The UN’s Green Climate Fund (GCF) is considering borrowing money from banks and other investors in order to meet a goal set by governments at COP29 in November to increase spending by a group of funds that support developing countries.
At the talks in Baku, under pressure from small island nations and the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), all governments agreed to “pursue efforts to at least triple annual outflows” between 2022 and 2030 from UN climate funds like the GCF.
But with climate finance from wealthy governments faltering, Alain Beauvillard, the GCF’s director of strategy, policy and innovation, told Climate Home that the fund was considering tapping capital markets to help meet this goal.
What Trump’s second term means for climate action in the US and beyond
He said the GCF has an “ambitious” goal to manage $50 billion by 2030 – set in 2023 by its executive director – but foreign aid budgets are “not growing fast, some are falling and basically Ukraine is taking the greatest part”, so “we need some other sources of funding”.
The GCF will also look at accessing international financial assets called Special Drawing Rights and benefiting from proposals for global taxes on polluting economic sectors, he added.
Climate justice
But borrowing is controversial. Harjeet Singh, a frequent observer of GCF board meetings and director of the Satat Sampada Climate Foundation in India, told Climate Home that “turning to capital markets to scale up climate finance may address short-term funding gaps but fundamentally undermines the principles of climate justice”.
In his view, it “prioritises profit-driven projects like renewable energy over critical adaptation efforts and addressing loss and damage – both of which are essential for vulnerable communities bearing the brunt of the climate crisis”.
Those lending money to the GCF on financial markets would expect to be paid back with interest. While clean energy projects generally produce revenue which the GCF could use to pay off lenders, it is harder to make profit from rebuilding a hurricane victim’s house or constructing a seawall to defend against rising sea levels.
The COP29 language about tripling outflows from the climate funds was only added into the finance agreement at midnight on the last night of the tense summit, giving governments no time to debate the exact wording. The amounts and details have yet to be worked out.
Michai Robertson, finance negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), told Climate Home that its inclusion was a compromise made to them and the LDCs, following a dramatic temporary walk-out on the last afternoon of the talks.
While government aid agencies like USAID and multilateral development banks (MDBs) like the World Bank are at least largely controlled by developed countries, the GCF has a board made up of an equal number of developed and developing country representatives.
Aid agencies and MDBs often favour finance in the form of loans, emissions-cutting projects and big countries as recipients of their money. But the GCF has a mandate to invest half of its money in adapting to climate change, 50% of which goes to LDCs, small island developing states and African governments.
Open to interpretation
Richard Sherman, a South African climate negotiator who was at COP29, told Climate Home that developing countries assumed that tripling outflows from these funds also meant tripling inflows “and definitely not doing three times more with what they are currently getting”.
“Now it seems the Baku language means everything to anyone,” he said. “This will probably be the start of endless negotiations of what we actually agreed to.”
Sherman warned that the GCF’s board and its trustee – the World Bank – would have to agree if the GCF is to enter the capital markets, adding that getting money from SDRs and solidarity levies would also be “complicated”. He called these proposals “stock-standard developing-country treasury approaches”.
Support grows for global tax on shipping emissions to fund climate action
Some UN funds already borrow money. In 2022, the International Fund for Agricultural Development was the first UN agency other than the World Bank to access the capital markets to lend to rural communities in poverty.
Last Tuesday, the Climate Investment Funds (CIF) – one of the world’s largest multilateral climate funds – issued its first bond, borrowing $500 million to lend to clean technology project developers in developing countries. This process was begun by former CIF head Mafalda Duarte, who now leads the GCF.
Current CIF head Tariye Gbadegesin called the bond issue “a historic moment for climate finance” which would “multiply the funds available for scaling up clean technology and infrastructure in developing countries – not in ten years, but now, when it’s most critically needed”.
She noted that demand for the bonds was more than six times higher than supply, describing this as “an enormous vote of confidence and a sign of the keen market interest in backing high-quality clean energy projects”.
