Connect with us

Published

on

During his three-year tenure as Japan’s prime minister, Fumio Kishida’s created the Asia Zero Emission Community (AZEC) to, in his words, “help Asia decarbonise together”.

But a year and a half after AZEC was formally launched, a new report by the international research organization Zero Carbon Analytics shows that one-third of agreements between Japan and AZEC member countries promote or prolong fossil fuels.

Of the 158 projects financed by Japan under this initiative, 56 include fossil fuel technologies such as natural gas, co-firing ammonia with fossil fuel in power plants, hydrogen produced with fossil fuels, carbon capture and storage (CCS), and e-fuels.

A report by Zero Carbon Analytics shows the projects signed under the AZEC initiative leave renewable energy on the sidelines and favour technologies that promote or prolong fossil fuels. (Photo: Zero Carbon Analytics)

The alleged climate benefits of these technologies are hotly disputed. While some studies have claimed gas is a less polluting fossil fuel than the coal used for electricity in much of Southeast Asia, a study published last week suggested that it can actually be more polluting, especially when it is imported across the sea in a liquid form called LNG.

Ammonia co-firing involves burning ammonia alongside coal in coal-fired power plants. While this reduces the amount of coal burned, critics note that the plants still burn mostly coal and that the co-firing can encourage governments to allow the coal-fired power plant to keep operating longer. Similarly, carbon capture and storage technology captures just some of a power plant’s emissions and can encourage the authorities to keep the plant open longer.

Ammonia, hydrogen and e-fuels are all fuels which can be made in more polluting ways using fossil fuels or cleaner ways with renewable electricity.

Louisiana communities are suffering from Japan-funded LNG exports

AZEC was launched in 2023 to advance climate cooperation in Asia, with Japan playing a central role. Kishida likened it to an Asian version of the European Coal and Steel Community – a predecessor to the European Union. Members include most countries in Southeast Asia and Australia.

But Japan’s fossil fuel investments – particularly gas projects – through AZEC are inconsistent with its pledge to stop overseas financing for unabated fossil fuels, experts told Climate Home News.

At their 2022 meeting in Berlin, G7 leaders all agreed to “end new direct public support for the international unabated fossil fuel energy sector by the end of 2022, except in limited circumstances clearly defined by each country that are consistent with a 1.5 °C warming limit and the goals of the Paris Agreement”.

Report author Amy Kong said: “Relying on these technologies is a slower and more expensive path to decarbonisation for the region, and risks derailing national power sector emissions targets set out in the International Energy Agency’s 2050 net zero scenario.”

Shigeru Ishiba, Japan’s recently appointed prime minister, has suggested the country will prioritise regional cooperation and has argued in favour of renewable energy. However, there is still little information on the future of AZEC under his new government.

Zero emissions community

Japan’s goal with the AZEC initiative was to invest public funds from its climate transition bonds to “create a huge new decarbonisation market in Asia”, former PM Kishida said during the community’s launch.

Through AZEC, member countries could apply for Japanese funding for energy projects. More than 150 projects have been approved between the Japanese government or government-backed institutions and their AZEC counterparts, the Zero Carbon Analytics report shows.

Initial investments were administered via a host of Japan’s government-backed institutions, including the environment and the trade ministries. Many of Japan’s private-sector firms have also partnered with these public entities. 

But according to Zero Carbon Analytics’ analysis, over one-third of those MOUs will promote fossil fuels or technologies that will prolong the use of fossil fuels. This threatens to lock-in coal and gas investments that may be difficult to reverse, the report says.

On the other hand, 54 MOUs signed under AZEC include renewables and electrification technologies, about a third of the total. These include solar PV power, wind, hydroelectric, geothermal, battery storage, electric vehicles, green hydrogen and ammonia, and waste management. But of these 54 agreements, only 11 include wind and solar.

UAE’s ALTÉRRA invests in fund backing fossil gas despite “climate solutions” pledge

‘False solutions’

Non-governmental organizations across Asia have raised concerns that AZEC primarily promotes fossil-based technologies. 

Ayumi Fukakusa, deputy executive director of Friends of the Earth Japan, told Climate Home that technologies like CCS, ammonia and biomass co-firing and LNG  “only delay climate actions and prolong the life of fossil fuel infrastructure”. She added that “AZEC will further lock-in Asian partners in massive emissions and doesn’t support real decarbonization”.

