Connect with us

Published

on

Tanzania, a fossil gas producer that led African nations at COP30, urged African ministers to position themselves against transitioning away from fossil fuels ahead of critical negotiations in the final week of the summit, according to a document seen by Climate Home News.

The recommendation was part of a four-page presentation dated November 15 – the halfway point of COP30 – and delivered by Tanzania’s lead negotiator during a briefing on the just transition work programme as calls for the inclusion of a fossil fuel roadmap in the conference’s main outcome were gathering speed.

The powerpoint advised African countries to maintain a position against transitioning away from fossil fuels, while also ensuring that a call for universal energy access was included in the text.

Richard Muyungi – who chaired the 54-strong African group of countries at COP30 – told Climate Home News on November 14 that the group had yet to coordinate their views on a potential fossil fuel transition roadmap, but would do so if developments at COP30 required it. He added that Africa should not be forced or pushed towards a trajectory that threatens to undermine its development agenda.

Nonetheless, two African countries publicly stated during COP30 that they supported a transition roadmap, suggesting that they did not agree with the approach proposed by the African Group. A formal group position was not declared openly during the summit.

Tanzania’s Richard Muyungi, AGN chair, and COP30 President André Correa do Lago speaking during a COP30 plenary. Photo: UN Climate Change – Kiara Worth

Tanzania’s Richard Muyungi, AGN chair, and COP30 President André Correa do Lago speaking during a COP30 plenary. Photo: UN Climate Change – Kiara Worth

“Pathetic” to tell Africa to transition

Explicit references to phasing out fossil fuels were axed from the final “Global Mutirão” decision in the Belém “political package”, following strong pushback from oil and gas-producing nations led by Gulf states. But questions remained over the role of African countries, with The Guardian suggesting that Tanzania’s Richard Muyungi, chair of the African Group of Negotiators (AGN), told a closed-door meeting that the continent’s 54 countries aligned with Arab Group nations on the issue.

Muyungi did not confirm this alignment publicly, telling Climate Home News that the AGN had not been consulted by the COP30 presidency on fossil fuels. He added that, as many African nations have only just started tapping their oil and gas reserves, “how do you tell them to transition away when they have just discovered it [fossil fuel]?”

The AGN chair stressed that what Africa needs is energy access for the over 600 million people who currently lack electricity and 900 million others without clean cooking. He added that it would “really be pathetic” if Africa were told by other countries to transition away from fossil fuels. “Ours is a transition away from wood and charcoal to electricity,” he said.

    Tanzania boasts vast gas reserves, some of which are expected to be auctioned off in a long-awaited new licensing round, and relies on the fossil fuel for over two-thirds of its electricity. Tanzania is also involved in the controversial 1,443-kilometer East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), which aims to carry crude oil extracted from fields under development near Uganda’s Lake Albert to the Tanga port in Tanzania for export to international markets.

    Muyungi said the continent could get cheap electricity from gas and “nobody can tell us to transition away from gas because this is our survival now”.

    “Our economy will not move if somebody tells us to move away from gas because it is part of the fossil fuels – we cannot accept [that],” he told Climate Home News.

    African nations split over fossil fuel roadmap

    Before negotiations kicked off in Belém, some African leaders called for careful consideration of any attempt to transition away from fossil fuels. Ghana’s environment minister Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah said that “to deny Africa the strategic use of these [natural] resources is to deny our right to develop, to light our homes and to power industries”.

    As the idea of a fossil fuel transition roadmap unexpectedly became a priority for the COP30 talks following strong calls by Brazil’s president and environment minister, the divergent positions of African nations started to surface, making it hard for them to form a common stance.

    Kenya and Sierra Leone, which overwhelmingly rely on clean energy sources, publicly supported the roadmap, joining a group of more than 80 countries to call for its inclusion in the final Mutirao decision.

