Nations are gathering in Baku, Azerbaijan, for the latest round of UN climate talks, where they will be tasked with setting a target for channelling climate finance into developing countries.
Intense discussions around this contentious topic are set to dominate at COP29.
Nations are divided over who should provide money, how much there should be and what form that support should take.
But this is just one part of the negotiations.
As ever, diplomats and ministers will have a packed agenda that will see them discuss the finer points of climate adaptation, carbon markets and scaling up emissions reductions, among many other issues.
There will also be debate over how best to carry forward the outcomes of last year’s COP28, including a global agreement to “transition away from fossil fuels”.
This will come as nations face a deadline to launch new climate plans under the Paris Agreement.
Carbon Brief has conducted its annual assessment of priority issues for various parties, compiled into the interactive table below. This is based on submissions to the UN, public statements and wider research conducted by Carbon Brief.
The first column shows the countries and UN negotiating blocs, the second column shows the topics up for debate and the third column indicates specific issues within those topics.
The final column indicates the position that each grouping is likely to take on each particular issue at the summit. This ranges from “high priority” – meaning the grouping is likely to be strongly pushing the issue – to “red line”, which means the grouping is likely to oppose this issue and show no room for compromise.
This is a “living document” that will be updated during the course of COP29. Please get in touch if you would like to offer additions to the table, by emailing policy@carbonbrief.org.
Explanations of the overarching issues and jargon-filled language that permeates the talks can be found below the interactive table.
Finance
The biggest issue at COP29 will be the “new collective quantified goal” (NCQG) for climate finance. Nations have been deadlocked for months in discussions over the details of this target, which must be agreed this year.
This is set to replace the existing target – agreed in 2009 – for developed countries to provide $100bn annually from 2020 to developing countries, in order to help them cut emissions and prepare for climate change.
Following this initial target, when the 2015 Paris Agreement was decided, nations also committed to scaling up climate finance provisions for developing countries “from a floor of $100bn” from 2025.
Multiple assessments have concluded that developing countries will need support to invest many trillions of dollars in the coming years in order to achieve their climate commitments.
Many developing countries have suggested a target in the region of $1tn a year or more, but developed countries – who have so far been responsible for providing climate finance – have been hesitant to suggest any numbers.
Yet the number, or “quantum”, attached to the target is just one of the issues at stake. Negotiators at COP29 must also reach a decision on who is responsible for providing climate finance, where it should come from and how it should be defined.
Broadly speaking, developing countries would like to see the money coming largely from public funds provided by developed countries. Meanwhile, developed countries would like to see wealthy, emerging economies share some of the burden, as well as a greater emphasis on other sources, such as private investment and development bank reforms.
(For more information about the different issues at stake in the NCQG negotiations, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth Q&A on the topic.)
Article 6
Another issue that the COP29 presidency has highlighted as one of its “main priorities” is the full launch of Article 6 carbon markets.
This includes the full “operationalisation” of both direct country-to-country trading under Article 6.2 and an international carbon market under Article 6.4, known as the “Paris crediting mechanism”.
This area has been unresolved for years and discussions at COP28 that sought to sort out outstanding technical issues ended with a lack of agreement.
This failure means that, for example, it has been unclear what kinds of projects could generate credits to trade under the Article 6.2 and 6.4 systems.
There was movement on some of the minor issues under Article 6 at the climate talks in Bonn earlier this year, but much remains to be decided at COP29.
Outstanding topics include whether or not parties can reserve the right to revoke authorisation of credits they have issued, as well as how confidential parties can be about trades they make with other countries.
Ahead of COP29, the Article 6.4 supervisory body agreed on a mandatory “sustainable development tool”, as well as on two key standards for projects that want to generate carbon credits for sale under the new market.
The first standard is on methodologies for calculating how many credits each carbon-cutting project will be able generate, while the second is on what counts as “carbon removal” and how to deal with reversals – for instance, when a reforested area is lost to wildfire.
The way in which the supervisory body adopted these standards was somewhat controversial and may or may not be approved at COP29.
While parties at COP29 will still be able to raise issues with the package produced, this could make the path to an outcome at the summit more streamlined.
Global stocktake and mitigation
Following COP28, parties have clashed over how to carry forward the outcomes from the summit, including its headline-grabbing call for all countries to contribute to “transitioning away from fossil fuels” and reaching global net-zero by 2050.
