In 2023, the figure reached 26.4 million worldwide as a result of floods, storms, wildfires and other disasters, according to the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC).

Climate change is not solely responsible, but the frequency and intensity of extreme weather is increasing as global temperatures continue to rise. As a result we can expect that more and more people will face losing their homes and their livelihoods.

It is commonplace to see people boarding up their homes and literally battening down the hatches before a major hurricane is predicted to make landfall. For those facing extreme weather, this mentality is no longer confined to one-off events, but a regular mindset as the climate crisis continues to bite. Many communities around the world know that building resilience against intense storms, floods and heat waves is now essential to daily life.

“No country is immune to disaster displacement,” Alexandra Bilak, IDMC’s director, said in a recent press statement. “But we can see a difference in how displacement affects people in countries that prepare and plan for its impacts and those that don’t. Those that look at the data and make prevention, response and long-term development plans that consider displacement fare far better.”

This kind of planning is happening in countries on the front line of the climate crisis. Some small island nations, for example – many of them low-lying – are seeing their homes permanently washed into the Pacific Ocean.

Paradise lost

According to Fiji’s government, disaster events in the Pacific island state over the past 40 years have led to annual economic damages of around US$16 million, with 40,000 people impacted each year. This is due to increase to an average of US$85 million per year in losses, as a result of cyclones and earthquakes. These figures are high for a country with a population of under 1 million people.

Many of the people most impacted by climate disasters live in informal urban settlements. Their homes are extremely vulnerable to the regular cyclones that hit the island nation, especially as they are often located near riverbanks or around the coast.

The subtle art of scaling up climate adaptation

A recent Adaptation Fund project in Fiji was designed to build resilience against regular extreme weather events and “climate proof” housing for the foreseeable future. The project, implemented by UN-Habitat, looked at ways to protect thousands of homes when storm surges overwhelm local water and sanitation infrastructure. The settlements were located across four main urban areas on the island: Lautoka, Sigatoka, Nadi and Lami.

Low-cost, high-impact

Constructing cyclone-resilient buildings was an essential component of the work.

Moving new homes away from vulnerable hot spots, such as foreshores, floodplains and riverbanks, was a first step. As many settlements are self-built, training local people in new construction methods ensures future homes can be built with extreme weather in mind. An innovative element from the project was so-called ‘stilted safe rooms’ – low-cost and simple raised structures intended to provide refuge during periods of intense flooding.

Flood control is a key component of climate-proofing infrastructure. In Fiji, priorities included building upgraded site drainage to reduce runoff; upgrading water sources and storage; and improving access ways, to ensure people can respond when cyclones put pressure on local infrastructure.

School’s out

In Haiti, a very poor and conflict-torn country beset with repeated natural disasters, climate-proofing infrastructure is still at an early stage. The country’s education sector, for example, has been repeatedly hit by extreme weather, including in 2016 when Hurricane Matthew damaged a quarter of its schools. Rebuilding after such frequent turmoil now requires new ways of thinking.

With the help of around US$10 million of funding from the Adaptation Fund, UNESCO is currently supporting the restoration of 620 schools across the country. Their work has included raising awareness of disaster risk reduction, improving knowledge of safety levels, and retrofitting existing buildings.

As climate disasters grow, early warning systems become essential

Panaroty Ferdinand Prophete, UNESCO’s national coordinator, told Climate Home that “nearly 200 technicians, students and experts received training on new construction techniques, an early warning system and the management of temporary shelters.” This training included working directly with the Ministry of Education to develop new construction standards for schools.

Over 150,000 students have so far benefited from the project, a success Prophete attributes to “very good synergy” between the different stakeholders. “This makes it easy to put in place a community emergency plan as well as the execution of the national action plan for resilient school infrastructure,” he added.

Best defence

Experts agree that we need to change the way we live in response to climate disasters. Moving settlements away from major water sources is, if possible, a simple solution. More projects supported by the Adaptation Fund – from Indonesia to Antigua and Barbuda – are focusing on blocking, redirecting or draining excess water as it comes in, to keep homes intact and habitable. These responses will remain some of our best defence against more unpredictable and extreme weather.

“A key sector for the Adaptation Fund is averting and reducing loss and damage through disaster risk reduction and early warning systems, which account for about 16% of the Fund’s current portfolio. Many additional multi-sector projects also include elements that are building resilience to disasters,” said Mikko Ollikainen, head of the Adaptation Fund.