Hanna Hakko, Japan-based senior associate of the E3G think tank argued that Japan’s AZEC initiative would “serve the region far better by enabling the growth of renewable energy”, which would make the country more energy independent and contribute to long-term emissions reductions.

Wicaksono Gitawan is an Energy Transition Associate and Project Manager at Indonesian nonprofit CERAH. He called AZEC a form of “green colonialism.”

Japan’s push for ammonia co-firing has also been criticized by other governments, most prominently by Canadian, UK, and German ministers during the 2023 G7 meeting. 

‘Green colonialism’

Japan signed by far the most deals with the region’s most populous nation Indonesia, followed by Thailand and Malaysia. Historically, Japan has been the top source of infrastructure investment in Southeast Asia and spearheaded the creation of an Asian LNG market in the 1960s.

Japan’s government-backed financial institutions, such as the Japan Bank for International Cooperation, invested $93 billion in overseas oil and gas projects between 2013 and 2023. About $42 billion of that was in fossil fuels projects in Asiawhile just $9 billion was spent on clean energy over the same period.

Campaigners say the long-term financial benefits of AZEC are questionable. Fukakusa from Friends of Earth Japan said “most of the support made by the Japanese government in the past, especially for energy projects, are through loans,” which risk adding pressure on already debt-burdened economies in Southeast Asia.

According to a Wood Mackenzie analysis, the cost of electricity from utility-scale solar PV in Asia declined significantly over the last few years, while the costs of coal and gas generation increased. In 2023, renewables were 13% cheaper than conventional coal in Asia and are expected to be 32% cheaper by 2030.

(Reporting by Walter James, editing by Sebastian Rodriguez and Joe Lo)

The post Japan backs fossil fuels in Southeast Asian “zero emission” initiative appeared first on Climate Home News.

Japan backs fossil fuels in Southeast Asian “zero emission” initiative

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Pacific leaders rail at climate finance failures after pre-COP trip to Tuvalu

Published

on

After witnessing the effects of sea-level rise in the low-lying island nation of Tuvalu, Pacific leaders on Tuesday used the pre-COP31 summit in Fiji to voice their frustration at the difficulties they have experienced in tapping the global climate finance system.

A small group of government leaders, climate negotiators and heads of development banks and climate funds took a trip to Tuvalu’s Funafuti atoll on Tuesday morning, travelling by road over land just 10-20 metres wide to visit a project that is building barriers to keep the sea from the land.

They then flew to Fiji for the pre-COP summit, where several Pacific leaders said they had been let down by the insufficient quantity, bad terms and slow speed of international finance to help them adapt to a warming climate that is bringing higher oceans, drought and more powerful storms to their shores.

“Right now, our islands are like a canoe that has been rammed by a massive foreign ship. Our canoe is taking on water, we are sinking, and what is the world’s response?” asked Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr.

“They hand us a tiny patch to cover a gaping hole,” he continued, “but the bureaucratic process just to receive that patch is so slow that the water fills the hole while we wait. Then to rebuild the vessel so that we can survive the next storm, we are offered loans, debt that adds weight to a sinking boat packaged in red tape so thick we can barely access it. And while we wait, the water continues to fill.”

Palau’s president Surangel Whipps Junior on Monday (Photo: Australia-Pacific Partnership)

Pacific leaders and Australia called again on governments to invest in the new Pacific Resilience Facility (PRF), which has been designed by the Pacific Islands Forum and is seeking $500 million in investments by COP31 in November.

It has around $180 million so far, but did not receive additional pledges during the UN General Assembly in New York. The PRF aims to invest to generate annual returns which it can give to projects like water tanks for drought-hit communities.

Witnessing sea level rise

The annual pre-COP gathering is usually a low-profile technical meeting of climate negotiators. But this year, Australia – which is the president of negotiations at COP31 – partnered with the Pacific to introduce a “leaders segment” in an attempt to shine a spotlight on climate issues affecting the region.

Fourteen government leaders – from Australia, Timor-Leste, Mauritius and the Pacific – made the trip. They were joined by the European Union’s climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra, the heads of the Green Climate Fund and the Asian Development Bank and former Australian prime minister Julia Gillard.

