As UN chief António Guterres called on the G20 to “lead” on climate, Climate Home can reveal that the group of big countries watered down a report by top economists on how the financial system should shift to enable climate action.
Guterres made his comments by video at the launch of the United Nations’ Emissions Gap Report which showed that, under their current policies, the G20 countries as a group will fail to meet their 2030 targets to cut planet-heating emissions.
Separately, Climate Action Tracker has found that no G20 country’s policies are compatible with limiting global warming to the Paris Agreement goals of either 1.5 degrees Celsius or “well below” 2C.
“The largest economies – the G20 members, responsible for around 80% of all emissions – must lead,” Guterres said on Thursday.
At COP16, countries clash over future of global fund for nature protection
He spoke as officials from G20 climate and finance ministries and central bankers gathered in Washington DC to attend a meeting of the G20 Taskforce on a Global Mobilization against Climate Change (TF-CLIMA), an initiative of the Brazilian G20 presidency aimed at bringing climate and finance officials out of their silos to talk about tackling climate change.
One of their tasks is to react to a report the taskforce commissioned from a group of 12 independent experts, led by economists Vera Songwe and Mariana Mazzucato, on how the G20 countries can shift their financial systems towards tackling climate change.
Brazil’s Secretary for Climate, Energy and Environment André Aranha Corrêa do Lago told a briefing for journalists on Wednesday that the experts were requested to do a “strong report”, going beyond what the G20 can agree to in a joint declaration. It was “important to leave as a legacy a document that shows that we believe that more is needed”, he said.
The report, published on Thursday, lists five “myths” blocking climate action, including that it will slow economic growth and that governments lack the resources to fix climate change and should leave it to the market. It recommends that G20 governments should implement green industrial strategies, reform the global financial system and scale up financing for climate projects.
Weakened after criticism
However, according to a draft of the report from September 4 seen by Climate Home, the final, public version was watered down in response to critical feedback from G20 governments through their negotiators.
Comparing the earlier and later versions, there was a weakening of various points – from criticism of the G20 to warnings over climate impacts, praise for a billionaires’ tax for climate and calls for central banks to help fight climate change.
References to “G20 inaction” were replaced with “G20 inertia”, and the line “each year the destruction to the planet is harsher than the last” was deleted. A reference to a “stark increase” in global temperatures was softened to “a temperature increase on this scale”.
European Central Bank holds back plan to boost climate finance for Africa, Latam
Information in support of Brazil’s proposal for a 2% tax on the wealth of billionaires worldwide was also cut, including a description of the idea’s popularity with “electorates around the world”. An observation on the proposal’s “relatively straightforward” nature to implement was replaced by “questions over the feasibility of implementation”.
The September draft said France, Spain and South Africa supported the wealth tax proposal “while the US opposes it”, but this was deleted from the final version. The US has not made its position on the tax clear in public.
In addition, a recommendation that central banks and supervisory and regulatory bodies should mitigate climate-related financial risks and help mobilise private finance for green investments was modified with the caveat “within their mandates”.
A source with knowledge of discussions told Climate Home that the recommendations on central banks had been criticised by the US, EU and France, and some developing countries.
Just transition?
On the same day, the UN Emissions Gap report warned that the 1.5C goal will be gone within a few years unless all countries collectively commit to cut 42% off annual greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and 57% by 2035 in their next round of national climate plans due by next year – and back them up with rapid action.
The report showed that global greenhouse gas emissions set a new record high of 57.1 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent in 2023, a 1.3% increase from 2022 levels, with rises in sectors from power to transport and agriculture. Guterres said emissions needed to fall 9% each year to 2030 to meet the 1.5C limit and “avoid the very worst of climate change”.
In a warring world, Azerbaijan’s COP29 truce appeal draws fire as “PR exercise”
The report said all G20 governments must step up efforts and “do the heavy lifting” by reducing the group’s collective emissions – accounting for 77% of the global total – dramatically.