This pledge emerged from the “global stocktake”, which also included contributing to tripling renewable energy capacity and doubling the rate of energy efficiency improvements globally by 2030.
Countries were asked to continue discussions under the “UAE dialogue on implementing the global stocktake outcomes”.
However, there has been disagreement over what this dialogue should cover. Developed countries and small islands are among those seeking to include a focus on efforts to cut emissions, as well as all the other stocktake outcomes.
For example, the EU says the dialogue should “keep track of…implementation” across all stocktake issues, including mitigation, finance, adaptation and so on.
The EU wants the global stocktake outcomes to be incorporated into “all relevant work programmes and constituted bodies”, including in particular the ongoing “mitigation ambition and implementation work programme” (MWP).
This comes as nations are expected to launch new climate plans – known as “nationally determined contributions” (NDCs) – by February next year.
The stocktake “encouraged” countries to ensure that this new round of NDCs is “aligned” with the Paris Agreement’s stretch target of limiting global warming to 1.5C – although the meaning of “aligned” is unclear
Yet some developing nations, including the Like-Minded Developing Countries (LMDC) groups – which includes China, Saudi Arabia and India – argue that the UAE dialogue should be “solely focused on finance”.
Moreover, they argue there is “no mandate for any activities which ‘take stock’ of progress of the implementation of the Paris Agreement” outside of the five-yearly stocktake process.
Adaptation
At COP28, countries agreed on a “framework” to guide countries’ adaptation actions under the “global goal on adaptation”. As part of this, they set up a work programme to develop a set of universal “indicators” that can be used to track countries’ progress on adaptation.
Negotiators will continue this work programme at COP29, following slow progress at the earlier talks in Bonn back in June.
Climate finance has been a constant issue in adaptation negotiations. Developing countries frequently argue that any discussion of the topic must involve money, due to the shortfall in funding for adaptation projects.
Negotiators have also disagreed over the adaptation indicators themselves and which organisations should be charged with “mapping” them.
Meanwhile, following guidance from the global stocktake, nations must also have national adaptation plans in place by 2025, so they are ready to implement them by 2030.
Discussions will continue around this topic including, again, questions of providing the necessary finance to support these plans.
Loss and damage
The long-anticipated loss-and-damage fund was officially launched at COP28, in what was widely seen as a diplomatic triumph for the United Arab Emirates presidency.
So far, the fund has depended on the generosity of donors to fill it, as nations are not obliged to do so.
Many countries have pledged money for the fund, but these amounts are tiny compared to the amount of money developing countries need to respond to climate-driven disasters.
Loss and damage will not be as high profile at COP29 as it has been at recent UN climate summits. However, there will likely still be a push from developing countries to provide more funds for it, including a separate sub-goal under the NCQG.
The post Interactive: Who wants what at the COP29 climate change summit appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Interactive: Who wants what at the COP29 climate change summit
Climate Change
DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report
Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.
This week
Blazing heat hits Europe
FANNING THE FLAMES: Wildfires “fanned by a heatwave and strong winds” caused havoc across southern Europe, Reuters reported. It added: “Fire has affected nearly 440,000 hectares (1,700 square miles) in the eurozone so far in 2025, double the average for the same period of the year since 2006.” Extreme heat is “breaking temperature records across Europe”, the Guardian said, with several countries reporting readings of around 40C.
HUMAN TOLL: At least three people have died in the wildfires erupting across Spain, Turkey and Albania, France24 said, adding that the fires have “displaced thousands in Greece and Albania”. Le Monde reported that a child in Italy “died of heatstroke”, while thousands were evacuated from Spain and firefighters “battled three large wildfires” in Portugal.
UK WILDFIRE RISK: The UK saw temperatures as high as 33.4C this week as England “entered its fourth heatwave”, BBC News said. The high heat is causing “nationally significant” water shortfalls, it added, “hitting farms, damaging wildlife and increasing wildfires”. The Daily Mirror noted that these conditions “could last until mid-autumn”. Scientists warn the UK faces possible “firewaves” due to climate change, BBC News also reported.
Around the world
- GRID PRESSURES: Iraq suffered a “near nationwide blackout” as elevated power demand – due to extreme temperatures of around 50C – triggered a transmission line failure, Bloomberg reported.