World leaders and bank officials pose for a photo at Tuvalu’s narrowest point (Photo: Australia-Pacific Partnership for COP31)

On their return to Fiji, Solomon Islands Prime Minister Matthew Wale told the pre-COP leaders roundtable that the sea level rise they had witnessed was personal for him.

“Tuvalu was not just a site visit for me. I saw the story of my own saltwater people,” he said, adding that he, his daughter and his grandfather had lost their houses to sea level rise and that three-quarters of his electorate live on land that will be underwater in the next 30 years.

From the other side of the world, Antigua and Barbuda’s environment minister Michael Joseph said Tuvalu’s problems felt similar to those of his own Caribbean islands. “I saw vulnerable communities… just metres from the sea and people determined to remain on their land, preserve their culture and way of life,” he said.

Michael Joseph speaks to reporters at Tuvalu’s narrowest point (Photo: Australia-Pacific partnership)

A group of Fijian schoolchildren told the leaders it was not just sea level rise the Pacific struggles with but also heatwaves, droughts and storms, which worry their families and prevent them from learning.

Climate finance red-tape

Several Pacific leaders criticised the world’s leaders for not doing enough to combat climate change. Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown expressed disappointment that only two non-Pacific leaders had come to the pre-COP, a fact Australian media widely picked up on to label the event a flop and question its A$20 million (US$14m) price tag.

“We’ve heard a lot of numbers these last two days,” Brown said. “Let me share one of my own. More than 50 invitations extended to world leaders… to see for themselves what high emissions are doing to our nations and our ocean – an ocean that covers nearly one-third of the Earth’s surface.”

    He called for more climate finance for the Pacific, asking “if the world is prepared to assess our suitability for climate finance, why is it not equally prepared to scrutinise whether those responsible for delivering it are meeting their obligations?”

    Like Palau’s president Whipps, Naoero’s President David Adeang criticised the red tape that is hindering access to climate finance as well as a lack of money, complaining especially about “complicated procedures, heavy reporting, delays in approval and disbursement”.

    Adeang added that “the way we assess vulnerability matters”, adding that it should be measured by more than income. Naoero, for example, is classified by the World Bank as high-income, restricting which climate finance it is eligible for.

    Action plan to improve access

    On Thursday, the Australian government will present a statement and action plan on improving access to climate finance for small island developing states and least developed countries, which it is asking other countries and organisations to endorse.

    The statement addresses some of these Pacific complaints as well as acknowledging that progress has already been made on simplifying access by multilateral development banks and climate funds.

    In Fiji, Asian Development Bank head Masato Kanda said his institution is “tailoring our finance and operations to island realities” because “your children and their children should be able to grow old in the countries their ancestors have called home for millennia”.

    The executive director of the Green Climate Fund (GCF), Mafalda Duarte, said that the GCF-backed coastal adaptation project leaders visited in Tuvalu shows that “climate finance works” although – as the project took eight years to implement – “it takes time, and therefore we have no time to waste”.

    Part of the GCF-backed Tuvalu Coastal Adaptation Project (Photo: Australia-Pacific Partnership)

    Australia calls for optimism

    While Pacific leaders expressed concern that the world is set to blast past its agreed 1.5C warming limit, endangering their nations, Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called for “optimism”. “If people think there is no hope, then they will not strive to get the change that we need,” he said.

    He said that when he attended his first COP in 2005, Australia’s renewable energy target was 2%. Its target is now 82% renewable electricity by 2030.

    While Albanese promoted Australia’s success at electrifying homes and businesses and rolling out renewables, he has been criticised by climate campaigners for extending the production of fossil fuels, including coal – largely for export.

    Climate campaigners criticise Australia’s fossil fuel subsidies on the grounds of the Sheraton hotel on October 06, 2026 in Nadi, Fiji. (Photo by Hilary Wardhaugh/Getty Images)

    France’s Minister for Ecological Transition Monique Barbut defended the European Union’s climate action at the pre-COP meeting. She said the continent was heating up and reducing emissions faster and providing more climate finance than anywhere else in the world.

    “It is time for all major emitters to step up and do their fair share” on climate finance, she said. Most developing countries with large emissions have fiercely resisted joining the club of climate finance donors, arguing they have played a disproportionately small historic role in causing climate change.