But it argued that stronger international support and more climate finance will be essential to ensure that climate and development goals can be realised fairly across G20 member countries, as well as globally.
The G20 includes some developing countries – like India, Indonesia and Brazil – that, despite being large and rising emitters today, have relatively low levels of emissions per capita and have historically contributed far less than rich, industrialised nations to global warming.
In response to a question from Climate Home, UN Environment Programme Executive Director Inger Andersen told journalists that the Emissions Gap Report recognises that some countries have a higher ability to move first, but emissions cuts are needed by all G20 nations.
“Every G20 country, irrespective of where it stands on the long historical trail, has an opportunity to lean into this investment opportunity and change its emissions structure,” she said. UN chief Guterres has nonetheless called on the wealthier ones to stretch and do even more, to leave space for those who will find it harder to meet net-zero emissions by 2050, she added.
Anne Olhoff, chief scientific editor of the report, noted that all G20 countries apart from Mexico, have made pledges to reach net-zero emissions later this century. She said those that have yet to peak their emissions – China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Republic of Korea, and Türkiye – should do so as soon as possible, and then start cutting them rapidly in order to meet their net-zero targets.
(Reporting by Joe Lo; additional reporting by Megan Rowling; editing by Megan Rowling)
The post G20 waters down experts’ climate finance report, despite UN pressure to act appeared first on Climate Home News.
G20 waters down experts’ climate finance report, despite UN pressure to act
Climate Change
There is hope for Venezuela’s future – and it isn’t based on oil
Alejandro Álvarez Iragorry is a Venezuelan ecologist and coordinator of Clima 21, an environmental NGO. Cat Rainsford is a transition minerals investigator for Global Witness and former Venezuela analyst for a Latin American think tank.
In 1975, former Venezuelan oil minister Juan Pablo Pérez Alfonzo gave a now infamous warning.
“Oil will bring us ruin,” he declared. “It is the devil’s excrement. We are drowning in the devil’s excrement.”
At the time, his words seemed excessively gloomy to many Venezuelans. The country was in a period of rapid modernisation, fuelled by its booming oil economy. Caracas was a thriving cultural hotspot. Everything seemed good. But history proved Pérez right.
Over the following decades, Venezuela’s oil dependence came to seem like a curse. After the 1980s oil price crash, political turmoil paved the way for the election of populist Hugo Chávez, who built a socialist state on oil money, only for falling prices and corruption to drive it into ruin.
By 2025, poverty and growing repression under Chávez’s successor Nicolás Maduro had forced nearly 8 million Venezuelans to leave the country.
Venezuela is now at a crossroads. Since the US abducted Maduro on January 3 and seized control of the country’s oil revenues in a nakedly imperial act, all attention has been on getting the country’s dilapidated oil infrastructure pumping again.
But Venezuelans deserve more than plunder and fighting over a planet-wrecking resource that has fostered chronic instability and dispossession. Right now, 80% of Venezuelans live below the poverty line. Venezuelans are desperate for jobs, income and change.
Real change, though, won’t come through more oil dependency or profiteering by foreign elites. Instead, it is renewable energy that offers a pathway forward, towards sovereignty, stability and peace.
Guri Dam and Venezuela’s hydropower decline
Venezuela boasts some of the strongest potential for renewable energy generation in the region. Two-thirds of the country’s own electricity comes from hydropower, mostly from the massive Guri Dam in the southern state of Bolívar. This is one of the largest dams in Latin America with a capacity of over 10 gigawatts, even providing power to parts of Colombia and Brazil.
Guri has become another symbol of Venezuela’s mismanagement. Lack of diversification caused over-reliance on Guri for domestic power, making the system vulnerable to droughts. Poor maintenance reduced Guri’s capacity and planned supporting projects such as the Tocoma Dam were bled dry by corruption. The country was left plagued by blackouts and increasingly turned to dirty thermoelectric plants and petrol generators for power.
