Connect with us

Published

on

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

Continue Reading

Climate Change

When taps run dry in the Caribbean, it’s not enough to blame El Niño

Published

on

Amira Odeh Quiñones is a hydrologist and Caribbean organiser for the 350.org climate campaign group

El Niño, likely to be one of the strongest in modern history, has arrived on Caribbean shores.

Drought is slowly creeping up on our islands. But unlike the fiery wildfires ravaging parts of Europe, there’s no smoke signalling the damage being done, no sirens to warn of the danger. Only announcements from public health officials to stay indoors and remain hydrated — as if outdoor workers and farming communities have the luxury to heed such advice.

During El Niño, strong atmospheric winds alter rain patterns and trap heat across the Caribbean. But while we have experienced El Niño many times before, it has become very visible in recent years how climate change is making this natural phenomenon worse.

Across the Greater Antilles, temperatures are soaring past 38°C (100°F), with real-feel indexes reaching a gruelling 43°C in parts of Puerto Rico where I live. Cuba has it worse. Widespread power outages mean that methods for cooling down are unavailable for most of the day, leaving millions of vulnerable people at risk of heat stroke when temperatures hit 38°C.

Santa Marta coalition tested as co-chair Colombia turns back to fossil fuels

During the last strong drought a decade ago, I had water only two days a week in my home. Today, there are many families whose taps are about to run completely dry. Water authorities have already begun strict rationing in some municipalities, with more on the list scheduled for rationing if conditions don’t change.

Water rationing is far more than an inconvenience; it is an immediate health risk. This means thousands of people need to constantly haul heavy buckets up flights of stairs just so they could bathe, cook, stay hydrated – the basics of survival.

Heat causes health problems

Puerto Rico is home to roughly 300,000 elderly residents. Many live alone, isolated and without support. They risk severe physical injury when carrying heavy water containers, and are wont to suffer from silent heat exhaustion in unventilated rooms.

Furthermore, when water shortages force residents to store water in open household containers, it inadvertently creates breeding grounds for Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. Paired with scorching temperatures that tend to shorten the mosquito breeding cycle, the region is facing explosive outbreaks of dengue fever that endanger our most vulnerable: children and the elderly.

The economic fallout is equally devastating. Dry fields mean millions of dollars in lost crops, forcing small agricultural businesses to collapse, needing urgent government relief to survive. Extreme fuel shortages have already paralyzed Cuba’s agricultural sector, cutting food output by 60% – the El Niño dry spell threatens to decimate it.

At sea, warmer ocean waters fuel massive influxes of sargassum seaweed. Rotting sargassum chokes our beaches, destroying the local tourism industry that so many working families rely on. Tangled seaweed also damages nets and boat engines, slashing fish catches and driving up equipment costs for local fishers.

In the south of Puerto Rico, the coastal town of La Parguera is currently witnessing a historic amount of sargassum on its shores. This has halted most of the boating activity in the area, which is the seaside town’s main tourist draw and economic driver.

All over the Caribbean, from town halls to local group gatherings, the story I hear is always the same: constant headaches, lost work hours, failing health, and a sense that quality of life is silently being stolen. The compounding effects of heatwaves, drought, and marine destruction are exhausting our people, our islands.

Climate change to blame

Climate change makes each El Niño year hotter and more damaging. Higher baseline global temperatures increase the energy and moisture available for extreme weather. Latest projections show that El Niño may push the monthly global average temperature past 2°C of warming for the first time in early 2027. In the Caribbean islands, that will not just be breaking records – it’ll be breaking lives.

Recently, I had the opportunity to share a panel with climate scientists behind what is known as the field of “attribution science” – or the science that compares today’s climate conditions to what the Earth’s climate would be like without human activity, particularly burning fossil fuels. They’re unequivocal: it’s no longer a question of whether extreme weather is caused by climate change, it’s just a question of how much.

    Attribution science recently got a boost from the U.S.’ top scientific advisory body. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine recognized that researchers’ methods have advanced considerably in recent years, resulting in better assessments on how much extreme weather can be attributed to human-caused climate change. It noted that attribution findings could be relevant in some types of legal cases, including those seeking damages from oil companies for climate impacts.

    This crisis, which is already taking a heavy toll on our communities’ survival, needs real, urgent, and structural action that goes beyond aid. With similar droughts now gripping parts of Asia and Africa, we’re falling into the familiar narrative of treating the looming humanitarian crisis as if no one was to blame, as if it is being caused solely by a natural phenomenon we can’t control.

    It’s not. The world was already on fire before its regular visitor, El Niño, came. While we need humanitarian action, we need climate action too, in order to permanently put out the flames.

    The post When taps run dry in the Caribbean, it’s not enough to blame El Niño appeared first on Climate Home News.

