The US has quit the Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) initiative it helped launch to support several developing countries in their shift away from coal to clean energy, ending its contribution to the $45 billion in climate finance pledged to back their efforts.
The withdrawal is the latest in a rapid-fire series of US funding cuts for work in developing countries after President Donald Trump, a climate change sceptic, came to power in late January. His right-wing administration has since given notice that the US will leave the Paris Agreement, rescinded pledges of $4 billion to the Green Climate Fund, and given up the US seat on the loss and damage fund board.
The JETP initiative was launched in 2021 to great fanfare, with South Africa signing the first deal with the International Partners Group (IPG) – including the European Union, Germany, the UK, France and the US – at the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow.
The group pledged to mobilise an initial $8.5 billion between 2023 and 2027, a total that increased by several billion dollars as the Netherlands and Denmark joined. In 2022, Indonesia negotiated a JETP deal with a $20-billion commitment from the IPG, including $10 billion from commercial investors, followed by Vietnam with $15 billion.
Trump’s aid cuts make Malawians more vulnerable to climate change
Last week, the US wrote letters to those three recipient countries – Indonesia, Vietnam and South Africa – informing them of its decision to withdraw funding as part of the IPG, a coalition of donor countries and financial institutions providing funding and other technical support to the deal.
A fourth JETP was agreed with Senegal, but the US was not part of that from the beginning.
Germany described the US decision to exit as “regrettable”. However, German Development State Secretary Jochen Flasbarth said his government is convinced the work of the JETPs “can be continued successfully”.
As Climate Home News reported last year, Germany and the UK disclosed at the COP29 climate summit last year that they were hesitant to pursue additional JETPs and set out the lessons learned so far.
Why rich countries are “reluctant” on additional JETP coal-to-clean deals
But in his statement on the US withdrawal, Flasbarth said the partnerships “have grown”, adding that “the decision to share responsibility between so many partners is now turning out to be very helpful”.
He added that while public funding plays an important role in the JETPs, the mobilisation of private investment “is far more important”. The partnership has been working on the “conducive environment and reliable regulations” to stimulate such investment flows, he noted.
In South Africa, for example, energy legislation reforms laid the foundation for “a market-led boom in renewable energy”, Flasbarth said, meaning that renewables are now mostly cheaper than fossil fuels.
UK climate envoy Rachel Kyte said in South Africa this week that while the US exit is “regrettable”, she believes there is a “clear path forward”, in comments reported by the Financial Times.
Kyte went on to announce additional funding support for South Africa’s JETP to help prepare the country’s wholesale electricity market and explore interim transmission solutions.
‘Dangerous precedent’
While the IPG plans to move on without the US, environmental group 350.org said the US remains morally bound to deliver on its financial obligations to developing countries, adding that the exit is “deeply concerning” for the future of the planet and communities dealing with escalating climate chaos.
“Big polluters like the United States are financially obligated to support climate-vulnerable nations,” said Norly Mercado, Asia regional director at 350.org. Mercado said the US exit sets a “dangerous precedent” and signals to the rest of the world that the second-biggest emitter of planet-heating gases will no longer be accountable for its climate obligations.
Mercado added that the JETP withdrawal by the world’s richest country should not serve as an excuse for developing countries to roll back their commitments to phase out coal and urged them to accelerate the adoption of cleaner renewable energy sources.
Oil giant Pemex fails to control methane emissions, threatening Mexico’s net zero goal
Joanne Yawitch, head of South Africa’s Presidential Just Energy Transition Project Management Unit, said in a statement on Thursday, that the government remains “steadfast in its commitment to achieving a just and equitable energy transition”. She added that the country will seek alternative funding, while other partners in the IPG remain “firmly committed to supporting South Africa’s Just Energy Transition Investment Plan” .
The US pledge to South Africa included grant funding of $56 million and $1 billion in commercial investments, which the JETP unit said did not amount to a significant reduction from the total investment of $13.8 billion.
Thandolwethu Lukuko, Climate Action Network’s director for South Africa, said South Africa had not relied heavily on aid from the US for its JETP – which accounted for about 10% of the initial investment – and could proceed without it, with other partners able to fill the space left by the US.
But, he warned, broader climate policy changes and funding cuts by the US to mechanisms like the Green Climate Fund are “more worrisome” and could affect other countries’ ability to meet their climate goals.
The post US withdraws from coal-to-clean JETP deals for developing nations appeared first on Climate Home News.
US withdraws from coal-to-clean JETP deals for developing nations
Delegates will soon gather in the Turkish resort city of Antalya for UN climate negotiations, against a backdrop of war, energy crisis and climate extremes.
At COP31, nations will try to find agreement on various issues, including climate finance for developing countries and a global “just transition” towards a cleaner economy.
This summit is unusual due to its joint presidency, which means that Australia is leading the negotiations while Turkey hosts the conference.
Outside the formal negotiations, Turkey is also pushing its own priorities as part of a wider “action agenda”, including electrification, oceans and “green industrialisation”.