- ‘DIRE’ DOWN UNDER: The Australian government is keeping a climate risk assessment that contains “dire” implications for the continent “under wraps”, the Australian Financial Review said.
- EXTREME RAINFALL: Mexico City is “seeing one of its heaviest rainy seasons in years”, the Washington Post said. Downpours in the Japanese island of Kyushu “caused flooding and mudslides”, according to Politico. In Kashmir, flash floods killed 56 and left “scores missing”, the Associated Press said.
- SOUTH-SOUTH COOPERATION: China and Brazil agreed to “ensure the success” of COP30 in a recent phone call, Chinese state news agency Xinhua reported.
- PLASTIC ‘DEADLOCK’: Talks on a plastic pollution treaty have failed again at a summit in Geneva, according to the Guardian, with countries “deadlocked” on whether it should include “curbs on production and toxic chemicals”.
15
The number of times by which the most ethnically-diverse areas in England are more likely to experience extreme heat than its “least diverse” areas, according to new analysis by Carbon Brief.
Latest climate research
- As many as 13 minerals critical for low-carbon energy may face shortages under 2C pathways | Nature Climate Change
- A “scoping review” examined the impact of climate change on poor sexual and reproductive health and rights in sub-Saharan Africa | PLOS One
- A UK university cut the carbon footprint of its weekly canteen menu by 31% “without students noticing” | Nature Food
(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)
Captured
Factchecking Trump’s climate report
A report commissioned by the US government to justify rolling back climate regulations contains “at least 100 false or misleading statements”, according to a Carbon Brief factcheck involving dozens of leading climate scientists. The report, compiled in two months by five hand-picked researchers, inaccurately claims that “CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed” and misleadingly states that “excessively aggressive [emissions] mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial”80
Spotlight
Does Xi Jinping care about climate change?
This week, Carbon Brief unpacks new research on Chinese president Xi Jinping’s policy priorities.
On this day in 2005, Xi Jinping, a local official in eastern China, made an unplanned speech when touring a small village – a rare occurrence in China’s highly-choreographed political culture.
In it, he observed that “lucid waters and lush mountains are mountains of silver and gold” – that is, the environment cannot be sacrificed for the sake of growth.
(The full text of the speech is not available, although Xi discussed the concept in a brief newspaper column – see below – a few days later.)
In a time where most government officials were laser-focused on delivering economic growth, this message was highly unusual.
Forward-thinking on environment
As a local official in the early 2000s, Xi endorsed the concept of “green GDP”, which integrates the value of natural resources and the environment into GDP calculations.
He also penned a regular newspaper column, 22 of which discussed environmental protection – although “climate change” was never mentioned.
This focus carried over to China’s national agenda when Xi became president.
New research from the Asia Society Policy Institute tracked policies in which Xi is reported by state media to have “personally” taken action.
It found that environmental protection is one of six topics in which he is often said to have directly steered policymaking.
Such policies include guidelines to build a “Beautiful China”, the creation of an environmental protection inspection team and the “three-north shelterbelt” afforestation programme.
“It’s important to know what Xi’s priorities are because the top leader wields outsized influence in the Chinese political system,” Neil Thomas, Asia Society Policy Institute fellow and report co-author, told Carbon Brief.
Local policymakers are “more likely” to invest resources in addressing policies they know have Xi’s attention, to increase their chances for promotion, he added.
What about climate and energy?
However, the research noted, climate and energy policies have not been publicised as bearing Xi’s personal touch.
“I think Xi prioritises environmental protection more than climate change because reducing pollution is an issue of social stability,” Thomas said, noting that “smoggy skies and polluted rivers” were more visible and more likely to trigger civil society pushback than gradual temperature increases.
The paper also said topics might not be linked to Xi personally when they are “too technical” or “politically sensitive”.
For example, Xi’s landmark decision for China to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060 is widely reported as having only been made after climate modelling – facilitated by former climate envoy Xie Zhenhua – showed that this goal was achievable.
Prior to this, Xi had never spoken publicly about carbon neutrality.
Prof Alex Wang, a University of California, Los Angeles professor of law not involved in the research, noted that emphasising Xi’s personal attention may signal “top” political priorities, but not necessarily Xi’s “personal interests”.
By not emphasising climate, he said, Xi may be trying to avoid “pushing the system to overprioritise climate to the exclusion of the other priorities”.
