- Formal negotiations
- Finance
- Global review
- Global report
- Digital sequence information
- Harmful subsidies
- Marine biodiversity
- Planning, monitoring, reporting and review
- Article 8(j) implementation
- Biodiversity and climate change
- Links with other bodies
- Around the COP
- Armenian presidency
- Protests
- Lobbying and influence
- Carbon and biodiversity markets
Mark Lutes is senior advisor for global climate policy at WWF. He specialises in UNFCCC climate negotiations, shipping decarbonisation and carbon finance.
If all goes well, on April 11, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) will announce that governments have reached a deal to put the global shipping sector on course to net-zero emissions by 2050. Countries must not miss this opportunity to secure this landmark agreement.
Despite the shipping business accounting for around 3% of global emissions, the Paris Agreement on climate change does not contain mechanisms to control planet-heating emissions from shipping or aviation. So this deal has the potential to be a significant moment that finally aligns this critical industry with global climate targets. It would in fact be even stronger than the largely voluntary Paris accord, with mandatory enforcement of targets.
Final steps for global shipping decarbonisation
In July 2023, the IMO reached agreement on a substantially strengthened greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions strategy that contained the targets the IMO is now discussing how to achieve. These included 20% emission reductions from 2008 levels by 2030 – but striving for 30% – and achieving net-zero emissions “by or around, i.e. close to” 2050.
If countries agree on measures to achieve these targets at talks next week, it will require shipping companies to transition to using zero or near-zero fuels or alternative power sources over the next 25 years – essentially a fossil fuel phase-out in the sector. This is both necessary and possible, bringing both environmental benefits and long-term certainty and sustainability to the industry.
Fossil fuel nations to see value of their economies shrink under new UN-agreed measure
The IMO strategy also calls for shipping companies to strive for 10% zero or near-zero emissions fuels and energy sources for ships by 2030. This wording is important because it excludes liquefied natural gas (LNG) which proponents hail as a ‘transition fuel’ but has modest emission reductions at best and a risk of lock-in.
Energy efficiency measures are also a key part of the proposed strategy. The implementation of a Carbon Intensity Indicator has begun but is now undergoing a review. Successful energy efficiency measures are vital for reducing energy demand and also delivering important environmental co-benefits, including lower speeds which reduce underwater noise and whale strikes.
However, the most important measures for meeting the sector’s net zero targets relate to the energy that powers the ships. This is why negotiations have been focused so far on two measures: a Global Fuel Standard and an economic measure such as a carbon price or levy.
A global fuel standard for ships
A Global Fuel Standard would set a target or limit on the amount of GHG emissions per unit of energy for fuels. There is broad agreement on the need for a standard, but many key technical details remain to be worked out. These details can determine whether the “striving” targets will be met, what fuels and energy sources are incentivised, and whether new fuels will be sustainable and whether full life-cycle (well-to-wake) emissions of fuels are taken into account.
A well-designed standard should provide strong incentives for the development and deployment of zero or near-zero fuels – principally e-fuels produced using renewable energy, and limit the use of LNG and biofuels with high life-cycle emissions. Strong environmental safeguards are also vital to ensure these new fuels do not result in deforestation and other negative land use impacts.
Financing the transition
The most politically challenging issue for negotiators has been the economic measure or carbon price for the shipping sector.
There is broad agreement that revenue is needed for two main purposes – first, to invest in new zero emission fuel sources, especially e-fuels produced using renewable electricity, and to close the price gap between these fuels and other more polluting fuels; and second, to ensure a just transition to a zero-emissions shipping sector, by helping those countries most affected by rising shipping prices resulting from higher-cost fuels, especially prices of food and other essential goods for remote islands and least developed countries. Some also want the funds to be used to support broader activities, like adapting to climate impacts.
The majority of countries participating in the talks, and many shipping sector bodies and environmental observer groups, have supported a broad-based carbon price on shipping emissions, although there are a wide range of views on the amount of the levy, ranging from around $18 to $150 per tonne of CO2e emissions. Other countries, especially some large developing economies that depend on shipping for exports of basic commodities, are strongly opposed to a universal levy, but are open to designing the fuel standard in a way that can generate some amount of revenue.