Today, industry analysis suggests that Venezuela is producing at about 30% of its hydropower capacity. Rehabilitating this neglected infrastructure could re-establish clean power as the backbone of domestic industry, while the country’s abundant river system offers numerous opportunities for smaller, sustainable hydro projects that promote rural electrification.


Venezuela also has huge, untapped promise in wind power that could provide vital diversification from hydropower. The coastal states of Zulia and Falcón boast wind speeds in the ideal range for electricity generation, with potential to add up to 12 gigawatts to the grid. Yet planned projects in both states have stalled, leaving abandoned turbines rusting in fields and millions of dollars unaccounted for.
Solar power is more neglected. One announced solar plant on the island of Los Roques remains non-functional a decade later, and a Chávez-era programme to supply solar panels to rural households ground to a halt when oil prices fell. Yet nearly a fifth of the country receives levels of solar radiation that rival leading regions such as northern Chile.
Developing Venezuela’s renewables potential would be a massive undertaking. Investment would be needed, local concerns around a just and equitable transition would have to be navigated and infrastructure development carefully managed.
Rebuilding Venezuela with a climate-driven energy transition
A shift in political vision would be needed to ensure that Venezuela’s renewable energy was not used to simply free up more oil for export, as in the past, but to power a diversified domestic economy free from oil-driven cycles of boom and bust.
Ultimately, these decisions must be taken by democratically elected leaders. But to date, no timeline for elections has been set, and Venezuela’s future hangs in the balance. Supporting the country to make this shift is in all of our interests.
What’s clear is that Venezuela’s energy future should not lie in oil. Fossil fuel majors have not leapt to commit the estimated $100 billion needed to revitalise the sector, with ExxonMobil declaring Venezuela “uninvestable”. The issues are not only political. Venezuela’s heavy, sour crude is expensive to refine, making it dubious whether many projects would reach break-even margins.
Behind it all looms the spectre of climate change. The world must urgently move away from fossil fuels. Beyond environmental concerns, it’s simply good economics.


Recent analysis by the International Renewable Energy Agency finds that 91% of new renewable energy projects are now cheaper than their fossil fuel alternatives. China, the world’s leading oil buyer, is among the most rapid adopters.
Tethering Venezuela’s future to an outdated commodity leaves the country in a lose-lose situation. Either oil demand drops and Venezuela is left with nothing. Or climate change runs rampant, devastating vulnerable communities with coastal loss, flooding, fires and heatwaves. Meanwhile, Venezuela remains locked in the same destructive economic swings that once led to dictatorship and mass emigration. There is another way.
Venezuelans rightfully demand a political transition, with their own chosen leaders. But to ensure this transition is lasting and stable, Venezuela needs more – it needs an energy transition.
The post There is hope for Venezuela’s future – and it isn’t based on oil appeared first on Climate Home News.
There is hope for Venezuela’s future – and it isn’t based on oil
Climate Change
UN’s new carbon market delivers first credits through Myanmar cookstove project
A cleaner cooking initiative in Myanmar is set to generate the first-ever batch of carbon credits under the new UN carbon market, more than a decade after the mechanism was first envisioned in the Paris Agreement.
The Article 6.4 Supervisory Body has approved the issuance of 60,000 credits, which correspond to tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent reduced by distributing more efficient cookstoves that need less firewood and, therefore, ease pressure on carbon-storing forests, the project developers say. The approval of the credit issuance will become effective after a 28‑day appeal and grievance period.
The programme started in 2019 under the previous UN-run carbon offsetting scheme – the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) – and is being implemented by a South Korean NGO with investment from private South Korean firms.
The credits are expected to be used primarily by major South Korean polluters to meet obligations under the country’s emissions trading system – a move that will also enable the government to count those units toward emissions reduction targets in its nationally determined contribution (NDC), the UN climate body told Climate Home News.
Myanmar will use the remaining credits to achieve in part the goals of its national climate plan.