Carbon levy for adaptation funding
When it comes to adaptation, the business case for going to the financial markets is far less clear. That leaves the UN climate funds that are focused on supporting projects to help vulnerable communities protect themselves from extreme weather and rising seas with fewer options for meeting the COP29 goal.
The UN’s Adaptation Fund, which has blazed a trail for this type of finance for 17 years, has to go cap in hand to wealthy government donors every year to solicit contributions in a bid to meet an annual target that is now set at $300 million. That is a challenge when national budgets are tight and needs are growing across proliferating climate funds.
For example, the fund garnered contributions of only around $133 million through COP29 last year – and while it’s not living hand to mouth, it has a significant pipeline of projects seeking funding. Given this tough backdrop, its head Mikko Ollikainen told Climate Home it was encouraging to see donor governments commit to tripling outflows, which he took as “a vote of confidence” in the Adaptation Fund’s work.
“The direction of travel is quite clear – that the needs are increasing and the adaptation finance gap is growing, and the decision from Baku would enable us to partly bridge that gap,” he said. “But, of course, this needs to be implemented – and then the finance, the funds would need to materialise to match this target that the (government) parties have set.”
Wall Street’s faltering on climate action opens up opportunity for European banks
For the Adaptation Fund, the COP29 decision means increasing its allocations to projects and programmes to $400 million a year by 2030, which translates into an annual growth rate of 25%, Ollikainen said.
There is one other source of finance the Adaptation Fund can look to: countries have agreed it can receive a 5% levy on emissions reductions registered with the new UN carbon market – which could see credits start to change hands this year after its rulebook was finalised at COP29.
But previous experience with a similar levy on an earlier version of a UN offsetting regime, the Clean Development Mechanism, was disappointing. Revenue amounted to only 10% of the Adaptation Fund’s resources due to rock-bottom emissions permit prices.
Ollikainen said “there hasn’t been any sort of authoritative estimate of what we might be expecting” from the new market but welcomed the fact that countries had set a quantitative target for UN climate funds for the first time, signalling they are willing to ensure it is met.
Pressure on funds
Two other multilateral funds that mainly channel money for adaptation projects in poorer countries – the Least Developed Countries Fund and the Special Climate Change Fund – have struggled even more to get what they need, cancelling donor events at COP29 due to a lack of commitments.
Joe Thwaites, senior advocate for international climate finance with the US-based Natural Resources Defense Council, said the COP29 goal amounts to tripling outflows from all the funds combined to an annual $5.2 billion.
Donor governments will need to make new pledges to help them reach the the target, but it also puts pressure on the funds themselves to do more with the money they have in their coffers, he said, noting that “getting the money out of the door… has been one of the challenges”.
“It doesn’t get countries off the hook but if [the funds] can manage their money better, they could leverage that and get greater outflows off the same capital base,” Thwaites said.
(Reporting by Joe Lo; additional reporting by Megan Rowling; editing by Megan Rowling)
The post Green Climate Fund looks at capital-market borrowing to meet COP29 goal appeared first on Climate Home News.
Green Climate Fund looks at capital-market borrowing to meet COP29 goal
Climate Change
Drought Turns Southeastern US Into ‘Tinderbox’ as Wildfires Rage
Weather extremes fuel wildfires that have burned through tens of thousands of acres across Georgia, Florida and other states.
Drought and fire are a dangerous duo. The Southeastern United States is witnessing this firsthand as several major blazes burn tens of thousands of acres across the parched region, destroying homes and prompting evacuations in some areas. Florida and Georgia have been particularly hard hit, and strong winds and unusually low humidity have made it difficult to combat the flames.
Drought Turns Southeastern US Into ‘Tinderbox’ as Wildfires Rage
Climate Change
Night Skies and Shifting Stars: How Indigenous Celestial Knowledge Tracks a Changing Climate
When the land no longer answers the stars the way it once did, Indigenous peoples are among the first to notice — and the first to ask why.