Agreement on financing mechanism is essential
Whatever the final design, it is vital that the agreed measures generate sufficient and predictable financing to ensure a just transition in the sector and to accelerate the production of zero and near-zero GHG emission fuels, especially e-fuels. Some form of levy is likely to be agreed as part of the Global Fuel Standard mechanism, if not as a stand-alone carbon price.
The IMO’s ability to reach an agreement by April 11 will likely hinge on a resolution of this contentious issue. Success here would not only be a step forward for shipping, but could also send a strong signal about the enduring power of multilateralism. This high-stakes negotiation comes at a very sensitive time for the international community with cooperation seemingly at a low ebb.
In this context, an agreement to decarbonise a key global sector would send a positive signal to countries now developing their national climate plans under the Paris Agreement, and to COP30 in November in Brazil, where key decisions must be made on the next steps for global efforts to combat climate change.
The post Landmark deal to put shipping on course for net-zero is in sight appeared first on Climate Home News.
Landmark deal to put shipping on course for net-zero is in sight
Continue Reading
Prepared by a coalition of nine Western Australian union, industry, conservation, and community organisations—including UnionsWA, the Conservation Council WA, and the Smart Energy Council—the WA Clean Energy, Jobs & Industry Plan provides a practical roadmap to transform Western Australia into a clean energy powerhouse while creating thousands of secure local jobs.
Western Australia stands at a pivotal crossroads: lead the global clean energy economy or watch investment, future industries, and secure jobs go elsewhere. The WA Clean Energy, Jobs & Industry Plan outlines a transformative blueprint to harness the state’s world-class solar and wind resources. Discover how legislated renewable targets, green iron manufacturing, and a dedicated regional training strategy can generate tens of thousands of local jobs, lower household bills, and build a resilient, net-zero future for all Western Australians.
WA needs a clear and forward-thinking plan if it is going to become a competitive renewable energy powerhouse and maintain its economic strength through the energy transition.
“Western Australians know a faster renewable energy transition will lower their household expenses and prevent harmful climate pollution. But the community also needs clear direction to ensure this transition will create jobs, lower costs and not cause undue environmental harm.
“Here, sectors representing a broad range of interests have laid the groundwork for those outcomes, clearly outlining what is needed to create a future for WA that is good for the environment, for the climate, for workers and for the economy.
Summary
The WA Clean Energy, Jobs & Industry Plan sets out a strategic roadmap to position Western Australia as a global clean energy superpower while creating thousands of secure local jobs.
The report establishes three overarching goals:
- Creating local employment.
- Maintaining industrial competitiveness.
- Lowering household energy costs
To realize this vision, the framework details actionable measures to follow on from the recent WA Government announcement of a 75% Renewable Energy Target by 2031 for the South West Interconnected System. This includes developing a statewide Renewable Energy Target, coordinating statewide workforce and training pipelines, strategically planning regional infrastructure to safeguard high-value biodiversity and cultural heritage, and ensuring equitable benefit-sharing through household electrification incentives and First Nations equity partnerships. Ultimately, the plan highlights that establishing clear policy and regulatory certainty will unlock lower energy bills, boost power reliability, and secure the state’s global competitiveness in emerging green commodity export markets.
Key Findings
- Statewide Renewable Energy Target and Emissions Reduction Targets: The report calls for a statewide RET and 1.5°C aligned emission reduction targets to remove policy risk, lower capital costs, and attract clean energy investment.
- Transformative Job Creation: Accelerating the transition offers massive employment prospects, including up to 8,800 solar and battery jobs by 2050, as well as 24,000 ongoing and 11,000 construction jobs in a commercial green iron industry.
- Industrial Electrification & Competitiveness: Requiring large gas users to adopt binding electrification timetables and providing concessional financing will protect existing energy-intensive manufacturers from rising energy costs and impending domestic gas shortfalls.
- Green Commodity Export Leadership: Western Australia can build new export markets in green iron, green ammonia, and offshore oil/gas decommissioning by constructing shared common-user infrastructure and setting dedicated Green Commodity Export Targets.