Making ‘a big difference’
The approval of the credits issuance represents a major milestone for the UN carbon market established under article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement. By generating carbon credits that both governments and private firms can use, the mechanism aims to accelerate global climate action and channel additional finance to developing nations.
UNFCCC chief Simon Stiell said the approval of the first credits from a clean cooking project shows “how this mechanism can support solutions that make a big difference in people’s daily lives, as well as channeling finance to where it delivers real-life benefits on the ground”.
“Over two billion people globally are without access to clean cooking, which kills millions every year. Clean cooking protects health, saves forests, cuts emissions and helps empower women and girls, who are typically hardest hit by household air pollution,” he added in a statement.
Concerns over clean cookstove credits
Carbon markets are seen as an important channel to raise money to help low-income communities in developing countries switch to less polluting cooking methods. Proceeds from the sale of carbon credits made up 35% of the revenue generated by for-profit clean cooking companies in 2023, according to a report by the Clean Cooking Initiative.
But many cookstove offsetting projects have faced significant criticism from researchers and campaigners who argue that climate benefits are often exaggerated and weak monitoring can undermine claims of real emission reductions. Their main criticism is that the rules allow project developers to overestimate the impact of fuel collection on deforestation, while relying on surveys to track stove usage that are prone to bias and can further inflate reported impacts.
As Louisiana bets big on ‘blue ammonia’, communities brace for air pollution
The project in Myanmar follows a contested methodology developed under the Kyoto Protocol that was rejected last year by The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM), a watchdog that issues quality labels to carbon credit types, because it is “insufficiently rigorous”.
An analysis conducted last year by Brussels-based NGO Carbon Market Watch claimed that the project would generate 26 times more credits than it should, when comparing its calculations with values from peer-reviewed scientific literature.
‘Conservative’ values cut credit volume
But, after transitioning from the CDM to the new mechanism, the project applied updated values and “more conservative” assumptions to calculate emission reductions, according to the UNFCCC, which added that this resulted in 40% fewer credits being issued than would have been the case in the CDM.
“The result is consistent with environmental integrity requirements and ensures that each credited tonne genuinely represents a tonne reduced and contributes to the goals of the Paris Agreement,” said Mkhuthazi Steleki, the South African chair of article 6.4 Supervisory Body, which oversees the mechanism.
Over 1,500 projects originally developed under the CDM requested the transition to the new mechanism, including controversial schemes subsidising fossil gas-powered plants in China and India. But, so far, the transfer of only 165 of all those projects has been approved by their respective host nations, which have until the end of June to make a final decision.
The UN climate body said this means that “a wide variety of real-world climate projects are already in line to follow” in sectors such as renewable energy, waste management and agriculture. But the transfer of old programmes from the CDM has long been contested with critics arguing that weak and discredited rules allow projects to overestimate emission reductions.
Genuinely new projects unrelated to the CDM are expected to start operating under the Paris Agreement mechanism once the Supervisory Body approves the first custom-made methodologies.
The post UN’s new carbon market delivers first credits through Myanmar cookstove project appeared first on Climate Home News.
UN’s new carbon market delivers first credits through Myanmar cookstove project
Climate Change
Equity, Benefit-Sharing and Financial Architecture in the International Seabed Area
A new independent study by Dr Harvey Mpoto Bombaka (Centro Universitário de Brasília) and Dr Ben Tippet (King’s College London), commissioned by Greenpeace International, reveals that current International Seabed Authority revenue-sharing proposals would return virtually nothing to developing countries — despite the requirement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) that deep sea mining must benefit humankind as a whole.
Instead, the analysis shows that the overwhelming economic value would flow to a handful of private corporations, primarily headquartered in the Global North.
Download the report:
Equity, Benefit-Sharing and Financial Architecture in the International Seabed Area
Executive Summary: Equity, Benefit-Sharing and Financial Architecture in the International Seabed Area
https://www.greenpeace.org.au/greenpeace-reports/equity-benefit-sharing-and-financial-architecture-in-the-international-seabed-area/
-
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






