits previously sold for offsetting purposes.

Additionally, complaints may trigger a project review and, if a developer is found to have issued too many credits, it can be sanctioned or made to pay a compensation.

But carbon market experts have doubts over the effectiveness of the system, saying the size and use case of buffer pools may be too limited. Only one project has ever had credits from the buffer pool cancelled, according to the Verra register.

Recurring problem

Over 17,000 kilometres away from Tumring, the Rio Preto-Jacundá Redd+ project is meant to achieve the same goal and protect an area of the Brazilian Amazon state of Rondonia.

The project has sold more than one million credits, with big name buyers including German utility Entega, Bank of Santander’s Brazilian arm, and Brazilian financial services giant Banco Bradesco.

From when it began in 2012 to 2020, the latest year available in monitoring reports, the project recorded 5,884 ha of loss, with a sharp increase from 2016. Global Forest Watch data shows it lost 8,200 ha of forest – 33% higher than the numbers declared by the project owner, Biofílica Ambipar.

The scheme’s “without project” scenario, to show what would happen under business as usual, predicted 9,922 ha of loss in the same period.

‘On watch’

Sylvera, an offsetting rating agency that independently checks and verifies projects using a combination of satellite imagery and machine learning, has placed the Rio Preto project “on watch”, after noting significant and increasing deforestation within the project area.

Biofílica Ambipar, which runs the Rio Preto scheme, said it “works continuously to monitor, identify and report any illegal activity to the Brazilian public environmental authorities”.

The company says it relies on the Prodes system to monitor forest loss in the area. Created by the National Institute for Space Research in 1988, Prodes is also used by the Brazilian government for its official annual deforestation reports.

“According to the Prodes system, the deforestation rates in the region are lower than those informed by Global Forest Watch, which is not as accurate in classifying deforestation,” Biofílica Ambipar said.

Prodes is used to detect large-scale changes in primary forest, but it can miss smaller changes. The system uses satellite images that only detect clearcut logging of more than 6.25 hectares – an area equivalent to nearly nine football pitches – missing smaller-scale forest loss. The University of Maryland data, made available through Global Forest Watch, captures losses as small as 0.1 hectares, while also picking up forest degradation.

Still selling credits

Another Biofílica project was abruptly cancelled last year after part of it was legally deforested by the landowner. But carbon credits generated by the scheme are still on the market.

The Maísa project covered over 25,000 hectares of forest in the state of Pará controlled by a family-owned agroindustrial company, which runs eucalyptus, Brazil nuts and açaí plantations.

When the project began in 2012, the firm agreed with Biofílica to protect the trees and invest in better forest management practices in exchange for a share of the profits from the sale of carbon credits.

Since then, polluters including steel giant ArcelorMittal have bought hundreds of thousands of its credits.

But starting from last year the landowner began clearing increasingly larger areas of the forest in what Biofílica says was a breach of their agreement.

The project developer decided to stop the project, but it is still listed on the Verra register and its credits continue to be used for offsetting purposes. Over 38,000 credits have been retired since the project was stopped by Biofilica – more than 4,000 of them purchased by Uber to compensate for the emissions spewed by its fleet of cars in Central and South America.

Uber said that it “only invests in projects certified, traceable, and auditable by Verra, the United Nations, Gold Standard, and Climate Action Reserve [other verifying bodies for offsetting schemes] after a thorough investigation”.

Lure of agribusiness

Biofílica told Unearthed and Climate Home that the company had made it a policy to stop selling credits from the Maísa project as soon as it became aware of the legal logging. It added that “the project is currently in the process of being terminated and audited in line with Verra procedures.”

Asked what would happen to old credits in the project that are still available on the market through third-party sellers, Biofílica’s spokesperson said: “It is important to highlight that the credits that are still being sold by traders and brokers refer to credits verified in previous years, when there was still no legal deforestation scenario in the area; that is, they were audited and verified credits.”

However, when trees are cut down, the carbon stored in them is released back into the atmosphere, no matter if they were originally protected, negating any potential climate benefit. Experts say good projects need to ensure the carbon they sequester or avoid will remain out of the atmosphere for at least 100 years.

When asked what happens to credits in projects that are cancelled, a Verra spokesperson said projects are required to deposit a percentage of their credits into buffer pools which can be drawn on if a portion of the forest is lost.

Maísa’s buffer pool contains 131,600 credits which have currently been placed on hold, meaning Verra still needs to decide their fate. That is only 20% of the total credits put on the market for offsetting purposes, most of which have already been used.

Biofílica spokesperson suggested that what happened with the Maísa project was a sign that Redd+ projects can struggle to compete with the economic opportunities offered by agricultural production in the Amazon.

They said: “Maísa shows the reality of the Amazon region and illustrates the difficulties that all actors interested in conservation face in making carbon projects financially viable.”

The post Exposed: carbon offsets linked to high forest loss still on sale appeared first on Climate Home News.

Exposed: carbon offsets linked to high forest loss still on sale

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Pressure builds for fossil fuel transition plan at COP30  

Published

on

A growing group of countries wants COP30 to kick off the process of crafting a roadmap for the world to transition away from fossil fuels, which are by far the largest driver of planetary heating.