There are other ways to know where climate ranks on the policy agenda, Thomas noted:
“Climate watchers should look at what Xi says, what Xi does and what policies Xi authorises in the name of the ‘central committee’. Is Xi talking more about climate? Is Xi establishing institutions and convening meetings that focus on climate? Is climate becoming a more prominent theme in top-level documents?”
Watch, read, listen
TRUMP EFFECT: The Columbia Energy Exchange podcast examined how pressure from US tariffs could affect India’s clean energy transition.
NAMIBIAN ‘DESTRUCTION’: The National Observer investigated the failure to address “human rights abuses and environmental destruction” claims against a Canadian oil company in Namibia.
‘RED AI’: The Network for the Digital Economy and the Environment studied the state of current research on “Red AI”, or the “negative environmental implications of AI”.
Coming up
- 17 August: Bolivian general elections
- 18-29 August: Preparatory talks on the entry into force of the “High Seas Treaty”, New York
- 18-22 August: Y20 Summit, Johannesburg
- 21 August: Advancing the “Africa clean air programme” through Africa-Asia collaboration, Yokohama
Pick of the jobs
- Lancaster Environment Centre, senior research associate: JUST Centre | Salary: £39,355-£45,413. Location: Lancaster, UK
- Environmental Justice Foundation, communications and media officer, Francophone Africa | Salary: XOF600,000-XOF800,000. Location: Dakar, Senegal
- Politico, energy & climate editor | Salary: Unknown. Location: Brussels, Belgium
- EnviroCatalysts, meteorologist | Salary: Unknown. Location: New Delhi, India
DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
The post DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report appeared first on Carbon Brief.
DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report
Climate Change
New York Already Denied Permits to These Gas Pipelines. Under Trump, They Could Get Greenlit
The specter of a “gas-for-wind” compromise between the governor and the White House is drawing the ire of residents as a deadline looms.
Hundreds of New Yorkers rallied against new natural gas pipelines in their state as a deadline loomed for the public to comment on a revived proposal to expand the gas pipeline that supplies downstate New York.
New York Already Denied Permits to These Gas Pipelines. Under Trump, They Could Get Greenlit
A “critical assessment” report commissioned by the Trump administration to justify a rollback of US climate regulations contains at least 100 false or misleading statements, according to a Carbon Brief factcheck involving dozens of leading climate scientists.
The report – “A critical review of impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on the US climate” – was published by the US Department of Energy (DoE) on 23 July, just days before the government laid out plans to revoke a scientific finding used as the legal basis for emissions regulation.
The executive summary of the controversial report inaccurately claims that “CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed”.
It also states misleadingly that “excessively aggressive [emissions] mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial”.
Compiled in just two months by five “independent” researchers hand-selected by the climate-sceptic US secretary of energy Chris Wright, the document has sparked fierce criticism from climate scientists, who have pointed to factual errors, misrepresentation of research, messy citations and the cherry-picking of data.
Experts have also noted the authors’ track record of promoting views at odds with the mainstream understanding of climate science.
Wright’s department claims the report – which is currently open to public comment as part of a 30-day review – underwent an “internal peer-review period amongst [the] DoE’s scientific research community”.
The report is designed to provide a scientific underpinning to one flank of the Trump administration’s plans to rescind a finding that serves as the legal prerequisite for federal emissions regulation. (The second flank is about legal authority to regulate emissions.)
The “endangerment finding” – enacted by the Obama administration in 2009 – states that six greenhouse gases are contributing to the net-negative impacts of climate change and, thus, put the public in danger.
In a press release on 29 July, the US Environmental Protection Agency said “updated studies and information” set out in the new report would “challenge the assumptions” of the 2009 finding.
Carbon Brief asked a wide range of climate scientists, including those cited in the “critical review” itself, to factcheck the report’s various claims and statements.
The post Factcheck: Trump’s climate report includes more than 100 false or misleading claims appeared first on Carbon Brief.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-trumps-climate-report-includes-more-than-100-false-or-misleading-claims/
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year 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 Change1 year 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”
-
Carbon Footprint1 year agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Why airlines are perfect targets for anti-greenwashing legal action
-
Renewable Energy2 months ago
US Grid Strain, Possible Allete Sale
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Some firms unaware of England’s new single-use plastic ban