“From climate-proofing homes and community centres to making informal settlements resilient to floods, it’s a vital aspect of the Fund’s work. Many of the projects are replicable and scalable so we hope they will also serve as models to create a larger positive impact on additional vulnerable communities beyond those served by the projects,” he added.

There is only so much adaptation can achieve if the flood waters get too high, or if cyclones increase in intensity and destructive force. But there are many cost-effective solutions to offer people a better chance of keeping their homes intact when extreme weather hits.

These investments can’t come soon enough for communities living in climate hot-spots and can serve to tackle long standing poverty issues at the same time. Fast-tracking these solutions will become ever more important if we want to reduce the millions of newly displaced people each year.

Sponsored by the Adaptation Fund. See our supporters page for what this means.

Adam Wentworth is a freelance writer based in Brighton, UK.

The post Climate disasters challenge right to safe and adequate housing appeared first on Climate Home News.

The global push toward renewable energy, intended to reduce climate-aggravating emissions, has revealed how the environmental and social costs of extracting the minerals it requires fall disproportionately on local communities and ecosystems.  

Many argue that electromobility and renewable energy technologies will help mitigate climate change – but adopting them on a large scale would require a massive increase in the mining of minerals such as lithium, which are key to their development.  

According to the World Bank, the extraction of 3 billion tons of minerals over the next 30 years is crucial to powering the global energy transition. The International Energy Agency further predicts a four-fold increase in mineral extraction by 2040 to meet climate targets.  

However, the rush for these so-called “critical” minerals risks amplifying the very crises it seeks to help solve, exacerbating ecological degradation and perpetuating socio-economic injustice in the Global South. 

Q&A: What you need to know about clean energy and critical minerals supply chains

The very naming of these transition minerals as “critical” creates a false sense of urgency, reinforcing the current damaging system of extraction, and failing to consider the protection of communities, ecosystems, and species in areas of exploitation. 

While mainstream strategies emphasize technological fixes, a deeper examination reveals that, without addressing the broader implications of mineral extraction, the quest for a greener future may only deepen existing environmental and human rights violations.  

UN-backed principles 

The UN Secretary-General’s Panel on Critical Energy Transition Minerals was formed in April this year to identify common and voluntary principles that will help developing countries benefit from equitable, fair and sustainable management of these minerals.  

The Panel brings together strange bedfellows – not least China and the US – and will need to work hard to create consensus to identify principles and recommendations for governments, companies, investors and the international community on human rights, environmental protection, justice and equity in value chains, benefit-sharing, responsible investments, transparency and international collaboration. It must raise the level of ambition and listen directly to civil society organizations and rights-holders, including local communities.  

Our reflection on what the Panel cannot ignore points to three elements: a status quo approach to “development”; a high level of technological optimism concerning mining; and a lack of urgency regarding ecosystem limits and communities’ rights.  

Indonesia turns traditional Indigenous land into nickel industrial zone

First, we acknowledge that the Panel is under pressure from powerful actors, but it will need to resist the assertion that mining is always beneficial to the economic growth and prosperity of nations. This status-quo perspective reinforces the notion of unlimited natural resources for human consumption, mirroring the economic development promises of the early 20th century, which contributed to the current climate crisis.   

The Panel must not fail to consider the possibility of degrowth or the imposition of limits on mining activities that could lead to reduced material and energy consumption. Nor should it neglect other forms of traditional and local knowledge that may offer possibilities for alternative development. 

Then, on the impacts, pollution and other ecosystem disruptions caused by mining, it is consistently stated that assessments and evaluations are necessary – and that these can preserve ecosystem integrity.  

The Panel must acknowledge the irreversibility of certain mining impacts on ecosystems, which are already evident. This belies the optimistic view that all mining problems can be resolved through technology, a notion that is both false and unrealistic. What’s more, it undermines the precautionary principle, which calls for protective action from suspected harms, even before scientific proof exists.  

Finally, in the dominant narrative, transition minerals are found in “empty” places, deemed void of life, where only the resources to be extracted are counted. This ignores both the biodiversity and traditional communities that inhabit these areas.  

Indigenous rights at risk 

More than half of the minerals needed for the energy transition are found in or near indigenous territories, which are already facing the consequences of the climate and ecological crisis, such as extreme aridity, permanent water shortages and scarce water availability.  

