The Busan talks which ended in the early hours of Monday were meant to be the final step in agreeing a UN treaty to end plastic pollution. But rumours started swirling on Sunday afternoon – later confirmed – that they wouldn’t be the last.
Fighting back the exhaustion from one too many sleepless nights, diplomats and observers wondered why the talks had broken down – and what could prevent the same happening again when countries reconvene next year to try and push a pact over the finish line?
One clear, prevailing narrative was borrowed straight from UN climate change negotiations: a vocal minority of defiant, well-coordinated petrostates had killed off the majority’s efforts to clinch an ambitious agreement to end plastic pollution.
More than 100 countries – from rich Western states to African, Latin American and Pacific nations – got behind a drive to include provisions to cap plastic manufacturing in the new UN accord, rather than limiting it to a narrower focus on recycling.
Anything short of that would be a failure and a betrayal, they repeated in unison throughout the week-long deliberations. “The time for the freedom to pollute is over,” said European Union envoy Tony Agotha on Friday. “Mopping the floor when the tap is open is useless.”
“Economic interests”
Only around 9% of plastic is recycled worldwide, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. It wrote in an October report that only through “stringent policies to curb production and demand”, combined with better waste management, could the world “nearly end plastic leakage to the environment by 2040”.
Nearly all plastic is made using plant-heating fossil fuels and, as production is projected to double or triple in the next 25 years, that spells trouble for efforts to limit global warming and stem the flood of plastic waste clogging up the Earth’s oceans and littering its land.
But a group of self-defined “Like-Minded” countries led by Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran – which also includes most Arab states and quietly counts on support from India – don’t want to close the door on a key economic sector. In Busan, they pushed back strongly against any attempt to include provisions to cap plastic manufacturing in a legally binding UN pact.
They reiterated their view that production curbs fall outside the scope of the treaty, saying they could cause “economic disruption”, trade restrictions and shortages of essential materials.
In response, Ghana’s lead negotiator Sam Adu-Kumi told reporters on Sunday it seems that “people are looking at their economic interests without looking at the common enemy” of plastic pollution and “its devastating effects”.
Fossil fuel-producing nations and companies see the petrochemicals industry, including plastics, as a lifeline because demand for oil and gas in the energy sector is projected to decline as the world shifts to cleaner sources for power and transport.
China, the United States, India, South Korea and Saudi Arabia were the top five primary polymer-producing nations in 2023, according to data provided by Eunomia.
More time needed
The deep divisions between countries were on full display during a marathon seven hour-long closing plenary stretching into the early hours of Monday morning in South Korea.
Juliet Kabera from Rwanda, speaking on behalf of the High-Ambition Coalition (HAC) of countries, brought the house down when she asked everyone who supported her statement – condemning calls from a minority of countries to remove “indispensable” binding provisions from the text – to “stand for ambition”.
Russia’s delegate spoke of “production regulation models” being imposed “purely for economic reasons”, while Kuwait’s negotiator – on behalf of the Like-Minded group – expressed “concern” over a “rush to showcase progress” in negotiations where “everyone is bringing its lenses”.
On Sunday, after the final session was suspended without an agreement, Inger Andersen, executive director of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), which is running the talks, said more time is needed to overcome “persisting divergence in critical areas”.
“We cannot afford to miss” the opportunity to make tackling plastic pollution a reality at the next session, she added in a written statement.
But, given the enduring stalemate, many weren’t sure how that would be possible as they exited the cavernous plenary room.
Higher level political involvement
Siddharth Singh, programme manager at the Delhi-based Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), told Climate Home the next round of talks would be “tough as the US would be negotiating under the Trump administration, possibly strengthening the low-ambition countries”.
The date for the resumption of the INC-5 talks has yet to be set, with the Earth Negotiations Bulletin reporting some countries want the next session to be convened in the first half of 2025 so as not to lose the momentum built in Busan, and others calling for it to be held in July or August next year given much work is still required before agreement can be reached.
Some negotiators and observers are hoping China can play a decisive role in bridging the divide with the petrostates. Its Vice Minister Guo Fang told the closing plenary that all countries should “propose more pragmatic and balanced solutions” that address the “entire life cycle” of plastics, while taking into account their national differences.
Aleksandar Rankovic, co-founder of the Common Initiative, a campaign group, called for “a much stronger involvement from heads of states or ministers” – something that was glaringly missing in Busan.
As negotiations continued behind closed doors, signs outside the UN plastic talks venue in Busan called for leaders to act and produce a strong treaty to address plastic pollution, November 29, 2024.
(Photo: IISD/ENB – Kiara Worth)
Vote or consensus?
Meanwhile, a growing chorus of voices believes the only viable option to ensure that a new global pact contains stringent provisions on plastic production is to put the issue to a vote, rather than relying on the current consensus-based system for approving decisions.
David Azoulay, director of environmental health at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), said ambitious countries should combat “the weaponisation of consensus by a small number of countries”.
“We must resist the idea that this process is destined to remain paralysed by obstruction,” he added, calling on governments to resolve the issue “once and for all” at the next negotiating session.
Eirik Lindebjerg, global plastics policy lead at WWF, said a small number of countries are “holding the negotiations hostage” – and those pushing for a strong agreement “must be ready to vote or adopt a treaty-of-the-willing”.
Production curbs needed for strong global pact on plastic pollution, campaigners say
Invoking a vote is technically an option according to the rules that govern the negotiations.
But at the second session of talks on the treaty in June 2023 in Paris, countries struck what Senegal’s national delegate Cheikh Ndiaye Sylla described on Sunday as a “gentleman’s agreement” to rule out voting throughout the process, adding it had been a “big mistake”.
Backtracking on it now is likely to spark a strong response from the “Like-Minded” group – and some other developing countries – which strongly believe all decisions should be made by consensus.
Delegates gather for the closing plenary of the INC-5 talks in Busan, South Korea on December 1, 2024. Photo: IISD/ENB – Kiara Worth)
While several Latin American, African and Pacific island members of the High-Ambition Coalition have publicly supported the need to consider voting, rich nations by and large remain nervous about that option.
According to CIEL’s Azoulay, they fear it would create “bad blood”, upsetting powerful players like India and China, and running the risk of denting multilateralism in an already tense geopolitical situation.
In a statement following the end of the meeting in Busan, the INC’s chair, Ecuadorian diplomat Luis Vayas Valdivieso, said the mandate of the talks had “always been ambitious”, adding “ambition takes time to land”.
Governments agreed that a “Chair’s Text” compiled by Valdivieso and issued on Sunday will serve as the starting point for negotiations at the resumed INC session in 2025.
“We have many of the elements that we need, and Busan has put us firmly on a pathway to success,” he said. “I call on all delegations to continue making paths, building bridges, and engaging in dialogue.”
(Reporting by Matteo Civillini; editing by Megan Rowling)
The post Failure of Busan talks exposes fossil fuel barrier to UN plastics pact appeared first on Climate Home News.
Failure of Busan talks exposes fossil fuel barrier to UN plastics pact
Climate Change
Hurricane Helene Is Headed for Georgians’ Electric Bills
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.
Climate Change
Amid Affordability Crisis, New Jersey Hands $250 Million Tax Break to Data Center
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
Climate Change
Curbing methane is the fastest way to slow warming – but we’re off the pace
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
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