    Sierra Leone’s Environment Minister Jiwoh Abdulai at COP30. Photo: UN Climate Change – Kiara Worth

    Sierra Leone’s Environment Minister Jiwoh Abdulai at COP30. Photo: UN Climate Change – Kiara Worth

    Speaking at a press conference two days before the close of COP30, Jiwoh Abdulai, Sierra Leone’s minister of environment and climate change, said moving away from fossil fuels is not just a climate issue but an economic issue.

    “We need to treat this with urgency, moving away from fossil fuels that are driving the increase in temperature,” he said, adding that “it has to be just and equitable especially for countries in Africa”.

    Nigeria, Africa’s largest oil producer, took a more critical stance, saying it would not support any process that would lead to its “sudden economic contraction and heightened social instability”. In a speech during the closing plenary, a Nigerian government official said “a successful transition cannot be imposed” but should be a deliberate process that is nationally determined and supported by international cooperation.

    Missed opportunity for Africa

    While the final Mutirao decision did not reference fossil fuel transition roadmaps in any form, the Brazilian presidency promised to create a voluntary one outside of the UN climate process over the next year. The process is expected to gain support from other countries such as Colombia, which will host the first conference on the issue in April.

    “We know some of you had greater ambition for some of the issues at hand,” COP30 president André Corrêa do Lago told the COP30closing plenary. “I will try not to disappoint you.”

    What was decided at COP30 on fossil fuels and adaptation?

    Experts said that, by not coming out in support of the fossil fuel roadmap, most African countries missed an opportunity to bring their energy access and finance demands into the centre of the talks.

    Tengi George-Ikoli, Nigeria manager at the Natural Resource Governance Institute (NRGI), said that rather than seeing it as a risk, Africa could have leveraged the opportunity to shape how the transition unfolds and ensure it does not happen in a way “that could cause more economic instability”, but is made into “a global pathway that is equitable, inclusive, and just”.

    But the lack of collaboration around a roadmap meant that Africa lost a chance “for that collective voice” to influence a pathway that considers energy access needs, market volatility, and the vulnerability of oil-dependent economies, she said.

    Finance at the centre

    The scepticism around the roadmap resulted from a lack of clarity, one observer who asked for anonymity told Climate Home News. He said African nations saw the roadmap as a Brazilian initiative that they first came across in Belém, so “there was limited understanding of what this roadmap was about”.

    NRGI’s George-Ikoli said that, while it was not clear what the roadmap would entail, African countries became more fixated on that instead of recognising the opportunity. “We might have gone too far into thinking that this roadmap may not be good for us and interpreting it to mean a number of things, not recognising that there’s an opportunity we can leverage now if we’re keen at the start and demand strongly.”

    Financial and technological support must be at the centre of this, Sierra Leonean minister Abdulai said. He noted that Africa still needs to grow its economies but also wants to be part of the climate solution because “to us, climate action and economic growth are not mutually exclusive”.

      The anonymous observer echoed the same, saying “any roadmap without finance will just remain a roadmap to nowhere”, adding that African countries also did not want to commit to something that they are not going to be able to afford to implement.

      Seble Samuel, head of Africa campaigns and advocacy at the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, said any roadmap needs to have clear accountability measures so that “it is not a smokescreen for continued failures on the means of implementation [finance]”. “That ultimately gaslights the Global South, especially those facing the biggest barriers to transition – like African nations,” she added.

      George-Ikoli said Africa “can still leverage” the COP30 presidency roadmap to define, on their own terms, what a just transition must look like.

      The coming year, she added, must be used to build a collective African position so the continent arrives at the next COP prepared and ready “to place its issues heightened on the agenda”.

      The post Tanzania pushed African nations to oppose fossil fuel transition at COP30 appeared first on Climate Home News.

      Tanzania pushed African nations to oppose fossil fuel transition at COP30

      Continue Reading

      Climate Change

      As fires burn and temperatures soar, it’s time to imagine a world beyond GDP

      Published

      on

      Steven Stone is acting director of the United Nations Environment Programme’s Office of Science

      In 1934, American economist Simon Kuznets presented a paper to Congress advocating for a new way of measuring economic performance.