A Sky Full of Knowledge
Look up on a clear night on Turtle Island and you’re seeing a sky that has guided human life for thousands of years. Across Indigenous nations in Canada, detailed systems of celestial knowledge developed not as abstract science but as living, practical guides —telling people when to plant, when to harvest, when herds would move, and when ice would come. This astronomical knowledge was woven into language, ceremony, and everyday life, passed down through generations with remarkable precision.
The Mi’kmaq and the Celestial Bear
Among the Mi’kmaq of Atlantic Canada, star stories are ecological calendars, precise and functional. The story of Muin and the Seven Bird Hunters connects the annual movement of what Western astronomy calls Ursa Major to the seasonal cycle of hunting and harvest: the bear rises in spring, is hunted through summer, and falls to earth in autumn. This knowledge was brought to broader public attention in 2009 during the International Year of Astronomy, when Mi’kmaq Elders Lillian Marshall of Potlotek First Nation and Murdena Marshall of Eskasoni First Nation shared the story through an animated film produced at Cape Breton University narrated in English, French, and Mi’kmaq.¹ The story encodes specific observations about when and where to hunt, and which species to expect at which time of year. It is science in narrative form.
The Anishinaabe and the Seasonal Star Map
Among the Anishinaabe peoples of the Great Lakes and northern Ontario, celestial knowledge forms part of a comprehensive seasonal understanding. Knowledge keepers like Michael Wassegijig Price of Wikwemikong First Nation have described how Anishinaabe constellations quite different from those of Western astronomy connect the movement of the heavens to naming ceremonies, seasonal gatherings, and land practices.² The Royal Astronomical Society of Canada now offers planispheres featuring Indigenous constellations from Cree, Ojibwe, and Dakota sky traditions, recognizing their value as both cultural heritage and ecological knowledge systems.³
When the Stars and the Land Fall Out of Rhythm
Here’s the challenge that climate change has introduced: the stars still move on their ancient, reliable schedule. But the land no longer always responds as expected. Migratory birds that once arrived when certain constellations appeared are now showing up earlier or later. Ice that once formed in predictable windows is forming weeks late, or not at all. Berry harvests, fish runs, animal migrations, all once timed by celestial cues accumulated over millennia are shifting. Indigenous knowledge holders across Canada describe this as a kind of dissonance: the sky remains faithful, but the land has changed.⁴
Long-Baseline Ecological Records
Far from being historical curiosity, Indigenous celestial knowledge systems are now being recognized by researchers as long-baseline ecological calendars —records of how nature behaved over centuries, encoded in story and ceremony. When an Elder observes that a particular star rising no longer predicts the arrival of certain geese, that observation represents a departure from a pattern that may have held true for hundreds of years. The Climate Atlas of Canada integrates Indigenous knowledge observations alongside western climate data, recognizing that both contribute meaningfully to understanding ecological change.⁵
Keeping the Knowledge Alive
Language revitalization and land-based education programs are helping ensure this knowledge reaches the future. From youth astronomy nights on-reserve to the integration of Indigenous sky stories in school curricula, there is growing recognition that these knowledge systems belong to what comes next, not only what came before. As Canada grapples with accelerating ecological change, the quiet precision of thousands of years of skyward observation offers something no satellite can fully replicate: a continuous record of the relationship between the cosmos and a living land.
Blog by Rye Karonhiowanen Barberstock
Image Credit: Dustin Bowdige, Unsplash
References
[1] Marshall, L., Marshall, M., Harris, P., & Bartlett, C. (2010). Muin and the Seven Bird Hunters: A Mi’kmaw Night Sky Story. Cape Breton University Press. See also: Integrative Science, CBU. (2009). Background on the Making of the Muin Video for IYA2009. http://www.integrativescience.ca/uploads/activities/BACKGROUND-making-video-Muin-Seven-Bird-Hunters-IYA-binder.pdf
[2] Price, M.W. (Various). Anishinaabe celestial knowledge. Wikwemikong First Nation. Referenced in: Royal Astronomical Society of Canada Indigenous Astronomy resources.
