Grethel Aguilar is the Director General of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
Climate change is not just a crisis of rising temperatures—it is a crisis for humanity and nature alike. By failing to act on climate change, states are gravely undermining the human rights of vulnerable communities.
But apart from the devastating direct impacts, climate change also threatens nature, and consequently also the services that nature provides people with. Climate and nature are deeply interlinked, and these links cannot be overlooked in global action to address the climate crisis.
Today, we represented IUCN and we backed numerous other experts and organisations in arguing before the International Court of Justice in The Hague that countries have a binding legal responsibility to fight climate change. But uniquely, as the global authority on the state of nature, we also highlighted the impacts of climate change on the natural world – and the need to consider nature in climate action.
The climate crisis is also a biodiversity crisis. Climate change alters ecosystems in a myriad of ways, and at the same time the loss of nature is fuelling the extent and impact of climate change globally. One cannot be addressed successfully without the other.
As ecosystems shift and species are pushed to extremes, the natural world—on which we all depend—is under immense pressure. Yet, hope lies in recognizing the deep interconnection between nature and climate action. By restoring forests, protecting coral reefs, safeguarding soil health, and conserving vital habitats, we not only protect biodiversity but also strengthen nature’s ability to buffer us against climate impacts.
Big emitters accused of hiding behind climate treaties in international hearing
Today, we used our unique expertise to tell the court that nations need to take responsibility for climate change – but this cannot be realised if nature is overlooked.
As others like Vanuatu have argued, in failing to act on climate, states are undermining the human rights of vulnerable communities – particularly the right to life, health, housing and culture. By failing to reign in climate change, states are also undermining nature’s ability to provide communities with food, fisheries, productive farmland, and other services – impacting lives and livelihoods.
For millions—herders, farmers, fishers, and Indigenous peoples—nature is more than a resource; it is a lifeline. They will suffer the most from our inaction. Climate change is already affecting nature, and the impacts are escalating. For example, climate change and severe weather are a threat to 7,412 species (16%) on the IUCN Red List, including 19% of freshwater fishes and 44% of reef-building corals – two species groups that are integral to the lives of millions across the world.
Similarly, degraded land impacts 3.2 billion people, leaving communities more vulnerable to droughts that are increasing in severity and frequency – depriving them of the basic rights of access to food and water.
Over a billion people are estimated to benefit from coral reefs in some form, for instance, for food, income, and protection. As a Union that includes Indigenous peoples’ organisations as well as states and civil society, IUCN is well placed to speak out on this. This is an additional reason why action on climate must be a legal obligation for states, and why a failure to act should entail legal consequences.
The desertification (UNCCD) COP in Saudi Arabia just heard how up to 40% of the Earth’s land is degraded, impacting 3.2 billion people, including the world’s most vulnerable communities. These trends are compounded by biodiversity loss and declines in soil health as well as climate change, both of which contribute to the impacts of droughts – which are increasing in severity, frequency, and intensity. Some estimates suggesting that three quarters of the global population could be affected by 2050.
We know that action to limit climate change requires a just and inclusive transition to a low-carbon future via significant renewable energy development.
Here, too, climate and nature are connected. While a just and speedy transition to renewables is an absolute priority, biodiversity must also be considered in humans’ responses to climate change. For example, the energy transition entails changing land use – such as planting biofuels – and building energy infrastructure such as wind turbines and dams. Nature must be factored in and protected in the midst of these changes – when planning biofuel projects or energy infrastructure – to ensure that these responses do not impact ecosystems and species negatively.
Let us remember that the link between climate and nature is two-way – climate change threatens nature but failing to protect forests, grasslands, coral reefs, seagrass meadows and other ecosystems also worsens climate change, and leaves communities more vulnerable to its impacts. Nature is a crucial ally in the fight against the climate crisis, and we simply cannot afford to overlook it.
The post ICJ climate justice proceedings must recognise links between climate and nature appeared first on Climate Home News.
ICJ climate justice proceedings must recognise links between climate and nature
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.
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
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