In order to track parties’ positions on key negotiating points and wider issues at COP31, Carbon Brief has analysed around 100 documents and captured them in the interactive table below.
The first column shows the countries and UN negotiating blocs, the second shows the topics up for debate and the third indicates specific issues within those topics.
The final column indicates the positions that the parties have expressed on each topic. These range from “priority” – meaning the party is likely to be pushing the issue – to “oppose”, meaning it is likely to push against it.
This is a “living document” that will be updated over the course of COP31.
Please get in touch if you would like to offer additions by emailing policy@carbonbrief.org.
Brief explanations of the key issues and jargon-filled language that permeate the talks can be found below the interactive table.
Just transition
At COP30 in Brazil in 2025, nations agreed to establish a practical mechanism to help drive a “just transition” to a low-carbon economy.
Key aspects of this “Belém-Antalya mechanism” (BAM) – often referred to as the “just transition mechanism” (JTM) – were agreed during the June climate negotiations this year, but many details are missing and dividing lines remain between parties.
Parties have disagreed about the scope of the mechanism and whether it should be tied to the provision of finance.
Nevertheless, following progress in June within the “just transition work programme” (JTWP), civil society groups highlighted that getting the mechanism up and running is a “key expected outcome” from COP31.
Climate finance
Climate finance is always a highly contested issue at UN climate negotiations.
Developing countries have successfully pushed for a “work programme” on climate finance to feature on the conference agenda.
These parties see this programme as a way to pressure developed countries into providing more funding from their public coffers, specifically under Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement. Some are even proposing a “burden sharing” arrangement for climate-finance provision.
This comes against a backdrop of major donors cutting their aid budgets and the Trump administration in the US pressuring multilateral development banks (MDBs) to drop their climate objectives.
Developed countries, which have traditionally been responsible for providing finance, would prefer to keep a broader focus on issues such as improving access to existing finance and broadening the range of donors. Some developing countries, such as small-island states, also support these goals.
Nations have also been discussing Article 2.1c of the Paris Agreement under the “Veredas dialogue”. This focuses on making all global “financial flows” consistent with climate action.
Countries have different views about what this involves, with developing countries again hoping to keep the focus on developed countries’ responsibilities to financially support them.
Adaptation and mitigation
At negotiations in June, parties were unable to agree on the details of a “global goal on adaptation” (GGA), which is intended to drive climate adaptation worldwide.
Having agreed at COP30 on a list of 59 “indicators” – ways to assess progress towards the GGA – nations now need to refine these before COP32 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. This is a highly technical process that involves a taskforce working out how to use and track these indicators.
Broadly, developing countries stress the importance of finance to fund adaptation efforts, rather than simply to track progress. They also want reassurances about a pledge made last year to “triple adaptation finance”.
At the June climate negotiations, negotiators also failed to make any progress when discussing the mitigation work programme (MWP) – the only formal agenda item that concerns cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
Among other things, parties disagreed on whether the MWP should continue running over the next few years, or simply be brought to a close.
Global stocktake and NDCs
Back in 2023, the first “global stocktake” (GST) of the Paris Agreement set out the state of climate action and what needed to be done to set the world on course.
On mitigation, nations agreed to a package of measures, including “transitioning away from fossil fuels”, tripling renewable energy and “halting and reversing deforestation” by 2030.
Some of these outcomes remain contentious among certain parties, particularly large, developing countries and those with economies that rely on fossil-fuel exports.
Developing countries have persistently argued that they need more climate finance to implement the global stocktake outcomes.
Parties were meant to update their climate plans under the Paris Agreement, informed by the first global stocktake, by 2025. These plans, known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs), cover the period out to 2035.
So far, only 150 parties – responsible for three-quarters of global emissions – have submitted new NDCs.
Iran, Vietnam, Egypt and Argentina are among those without new NDCs – and the US has withdrawn its climate plan under the Trump administration.
Some parties, such as the EU, have stressed the need for countries to submit their new NDCs ahead of COP31 – and to ensure they are aligned with the 1.5C temperature limit.
COP31 will also see the launch of the second global stocktake, which will conclude in 2028.
Action agenda and other issues
Turkey will be pushing its “action agenda” priorities at COP31, including global targets for electrification, reducing waste and reducing building-sector emissions.
(The Australian “presidency of negotiations” is intending to pursue a “cover text” decision at COP31 that may capture some of these wider targets, such as the electrification goal.)
The action agenda is meant to provide a complementary track to the formal negotiations, where governments and non-state actors can advance specific, real-world solutions.
A new COP31 presidency effort dubbed the “climate implementation bridge” is also meant to complement these ambitions by turning NDC goals into an “investable project portfolio”
Some parties have explicitly signalled their support for various elements beyond the formal negotiations, in the run-up to COP31.
For example, a joint letter signed by 105 parties called for COP31 to “put the ocean at the heart of climate action” by embedding ocean-based climate action in the UNFCCC architecture.
The post Interactive: Who wants what at the COP31 climate change summit appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Interactive: Who wants what at the COP31 climate change summit
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 a