These impacts may be increased by mining project pressures and mineral extractive activities, which are already facing the impacts of the climate and ecological crisis, such as extreme aridity, permanent water shortages or scarce water availability.  

It is essential to ensure respect for the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination; to obtain their free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) before projects are begun; to carry out human rights and environmental due diligence; and to ensure not only remediation of impacts but also the ability of local people to maintain their own cultural, social, economic and political ways. 

Lithium tug of war: the US-China rivalry for Argentina’s white gold

In addition, current plans for the extraction of transition minerals are limited to the scale of the mining concession in question, without considering the cumulative impacts derived from others operating in the same area and ignoring the socioeconomic activities already taking place in these ecosystems.  

Instead, it is essential to ensure the bio-capacity of ecosystems to maintain their life-supporting functions and the diversity of uses by communities in territories, not just industrial ones. Decisions on mineral extraction should not be based solely on market demand, but also on the biophysical limits of ecosystems and, more sensibly, on the balance of water systems.    

The UN Panel has been established at a time when we can apply the lessons learned from the historical impacts of mining worldwide. This calls for the Panel to raise the level of ambition of its work by generating and advancing binding guidelines and mechanisms.  

Gathered this week in Nairobi, the Panel is working to set the rules of the game, defining principles and recommendations which will be officially presented in September during the UN General Assembly. It has a unique opportunity to oversee substantive changes to the global energy system – one that we cannot afford to miss. 

The post The UN can set a new course on “critical” transition minerals   appeared first on Climate Home News.

Former and current FAO officials and academics have criticised the document, seen by Climate Home News, for pro-industry bias, cherry-picking data and even “disinformation” about the environmental impacts of animal farming. 

The FAO told Climate Home that a final version of the report – part of an assessment consisting of various documents – would be launched in 2025 and that conclusions should not be drawn from the draft text at this stage. 

Estimates of livestock’s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions vary, ranging from 12%-20% of the global total – mostly in the form of methane from ruminants like cows and sheep, and carbon dioxide (CO2) released when forests are cut down for pasture.  

Want climate news in your inbox? Sign up for free to get our weekly newsletter and occasional extra bulletins

Methane, which is emitted in cow burps and manure, is a short-lived greenhouse gas that is 84 times more potent than CO2 over 20 years, making it one of the few available levers to prevent climate tipping points being reached in the near term.   

In a 2024 survey of more than 200 scientists and sustainable agriculture experts, about 78% said livestock numbers should peak globally by 2025 to start bringing down emissions and help keep global warming to internationally agreed limits.   

But the FAO’s draft study offers strong support for growth of the sector, saying livestock’s contributions to food security, nutrition and raw materials for industry make it a “linchpin for human well-being and economic development”.  

It is also described as “critical” for food security, “crucial” for global economies, and “indispensable” for development in sub-Saharan Africa.  

World Bank tiptoes into fiery debate over meat emissions

The report will be submitted to the FAO’s agriculture committee, which has 130 member nations, although the text could change as national representatives thrash out a final version. 

Private-sector lobbyists participating as advisors in national delegations are sometimes also able to influence texts under discussion, according to a July report by the Changing Markets Foundation. 

One FAO insider, who did not want to be named, told Climate Home the draft FAO report had been “biased towards pushing livestock [with] many national interests behind it”.   

The FAO receives around a third of its budget in direct donations from member countries, and the rest in voluntary contributions from the same states and other actors, including businesses and trade associations.   

Tech fixes  

The 491-page draft report, which was overseen by a scientific advisory committee of 23 experts and peer reviewers, does not assess how diets with more plant protein could improve food security.   

One advisory committee member, Professor Frederic Leroy of Vrije Universiteit Brussel, told Climate Home a shift to entirely plant-based diets “would severely compromise the potential for food security worldwide because many of the food nutrients which are already limited in global diets are found in livestock. How much you can move (away from livestock) should be the real investigation.” 

This table from a World Bank report (Recipe for a Livable Planet), published in May 2024, shows that vegan diets are the lowest in emissions (Screenshot/World Bank)

The report’s analysis assumes rising meat production as demand surges among a growing world population with higher incomes. In this context, it proposes “expanding the (livestock) herd size”, increasing production through intensified systems, better use of genetic techniques, and improved land management.   