[3] Royal Astronomical Society of Canada. (2020). Indigenous Skies planisphere series. RASC. https://www.rasc.ca/indigenous-skies
[4] Neilson, H. (2022, December 11). The night sky over Mi’kmaki: A Q&A with astronomer Hilding Neilson. CBC News. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/hilding-neilson-indigenizing-astronomy-1.6679072
[5] Climate Atlas of Canada. (2024). Prairie Climate Centre, University of Winnipeg. https://climateatlas.ca/
The post Night Skies and Shifting Stars: How Indigenous Celestial Knowledge Tracks a Changing Climate appeared first on Indigenous Climate Hub.
https://indigenousclimatehub.ca/2026/04/night-skies-and-shifting-stars-how-indigenous-celestial-knowledge-tracks-a-changing-climate/
Climate Change
World ‘will not see significant return to coal’ in 2026 – despite Iran crisis
A much-discussed “return to coal” by some countries in the wake of the Iran war is likely to be far more limited than thought, amounting to a global rise of no more than 1.8% in coal power output this year.
The new analysis by thinktank Ember, shared exclusively with Carbon Brief, is a “worst-case” scenario and the reality could be even lower.
Separate data shows that, to date, there has been no “return to coal” in 2026.
While some countries, such as Japan, Pakistan and the Philippines, have responded to disrupted gas supplies with plans to increase their coal use, the new analysis shows that these actions will likely result in a “small rise” at most.
In fact, the decline of coal power in some countries and the potential for global electricity demand growth to slow down could mean coal generation continues falling this year.
Experts tell Carbon Brief that “the big story isn’t about a coal comeback” and any increase in coal use is “merely masking a longer-term structural decline”.
Instead, they say clean-energy projects are emerging as more appealing investments during the fossil-fuel driven energy crisis.
‘Return to coal’
The conflict following the US-Israeli attacks on Iran has disrupted global gas supplies, particularly after Iran blocked the strait of Hormuz, a key chokepoint in the Persian Gulf.
A fifth of the world’s liquified natural gas (LNG) is normally shipped through this region, mainly supplying Asian countries. The blockage in this supply route means there is now less gas available and the remaining supplies are more expensive.
(Note that while the strait usually carries a fifth of LNG trade, this amounts to a much smaller share of global gas supplies overall, with most gas being moved via pipelines.)
With gas supplies constrained and prices remaining well above pre-conflict levels, at least eight countries in Asia and Europe have announced plans to increase their coal-fired electricity generation, or to review or delay plans to phase out coal power.
These nations include Japan, South Korea, Bangladesh, the Philippines, Thailand, Pakistan, Germany and Italy. Many of these nations are major users of coal power.
Such announcements have triggered a wave of reporting by global media outlets and analysts about a “return to coal”. Some have lamented a trend that is “incompatible with climate imperatives”, while others have even framed this as a positive development that illustrates coal’s return “from the dead”.
This mirrors a trend seen after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, which many commentators said would lead to a surge in European coal use, due to disrupted gas supplies from Russia.
In fact, despite a spike in 2022, EU coal use has returned to its “terminal decline” and reached a historic low in 2025.
Gas to coal
So far, the evidence suggests that there has been no return to coal in 2026.
Analysis by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air found that, in March, coal power generation remained flat globally and a fall in gas-fired generation was “offset by large increases in solar and wind power, rather than coal”.
However, as some governments only announced their coal plans towards the end of March, these figures may not capture their impact.
To get a sense of what that impact could be, Ember assessed the impact of coal policy changes and market responses across 16 countries, plus the 27 member states of the EU, which together accounted for 95% of total coal power generation in 2025.
For each country, the analysis considers a maximum “worst-case” scenario for switching from gas to coal power in the face of high gas prices.
It also considers the potential for any out-of-service coal power plants to return and for there to be delays in previously expected closures as a result of the response to the energy crisis.