- Coordinated Workforce & Training Pipeline: To address critical skill shortages the plan recommends establishing a WA Clean Energy Jobs Plan 2050, three regional training hubs, and dedicated pathways for female and under-represented apprentices.
- Environmental Safeguards & Community Benefits: Fast-tracked development must be paired with State Planning Policies that avoid high-biodiversity and cultural heritage lands, mandate new data centres to run on additional renewable power, and deliver household electrification rebates and First Nations equity partnerships.
What you can do
WA has an opportunity to lead on sustainable, clean energy and associated industries. You can help by:
- Sending an email to Environment Minister Murray Watt and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, calling on them to reject Browse.
- Sharing this story to help more Australians understand what’s at stake.
- Encouraging your friends and family to take action.
Countries have completed the first “global review” of their progress towards reversing nature loss by 2030 at the COP17 biodiversity talks in Yerevan, Armenia.
The review “notes with deep concern” that, unless action is “rapidly accelerated”, the goal to reverse nature loss and meet a set of 23 targets by 2030 “will not be achieved”.
It “urges” countries to accelerate action, including by “increased ambition in addressing the gaps”.
Much of the discussions in Yerevan focused on how to raise the necessary funds to help developing countries protect nature.
Some major economies pushed to expand the range of nations that are expected to provide finance, with countries agreeing at the end of the two weeks of talks that non-donors that want to contribute can “signal interest” before COP18.
This came after developed countries failed to meet a target to significantly ramp up nature finance over the last few years.
It also came as a landmark fund agreed at COP16 in Colombia to pay communities for the genetic resources derived from nature stands nearly empty two years on.
The Yerevan talks marked the halfway point of the “Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework” (GBF), the “Paris Agreement for nature” first made in 2022 and due to be achieved by 2030.
During the nearly 12-hour-long final plenary, countries voted for Quito, Ecuador, to host the COP18 nature talks, which will be held in 2028.
Countries managed to sign off on all the major negotiation texts, marking a stark contrast to COP16, which ran so far over time that the Colombian presidency lost “quorum”, forcing talks to resume in Rome months later.
Below, Carbon Brief has detailed analysis of all of the key outcomes from COP17.
Formal negotiations
Finance
Finance, predictably, was at the heart of the discord and deadlock at the Yerevan talks.
At COP17, discussions on finance had to achieve several outcomes.
The first part – to take stock of biodiversity finance mobilised so far to meet the nature deal’s goals – fell under the global review.
As the global report noted, developed countries failed to meet their commitments to raise “at least $20bn a year by 2025” for nature. Delegates pointed to falling aid levels and a sharp 27% decline in environmental funding for the 2026-30 period.
The second part was to agree on how to mobilise resources for the next four years, to meet the GBF’s goals and targets.
Calls to “broaden the contributor base” of who pays to protect nature – and whether that should include emerging economies – became the most fraught element of the talks.
Eventually, countries agreed on what Switzerland described as a “super, mega-delicate” text. It hinged on major “political compromises”, with “no major winner or loser”, according to Kenya.
Per the decision, countries that want to be included on a list of developed country donors can “signal interest” through bilateral, confidential consultations before COP18 and every alternate COP after.
Finally, countries also agreed on criteria to shape and resource a new, permanent financial mechanism to protect nature after 2030.
However, this did not immediately take the form of a new fund under the COP that biodiverse countries have demanded since 2022, deferring the mechanism’s institutional structure to COP18.
Resource mobilisation discussions at the GBF’s halfway mark were supposed to agree on how to close the “biodiversity finance gap” and to “increase resources from all sources” to “at least” $200bn per year by 2030, as set out in target 19 of the GBF.
The talks were largely dominated by a push, led by the JUSCANZ bloc of developed countries, to “broaden the contributor base”. This could see emerging economies, such as Qatar, China, Saudi Arabia and India, being added to the list of countries that pay to protect nature.
Article 20 of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) states that developed countries “shall provide new and additional financial resources” to developing countries to meet the costs of implementing measures to protect nature.