    Barbut, as well as Palau’s president Whipps, called for the next flagship scientific assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to be finished by COP33 in 2028, in time to inform the next global stocktake of national climate action.

    This timeline has been opposed by countries like India, Saudi Arabia and China, who argue it would put an unfair burden on developing countries. Barbut said countries should “support the work of the IPCC rather than sabotage its calendar”.

    Barbut said that governments should agree at COP31 to aim to raise the share of “clean electricity” in final energy consumption to 35% by 2035. The Turkish and Australian governments have pushed for this goal although without specifying that the electricity should be “clean”. Barbut added that COP31 should also agree to cut emissions of methane, a particularly potent greenhouse gas.

    The post Pacific leaders rail at climate finance failures after pre-COP trip to Tuvalu appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Pacific leaders rail at climate finance failures after pre-COP trip to Tuvalu

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Coal mines and hypocrisy must not be Australia’s COP31 legacy

    Published

    on

    Jacynta Fa’amau is a Pacific campaigner at global grassroots climate movement 350.org and a secretariat member of Pacific Climate Warriors.

    The first thing that struck me was the sheer size of Queensland’s Saraji coal mine. Standing at the edge of the enormous pit, my brain scrambled for words as I scanned the earth’s open wound – a whole island could probably fit inside it.

    Looking down, I noticed footprints of an emu and a koala, pressed and dried in what was once a puddle – signs of how drought had driven animals in desperate search of water, so dangerously close to the coal trucks and heavy machinery ahead.

    Earlier this year, I joined a small group of Pacific Islanders on a journey through the Bowen Basin to learn from First Nations communities battling Australia’s mammoth coal industry. Of the more than 40 coal mines operating in the area, BHP & Mitsubishi Alliance’s Saraji mine is one of the largest. So it came as a painful shock to us when in August, the Australian government approved the mine’s extension just months after our visit.

      Witnessing coal extraction is devastating. It is bad enough to see what pillaging tonnes of coal can do to a mine’s immediate surroundings: dry creek beds, dwindling wildlife, denuded land. But to know that this coal will be shipped across the ocean, bring air pollution, and eventually lead to the destruction of Pacific islands thousands of miles away is another kind of heartbreak.

      Rising ocean waters

      I’m an Australian-born Samoan. In 2002, I visited my family home for the first time. My father took me to the rural community where generations of my family were raised. He did not have the words to describe how much has changed since rising ocean waters had taken away almost a third of the beach.

      I learned of how we had to relocate my great‑great‑grandparents’ grave to higher ground twice in the last 15 years. Of how my cousins have to paddle out further to sea to catch fish, since warmer waters have destroyed much of the reef. Of how the ocean crashes so close to my uncle’s home that he had to build a new house further away.

      A climate activist protesting the drilling of new coal seam gas wells holds a sign during a demonstration outside Origin Energy Ltd’s Annual General Meeting in Sydney, Australia, October 15, 2025. REUTERS/Hollie Adams

      A climate activist protesting the drilling of new coal seam gas wells holds a sign during a demonstration outside Origin Energy Ltd’s Annual General Meeting in Sydney, Australia, October 15, 2025. REUTERS/Hollie Adams

      We saw reflections of our own climate destruction in the Pacific when we shared these stories with our First Nations relatives at the edge of the Saraji mine. Murrawah Johnson and Teila Watson, both Birri Gubba and Gangulu women, made clear connections between their struggles and ours. “We don’t get to inherit our land and we don’t get to inherit our traditional roles. We are fighting a war on extinction,” Murrawah said.

      Coal extraction devastated their lands and cultures – totems have disappeared, fresh water has become scarce – while the effects of using it have devastated ours. “King tide, cyclones, all the violence that has been enacted on your country and people is because of the violence that has been allowed here, to us and our country,” Teila said.

      Wearing the mantle of climate leadership

      This week, Australia is assuming the mantle of climate leadership as co-president and head of negotiations of this year’s UN Climate Change Conference, COP31. It will lead on deliberating the summit’s priorities as world leaders and climate negotiators descend on Fiji and Tuvalu for the pre-COP meetings.

      Ironically, just days before the pre-COP began, the New South Wales Independent Planning Commission approved the