Ember concludes that these factors could increase coal use by 175 terawatt hours (TWh), or 1.8%, in 2026 compared to 2025.
(This increase is measured relative to what would have happened without the energy crisis and does not account for wider trends in electricity generation from coal, which could see demand decline overall. Last year, coal power dropped by 63TWh, or 0.6%.)
Roughly three-quarters of the global effect in the Ember analysis is from potential gas-to-coal switching in China and the EU.
Other notable increases could come from switching in India and Indonesia and – to a lesser extent – from coal-policy shifts in South Korea, Bangladesh and Pakistan.
However, widely reported policy changes by Japan, Thailand and the Philippines are estimated to have very little, if any, impact on coal-power generation in 2026. The table below briefly summarises the potential for and reasoning behind the estimated increases in coal generation in each country in 2026.
Dave Jones, chief analyst at Ember, stresses that the 1.8% figure is an upper estimate, telling Carbon Brief:
“This would only happen if gas prices remained very high for the rest of the year and if there were sufficient coal stocks at power plants. The real risk of higher coal burn in 2026 comes not from coal units returning…but rather from pockets of gas-to-coal switching by existing power plants, primarily in China and the EU.”
Moreover, Jones says there is a real chance that global coal power could continue falling over the course of this year, partly driven by the energy crisis. He explains:
“If the energy crisis starts to dent electricity demand growth, coal generation – as well as gas generation – might actually be lower than before the crisis.”
‘Structural decline’
Energy experts tell Carbon Brief that Ember’s analysis aligns with their own assessments of the state of coal power.
Coal already had lower operation costs than gas before the energy crisis. This means that coal power plants were already being run at high levels in coal-dependent Asian economies that also use imported LNG to generate electricity. As such, they have limited potential to cut their need for LNG by further increasing coal generation.
Christine Shearer, who manages the global coal plant tracker at Global Energy Monitor, tells Carbon Brief that, in the EU, there is a shrinking pool of countries where gas-to-coal switching is possible:
“In Europe, coal fleets are smaller, older and increasingly uneconomic, while wind, solar and storage are becoming more competitive and widespread.”
In the context of the energy crisis, Italy has announced plans to delay its coal phaseout from 2025 to 2038. This plan, dismissed by the ECCO thinktank as “ineffective and costly”, would have minimal impact given coal only provides around 1% of the country’s power.
Notably, experts say that there is no evidence of the kind of structural “return to coal” that would spark concerns about countries’ climate goals. There have been no new coal plants announced in recent weeks.
Suzie Marshall, a policy advisor working on the “coal-to-clean transition” at E3G, tells Carbon Brief:
“We’re seeing possible delayed retirements and higher utilisation [of existing coal plants], as understandable emergency measures to keep the lights on, but not investment in new coal projects…Any short-term increase in coal consumption that we may see in response to this ongoing energy crisis is merely masking a longer-term structural decline.”
With cost-competitive solar, wind and batteries given a boost over fossil fuels by the energy crisis, there have been numerous announcements about new renewable energy projects since the start of war, including from India, Japan and Indonesia.
Shearer says that, rather than a “sustained coal comeback” in 2026, the Iran war “strengthens the case for renewables”. She says:
“If anything, a second gas shock in less than five years strengthens the case for renewables as the more secure long-term path.”
Jones says that Ember expects “little change in overall fossil generation, but with a small rise in coal and a fall in gas” in 2026. He adds:
“This would maximise gas-to-coal switching globally outside of the US, leaving no possibility for further switching in future years. Therefore, the big story isn’t about a coal comeback. It’s about how the relative economics of renewables, compared to fossil fuels, have been given a superboost by the crisis.”
The post World ‘will not see significant return to coal’ in 2026 – despite Iran crisis appeared first on Carbon Brief.
World ‘will not see significant return to coal’ in 2026 – despite Iran crisis
-
Climate Change9 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases9 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”
-
Renewable Energy6 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
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