      The United States was reeling from the Great Depression, and Kuznets – a future Novel prize winner – wanted to gauge just how badly the country’s economy had been dented.

      His metric, which would come to be known as gross domestic product (GDP), was a breakthrough. But as pioneering as it was, Kuznets saw its limitations.

      “The welfare of a nation can scarcely be inferred from a measure of national income,” he wrote in the 1934 paper.

      Some nine decades on, we have largely forgotten that message. GDP has become a barometer of economic progress, a kind of one-number-that-rules-them-all upon which national policies turn and governments rise and fall.

      With the climate crisis deepening by the day – as evidenced by the heatwaves and wildfires now searing Europe – our attachment to GDP is looking like a problem.

      In a single-minded pursuit of GDP growth, humanity is inadvertently feeding several environmental crises that, over the long run, threaten to make most of us poorer, sicker and more miserable. Climate change alone could slice 20 per cent off global GDP by 2100 – a staggering number.

      Clear-cutting boosts GDP not wealth

      We need to broaden our vision and definition of economic success before it’s too late.

      I grew up in the 1970s and 80s surrounded by the mixed hardwood forests of the northeastern United States. For me, the trees were a refuge, a place to run, discover and savor the history and mystery of the land and its people.

      Those experiences with my friends were more important than the amount of money in my pocket. And they led to a realization early on in my career as an economist: that wealth is about more than just income.

      This is one of GDP’s most significant oversights.

      With every forest we clear cut and every ounce of fossil fuel we burn, GDP rises. But through those actions, we are whittling away at the natural world, which supplies us with food, water, medicine, clean air and countless other essentials.

        By focusing only on GDP, we’re ignoring what’s happening to the natural assets on which our prosperity ultimately depends. It’s like we’re driving a car and only looking at the speedometer, not the energy remaining in the battery.

        That is the difference between measuring income versus measuring wealth.

        The answer to this dilemma lies in looking beyond GDP. We must start considering a broader range of indicators when making policy decisions.

        From an environmental perspective, that means measuring and valuing natural assets like forests, water, soil, biodiversity and clean air. By assigning a value to nature, decision-makers can better understand the economic consequences of, say, strip-mining a mountain top or letting plastic waste overwhelm a river.

        There is still some debate over how exactly to do this kind of natural capital accounting. But that’s not a reason to dismiss it, as many have done. It took years of refinement to end up with the GDP formula we have today.

        Costa Rica’s example

        The idea of looking beyond GDP isn’t only a theoretical debate. Countries and communities around the world have started to make economic decisions based on their natural assets. A prime example is Costa Rica, a biodiversity hotspot where a years-long effort to conserve land and seascapes has led to a boom in tourism. That in part helped elevate the country into the club of high-income nations.

        This kind of environmentally focused economic decision making can pay huge dividends. By stabilizing the climate, ending pollution and halting the loss of the natural world, humanity could save millions of lives a year and create US$20 trillion in economic benefits annually by 2070, found the Global Environment Outlook 7, a 2025 report from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The report was funded by the European Union among others.

        I began my career as an economist before moving to UNEP, which focuses on solving the world’s thorniest environmental problems. During that time, I’ve come to appreciate that “wealth” means more than simply “income.” True prosperity means being able to provide for ourselves now and into the future. Anything short of that is an empty kind of affluence – and ultimately doomed to be short-lived.

        As deadly heat blankets our cities, species slip into extinction and the planet struggles with rising toxicity and pollution, I am convinced that we can do better at measuring what matters. And that means updating and expanding how we measure economic progress.

        The post As fires burn and temperatures soar, it’s time to imagine a world beyond GDP appeared first on Climate Home News.

        As fires burn and temperatures soar, it’s time to imagine a world beyond GDP

        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

          Trending

          Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com