More than 80 countries on Tuesday issued a call for the “Mutirão” decision – expected to be the main political outcome of the Belém summit – to include a commitment to develop a blueprint that builds on the landmark COP28 agreement in Dubai, which for the first time signalled a global shift away from oil, coal and gas.

The call’s supporters include industrialised nations like the UK, Germany and the Netherlands, as well as large developing countries such as Colombia and Kenya, and low-lying Pacific island states.

“This is a global coalition with Global North and Global South countries coming together and saying with one voice: this is an issue which cannot be swept under the carpet,” UK Energy Secretary Ed Miliband told a press conference on Tuesday. “We have an opportunity to make COP30 the moment we take forward what we agreed at COP28,” he added.

    Since all governments agreed for the first time at the UN climate conference in Dubai to explicitly reference fossil fuels in an official climate summit outcome, major fossil fuel-producing countries – led vocally by Gulf states like Saudi Arabia – have pushed back against efforts to build on that landmark decision.

    But calls for the creation of a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels have been gathering momentum in Belém since Brazilian President Lula da Silva mentioned the idea at the leaders’ summit nearly two weeks ago.

    “Key for 1.5C”

    Rapid developments over the past ten days in the Amazon city have caught many countries off guard. The European Union has yet to form a joint position on the roadmap, for instance, even though the bloc supports the implementation of the Dubai agreement.

    Tina Stege, climate envoy for the low-lying Marshall Islands, said a global shift away from fossil fuels is “key for keeping the door open on 1.5C and limiting the scale and duration of any overshoot”. UN Secretary General António Guterres conceded last month that the global average temperature will breach, at least temporarily, the key threshold set in the Paris Agreement.

    Stege added that the current reference to a fossil fuel roadmap in the draft outcome decision presented by Brazil’s COP presidency on Tuesday morning was “weak and presented as an option”, while “it must be strengthened and it must be adopted”.

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

    The draft “Mutirão” decision – which the COP30 hosts hope to land by the end of Wednesday – mentions the transition away from fossil fuels among a wide sweep of options for how to find agreement on the thorniest issues being discussed in Belém.

    One option would encourage governments to convene a roundtable aimed at supporting countries to develop “just, orderly and equitable transition roadmaps”, including for reducing dependency on fuels and stopping deforestation. However, that appears to refer to domestic blueprints and stops short of advocating for a global roadmap that over 80 countries are calling for.

    Ministers from around 20 countries launch a declaration calling for a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels to be agreed at COP30 in Belem, Brazil on November 18, 2025. (Photo: Matteo Civillini)

    Ministers from around 20 countries launch a declaration calling for a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels to be agreed at COP30 in Belem, Brazil on November 18, 2025. (Photo: Matteo Civillini)

    Backlash expected from oil producers

    Irene Vélez, Colombia’s Environment Minister, said such a roadmap “must be the legacy of COP30”.

    “I wish that we won’t have to tell the world that the dozens of countries that are here have let them down – not only to those who mobilised today but to future generations,” she added. “We must rise to the occasion”.

    Antonio Hill, a COP veteran from the Natural Resource Governance Institute (NRGI), told Climate Home it is not surprising that strong calls for a fossil fuel transition blueprint are coming from Brazil and Colombia.

    “They are relatively high-cost producers [of oil and gas], they have relatively short horizons in terms of their reserves, and they’re facing structural decline,” he added. “They actually don’t have the luxury of waiting it out.”

    But their push for the inclusion of a fossil fuel roadmap in the COP30 outcome is all but guaranteed to prompt a strong backlash from several other large nations heavily dependent on fossil fuel exports and consumption.

    Petrostates within the Arab group, led by Saudi Arabia, are expected to mount the strongest opposition. And while renewable energy-rich Kenya has endorsed Tuesday’s call, many other African countries remain wary of committing to a fossil-fuel phase-out.

    Fair and funded transition

    Richard Muyungi, the chair of the African Group of Negotiators (AGN), told Climate Home News last Friday that African countries had yet to coordinate their views on the issue, which he described as “very important”.

    “But… generally as a continent, we are the least responsible for the [climate] problem, and this is the continent which chooses to harness all the available energy sources to develop,” he said, adding that Africa should not be forced or pushed towards a trajectory that threatens to undermine its development agenda.

    Former German climate envoy Jennifer Morgan said countries pushing for a roadmap need to reassure their counterparts that this will not be a “top-down” exercise.

    “We are talking about a nationally-driven, fair and inclusive process that would also bring in the finance [element],” she told Climate Home News. “For big fossil fuel producers, it is an opportunity to have a dialogue with consumers so that it can be just, orderly and equitable.”

    The post Pressure builds for fossil fuel transition plan at COP30   appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Pressure builds for fossil fuel transition plan at COP30  

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

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

    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

      COP Bulletin Day 8: Pope keeps faith in 1.5C

      Published

      on

      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 last night, 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.”

      “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”.

      Former US climate negotiators Trigg Talley and Todd Stern at COP30 on November 17

      The post COP Bulletin Day 8: Pope keeps faith in 1.5C appeared first on Climate Home News.

      COP Bulletin Day 8: Pope keeps faith in 1.5C

      Continue Reading

      Trending

      Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com