- 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
The 30th United Nations climate conference (COP30) has begun. The UNFCCC COP30 kicked off yesterday in Belém, Brazil. World leaders began gathering ahead of the conference on Thursday, November 6th, for the two-day world summit of world leaders that accompanies every COP. This year, the meeting took place a few days before COP30 began, rather than (as has been normal for the last few COPs) during the first two days of proceedings. Maybe this will leave more time and space at COP30 itself for negotiators to dig into business without the distraction of their boss’s bosses being in town. The leaders of China, the US, and India — the “planet’s three biggest polluters” — are “notably absent” from the two-day leaders’ summit. In fact, there will be no high-level U.S. officials at COP30, but the US may still try to shape negotiations from afar.
Onlookers have critiqued the accessibility of this conference due to COP30’s limited badges and high logistical costs. These barriers priced out many activists from countries at the forefront of the climate crisis, whose presence adds pressure to nations to take concrete, just action.
In late October, the UNFCCC published its 2025 Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) Synthesis Report. Based on the submissions of only 64 parties (countries that signed the Paris Agreement), it’s difficult to draw conclusions. What is clear is that ambitions and goals are not yet big enough. Nor are parties working fast enough to close the gap between the existing projected 2.6°C of heating this century, and the 1.5°C goal which the UN Secretary General recently warned is slipping from our grasp. The initial deadline for submitting 2025 Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to the UNFCCC was February 10, 2025, but most countries missed it, with a cut-off date in September 2025 set by the Secretariat for inclusion in this synthesis report, and most remaining submissions are expected during COP30.
Brazil’s President, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, has called for COP30 to be the “COP of Truth.” He has promised to put a stop to deforestation in Brazil by the end of the decade. He’s been successful so far; Brazil’s emissions fell nearly 17 percent last year, the biggest dip in 15 years, as his government cracked down on illegal deforestation. But the “Amazon COP” is also being overshadowed by Brazil’s decision in October to greenlight exploratory oil drilling at the mouth of the Amazon River. COP30 is expected to heavily focus on two central issues: deforestation and financing climate action.
Brazil has launched an initiative called the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF). The TFFF aims to raise $125 billion, invest it in bonds, and use the returns to pay countries and communities for preserving existing standing forests. The World Bank has agreed to host the TFFF. Indigenous communities and climate justice advocates have criticized the fund, saying that it commodifies the forests rather than protects them, and gives control of preserving forests to global financial actors and the World Bank — institutions dominated by the Global North, and is dependent on the bond investments turning a profit. It could potentially divert funding from existing mitigation, adaptation, and loss and damage funds. Financing climate initiatives is the other central issue expected at COP30. Financing that actually addresses the enormity of the climate crisis has been an ongoing and growing tension between the Global North — countries that have historically benefited from the carbon economy and are most responsible for the climate crisis — and the Global South — those least responsible but most impacted.
Others are calling COP30 the “Implementation COP”, in part because it has been 10 years since the Paris Agreement, which set a goal to limit greenhouse-gas emissions to 1.5 °C. Over those 10 years, the rules and mechanisms have been negotiated, and this year is a pivotal year for countries to actually follow through on their commitments. The Brazilian COP Presidency has declared there will not be a so-called cover decision — the main decision text that telecasts the conference’s political outcomes — this year.
Delegates representing the parties will be addressing the need to measure adaptation goals and will attempt to whittle down and codify a list of “indicators” that started with more than 10,000 different options.
Climate Justice advocates agree that this COP must be different. Given that we’ve passed that temperature limit agreed upon in the Paris Agreement, it will be critical that negotiating parties take action to:
- Phase out fossil fuels – committing to a full, fast, fair, and funded plan to stop producing and using fossil fuels like coal, gas, and oil.
- Protect civic space – elevating the voice of activists, human rights and land defenders in the push for climate action, protecting them from the intimidation, harassment and criminalization they too often experience.
- Massively scale up non-debt-creating climate finance from high-income polluting countries – enabling lower-income countries to phase out fossil fuels and to protect their populations from the inevitable harms climate change is already causing.
The post Your Preview of Negotiations: Nov. 10 appeared first on Climate Generation.
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.
The text states that other countries – including emerging economies – may “voluntarily assume” these obligations to pay. However, it adds that this list of developed countries “shall” be reviewed periodically and amended “if necessary”.
The list was last amended in 2006.
(See this “jargon buster” which explains the specific meaning and legal weight of various terms and verbs used in UN formal documents.)
Discussions around this fraught subject had reached a dead end at intersessional talks this year, but resurfaced in Yerevan.
The first “non-paper” had four different options for expanding