    When taps run dry in the Caribbean, it’s not enough to blame El Niño

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Q&A: What is in China’s new five-year plan for climate change?

    Published

    on

    China has released a five-year plan dedicated to addressing climate change.

    The 15th five-year plan for a national response to climate change is the latest in a series to outline in-depth climate and energy targets for the 2026-2030 period.

    These include five-year plans for “building a Beautiful China”, developing a “new-type energy system” and developing renewable energy.

    There are also separate “action plans” for the 2026-2030 period, such as for peaking carbon emissions

    China has pledged to peak its emissions before 2030 and reach carbon neutrality before 2060.

    The new plan does not include any major new targets, instead consolidating and reaffirming existing policies.

    Nevertheless, it includes significant signals on key policy areas, such as non-carbon dioxide (CO2) greenhouse gases, global climate governance and carbon markets.

    Below, Carbon Brief examines some of the notable elements in the latest five-year plan and what it reveals about China’s policy direction through to 2030.

    What does the climate plan cover?

    The Ministry of Ecology and Environment (MEE) released the plan in late July, in unison with 18 other government departments. These include the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), China’s top economic planning agency, and the National Energy Administration.

    The document covers a range of topics, including CO2 emissions, other greenhouse gases (non-CO2 GHGs), carbon markets, carbon footprints, climate adaptation and international cooperation on climate change.

    For the first time at the five-year plan level, the plan creates a comprehensive target system covering all areas of climate policy, say officials in a MEE Q&A.

    They describe it as “the main policy instrument” for advancing China’s climate action during 2026-2030.

    China rarely issues high-level multi-year policies dedicated to “responding to climate change”. In 2014, the NDRC published a plan on the topic running through to 2020, but this was not linked to a five-year plan period.

    Qin Yan, principal analyst at ClearBlue Markets, tells Carbon Brief that the plan shows that China’s climate governance has reached “an unprecedented strategic level”.

    She adds that the plan creates an “all-encompassing target system” to support China’s Paris Agreement climate pledges for 2030 and 2035.

    In its 2030 pledge, China aimed to peak emissions “before 2030” and reduce carbon intensity – its emissions per unit of GDP – by more than 65% from 2005 levels.

    Last year, president Xi Jinping personally announced China’s 2035 pledge to cut China’s greenhouse gas emissions to 7-10% below peak levels by 2035, while “striving to do better”.

    The five-year plan marks a new phase in China’s climate policy, according to researchers at CIB Research, an economic research body affiliated with the Industrial Bank, whose largest shareholder is the Fujian provincial government.

    Their analysis adds that the plan represents a broad effort to strengthen China’s climate-governance system, implementation mechanisms and underlying capacity.

    Nevertheless, several headline targets and policies in the document simply reiterate already established plans.

    These include:

    • Cutting carbon intensity by 17% across the five years
    • Reducing carbon intensity per product in industries under China’s carbon market by 3%
    • Substituting fossil fuels with renewables
    • Strengthening climate adaptation
    • Supporting the “free flow” of cleantech

    What does the plan say about non-CO2 GHGs?

    The plan also goes into detail on China’s approach to non-CO2 GHGs. This includes reaffirming a target of an emissions “reduction capacity” from these gases totalling 30m tonnes of CO2 equivalent (MtCO2e) by 2030, although the baseline is unclear.

    The target previously appeared in the overarching five-year plan, as well as the plan for building a “Beautiful China”.

    The goal refers to emissions reductions, which can be realised through implementing current non-CO2 emissions reduction policies and projects, says Chen Meian, programme director and senior analyst at the Institute for Global Decarbonization Progress (iGDP). 

    She adds that it is “relatively achievable”, with sources including increasing the number of coal-mine methane utilisation projects.

    She points to an MEE explanatory note for a draft methodology under the China Certified Emission Reduction (CCER) scheme, China’s voluntary carbon-credit market. Chen says the note suggests that projects using ventilation air methane and coal-mine methane with concentrations below 8% alone could deliver around 20MtCO2e of reduction by 2030.

    The note states that, currently, such projects are estimated to be able to “generate annual emission reductions of approximately 4.5MtCO2e”.

    In addition, Chen says, measures targeting industrial nitrous oxide (N2O) and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) could help make up the remainder needed to meet the target.

    According to iGDP analysis of biennial reports submitted by China to the UNFCCC, China emitted around 14,000MtCO2e of GHGs in 2021, excluding land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF).

    Non-CO2 GHGs accounted for around 2,700MtCO2e, or 19%, of the total, the majority of which was methane, as shown in the figure below.

