- 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
At the COP28 climate summit in Dubai, almost all the world’s countries agreed to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems. But, one year later at COP29, Namibia has been looking for oil and gas investments at its country pavilion in Azerbaijan’s capital Baku.
The state-run Namibia Investment Promotion and Development Board (NIPDB) organised side events with a focus on “producing the most sustainable barrel of crude oil” and another on “how to green Namibia via industrialisation and oil and gas value chain”.
The pavilion displayed its 2024-2025 investment opportunity catalogue which advocates for developing the country’s nascent oil and gas sector.
Namibia’s pavilion at COP29 (Photo: Vivian Chime)
In the foreword, the country’s minister of industrialisation and trade, Lucia Lipumbu, described the catalogue as being “reflective” of the southern African country’s “vision for the future”, adding that its economic potential has never been more promising, in light of major developments – “particularly in the oil and gas and renewable energy spaces”
Will GDP double?
In the oil and gas section of the catalogue, the country claims that current exploration for petroleum in four frontier basins – Namibe, Walvis, Lüderitz and Orange – will lead to a doubling of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) by 2040, if found to be commercially viable.
It also states that the country is partnering with Norwegian company BW Energy to develop the Kudu Gas fields, adding that the gas reserves “have the potential to transform Namibia into a net electricity exporter through gas-to-power production”.
Additionally, the government says that offshore oil exploration along its 1,600km-long coastline has seen a “significant uptick in interest”, with oil majors such as TotalEnergies, Shell, Galp and QatarEnergy actively pursuing interests along the coastline.
A wall display at Namibia’s pavilion at COP29 (Photo: Vivian Chime)
Vance Culbert, senior policy advisor in the energy program at the International Institute of Sustainable Development (IISD), said he doubted that Namibia’s GDP would double. The nature of investment deals requires “the payback of investments to the companies” – and thus will make it difficult for the country to accrue any short-term benefits, especially in the face of the transition, he said.
Mohamed Adow of Power Shift Africa holds similar views, telling Climate Home that while ‘increased GDP’ can be a tempting tagline, the reality behind that GDP number is that fossil fuels orient the economy toward extractive industries which privilege profit and foreign markets over delivering real prosperity and development for ordinary Namibians.
Resource curse
Furthermore, the Namibian government states in its investment catalogue that it is “cognisant of the potential pitfalls that are associated with discoveries of valuable natural resources”, adding that it has drawn lessons from the experiences of oil-producing countries and will effectively manage the new sector to ensure economic benefits for all Namibians.
Fadhel Kaboub, a senior advisor with Power Shift Africa, is doubtful that Namibia can succeed where others have failed. He said that if oil and gas were a source of development and prosperity, Nigeria and Angola “would be economic powerhouses delivering aid and development to their neighbours”.
Nigeria, a country of over 200 million people, continues to be energy poor despite having the second largest oil and gas reserve in Africa. The country has struggled to use its abundant natural resources to benefit its people and drive economic development, and is instead beset by poverty and corruption.
Coalition against fossil fuel subsidies expands but misses initial targets
The Niger Delta region of the country where most of the oil drilling takes place has suffered years of environmental degradation, and pollution to its waters and farmlands, leaving its people poor and facing health problems.
Kaboub said Namibia risks “falling into the same trap” – and this would have devastating impacts on the environment and people, bringing no economic development.
Ina-Maria Shikongo, a Namibian climate activist, said these impacts are already been felt. She said the drilling is affecting water bodies and threatening access to water for communities. She added that the seismic disturbance caused by the companies has also affected farming fields and cracking homes.
Shikongo, who said she fears the outcome of these activities, warned “this will end up impacting over a million people across four borders who rely on the Okavango water including Botswana, Zimbabwe and Zambia”.
Stranded assets
With the global call for a transition away from fossil fuels, experts warn that Namibia risks having useless stranded assets when oil markets shrink. “The rest of the world is decarbonising rapidly,” Kaboub told Climate Home, adding that demand for fossil fuels will decline in the next couple of decades.
New UN carbon market standards are a step change in protecting people and planet
Countries like Nigeria are beginning to see multinational oil companies like Shell decommission their onshore operations and selling off their business.
Shikongo worries that other countries are making strides at COP29 to advance their clean transition, but her country “brings more fossil fuel lobbyists to the conference to drive their oil and gas agenda”.
Karabo Mokgonyana, renewable energy campaigner at Power Shift Africa, said there is a need to sell the economic benefits of renewables to African leaders, adding that justifying the transition because of climate change will not work. She said “more convincing economic models” are necessary to get the buy-in of countries.
“No manna from heaven”
Kaboub and Adow suggested Namibia should use its critical minerals instead to leapfrog into the energy system of the future.
But Harsen Nyambe, the African Union Commission’s director of sustainable environment and blue economy, questioned this possibility. He said countries will not wait for “manna to fall from heaven” but will continue to use their available resources until an alternative is provided.
One major limitation is that investors see clean energy on the continent as risky – but if this perception changes, Africa can make the switch to clean energy, he added.
(Reporting by Vivian Chime, editing by Joe Lo)
The post Namibia uses COP29 climate summit to push for oil and gas investments appeared first on Climate Home News.
Namibia uses COP29 climate summit to push for oil and gas investments
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.