    Methane is China’s main source of non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions. Emissions by gas, MtCO2e. Stacked bar chart from 2005 to 2021 showing total emissions rising to over 2,700 MtCO2e. Methane consistently accounts for the largest share, followed by Nitrous Oxide and F-gases. Source: iGDP analysis of China’s first Biennial Transparency Report and fourth Biennial Update Report - (alt text generated by Google Gemini)
    iGDP analysis of China’s first Biennial Transparency Report and fourth Biennial Update Report.

    China’s plans to curb these super-pollutants in the five-year period include coal-mine methane utilisation projects, end-of-pipe destruction technologies for HFCs and guidance on the use of catalysts to reduce N2O emissions.

    The plan also calls for the recovery and replacement of sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) in power equipment.

    For Chen, the plan’s focus on SF6 control is particularly noteworthy. She says the gas is “finally receiving policy attention” and that proactive action is “timely and will help avoid future emissions growth” as China’s power system expands.

    What does the plan say about global climate governance?

    One of the plan’s clearest objectives for international cooperation is for China to play a more active role in global climate governance.

    By 2030, it says China should markedly increase its “influence, guiding power, shaping power and moral appeal” in this area.

    It says China’s climate action could also feed into the Global Governance Initiative, a policy initiative aimed at reforming the global governance system.

    China will also aim to “build a new narrative on climate governance”, it adds.

    Prof Thomas Hale, a professor in public policy at the University of Oxford’s Blavatnik School of Government, writes on LinkedIn that the plan “marks a major rhetorical shift” towards China being increasingly willing to “lead and shape” global climate action.

    Another clear focal point for international cooperation is in carbon markets.

    The plan calls for China to expand the global influence of its carbon market, such as through international rule-setting, cooperation on standards and by hosting the China Carbon Market Conference.

    Qin says China’s more active role in global carbon pricing is already evident in the launch of the open coalition on compliance carbon markets with the EU and Brazil. This coalition is expected to adopt a work plan at the China Carbon Market Conference in September.

    Qin also notes that China “could become the world’s largest [carbon] offset buyer” as its energy transition progresses.

    The country would, therefore, “benefit from helping shape global rules under the Article 6 framework [for carbon trading under the Paris Agreement]”, she adds.

    The post Q&A: What is in China’s new five-year plan for climate change? appeared first on Carbon Brief.

    Q&A: What is in China’s new five-year plan for climate change?
    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Quarter of countries still missing UN climate plans 18 months after deadline

    Published

    on

    About a quarter of the countries signed up to the Paris Agreement are still breaching its rules by failing to submit a new national climate plan, 18 months after the February 2025 deadline.

    Forty-five nations had not submitted a plan known as a nationally determined contribution (NDC), according to the Paris Agreement Implementation and Compliance Committee’s (PAICC) newly-published report of its 7-10 July 2026 meeting. One, Oman, has published it since the meeting.

    Twelve countries ignored the committee’s repeated attempts to find out why they had not yet produced a climate plan, the report said. They will be invited to the committee’s next meeting, from September 1-4, so it can identify the challenges and constraints they face.

    Members of the committee are divided, as they were at their last meeting, on whether to name those countries publicly and will debate the question again in September.

    The PAICC does not have any power to punish governments, as building these powers into the Paris Agreement was thought to be so controversial that it could have stopped some governments from joining, experts have previously told Climate Home News.

    A key requirement of the landmark 2015 Paris Agreement is that governments publish a more ambitious NDC every five years, setting targets to reduce their planet-heating emissions and outlining their policies to adapt to climate change, in order to meet the accord’s goals on limiting global warming and protecting people from its effects.

    The latest set – the third round of plans, with new targets for 2035 – was due in 2025.

    Some medium-sized emitters

    Countries without an updated NDC include Egypt, Vietnam, Argentina and the Phillippines, all of which rank among the world’s 40 largest greenhouse gas emitters. The rest of the countries are smaller, poorer nations, with many in Africa or the Caribbean.

    Some nations have argued that they cannot put together an NDC – which requires a significant amount of work in tracking emissions and consulting on how to curb them across the economy – because of exceptional circumstances. For example, a letter from a Sudanese official to the PAICC committee, seen by Climate Home News, says that the country’s civil war has led to the suspension of its NDC preparation.

      The US and Iran are not signed up to the Paris Agreement, although the US submitted a 2035 NDC under the Biden administration before Donald Trump pulled the US out of the UN climate accords.

      The committee also expressed concern that the UN’s NDC registry continued to label the climate plans of countries that are no longer party to the Paris Agreement as “active”, according to its report. The US submission has since been archived.

      Since the last PAICC meeting in March, ten countries have published NDCs. The committee did not name them but they include India, Algeria, Cameroon and Guyana.

      The post Quarter of countries still missing UN climate plans 18 months after deadline appeared first on Climate Home News.

      Quarter of countries still missing UN climate plans 18 months after deadline

      Continue Reading

      Trending

      Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com