“Technological innovations” such as feed additives and supplements to suppress methane are another idea backed by the FAO. Those could include experimental methods such as a vaccine announced last week and funded by a $9-million grant from the Bezos Earth Fund that aims to reduce the number and activity of methane-producing microbes in a cow’s stomach.    

Herdsman Musa takes cattle to graze along the Dodowa-Somenya road in Ghana, April 12, 2024. According to environmentalist Kwame Ansah, ‘The unchecked grazing is not only destroying crops but also eroding soil fertility exacerbating land degradation.’ (Photo: Matrix Images/Christian Thompson/via Reuters)

The report’s findings, once approved, will be fed into a three-part roadmap for bringing agricultural emissions in line with the Paris Agreement goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.  

The first instalment, published at the COP28 climate summit, was viewed internally by some FAO experts as a generic placeholder which largely followed an industry-friendly agenda.    

One ex-FAO official, who requested anonymity, told Climate Home the latest draft report on livestock ploughs a similar furrow and would set expectations for part two of the 1.5C roadmap.   

“The reality is that if they do a (nearly) 500-page report and put 23 experts’ names in front of it, it’s to impress you and say: ‘This is what is going to happen. We’re going to defend the sector’,” the former UN official said.  

Making the case for meat 

The expert added that the study’s panel was skewed toward intensified livestock systems and had “cherry picked” evidence to justify recommendations pointing in that direction.  

Several of the report’s advisory committee members have previously advocated for meat-based diets, and 11 of the study’s contributors work for the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), including one of the paper’s committee advisors.

According to the ex-FAO official, ILRI “has been pushing intensified livestock all its life. It’s their identity. It’s what they do.”

The institute co-founded an agribusiness-backed initiative – Pathways to Dairy Net Zero (P2DNZ) – which de-emphasised livestock emissions, framing them as just one of several problems for the industry to tackle.

ILRI did not respond to a request for comment.

IPCC’s input into key UN climate review at risk as countries clash over timeline

Shelby C. McClelland, of New York University’s Center for Environmental and Animal Protection, told Climate Home she was shocked by a repeated claim in the draft FAO report of “a lack of consensus among scientists regarding the contribution of livestock to global greenhouse gas emissions”.  

“This downplays and outright ignores overwhelming scientific evidence from the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], high-profile papers, and other recent studies,” McClelland said. “A statement like this in a supposedly scientific and evidenced-based review by the UN FAO is alarming given their influence on agenda-setting for global climate action.”

Advisory committee member Leroy countered that it was “dangerous” to talk about a scientific consensus when the metrics used to measure methane compared to other greenhouse gases are constantly evolving.  

“This should be part of an open and transparent debate,” he added. “I don’t think we have reached consensus on the way we interpret the effects of livestock agriculture on climate change, the degree of it, how we can measure it and how we can deal with it.” 

Scientists at the FAO first alerted the world to the meat industry’s climate footprint when they attributed 18% of global emissions to livestock farming in the seminal 2006 study, Livestock’s Long Shadow. This analysis found that, far from enhancing food security, “livestock actually detract more from total food supply than they provide.”  

However, the paper sparked a backlash felt by key experts in the agency’s Rome headquarters, as the FAO hierarchy, industry lobbyists and state donors to its biannual $1-billion budget exerted pressure for a change of direction.      

By the time of last December’s COP28, the FAO’s stance had shifted so far that two experts cited in another livestock emissions study called publicly for its retraction. They argued it had distorted their work and underestimated the emissions reduction potential from farming less livestock by a factor of between 6 and 40. 

A deforested and burnt area is seen in an indigenous area used as cattle pasture in Areoes, Mato Grosso state, Brazil, September 4, 2019. (Photo: REUTERS/Lucas Landau)

No ‘carte blanche’ 

Guy Pe’er, a conservation ecologist at the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research and the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, accused the FAO of turning a blind eye to widespread “hyper-intensive grazing practices” and land use change caused by the world’s growing number of mega-farms.

“We’re currently using more land to feed livestock than humans, and that is causing rapid deforestation in Brazil. Ignoring that is outrageous. When an official organisation is producing disinformation like this, I find it extremely irresponsible,” he said.  

Leroy told Climate Home that different types of livestock farming should not be conflated. “If you have over-grazing and the pollution of water sources, that’s clearly wrong, but other types of animal agriculture are also net-positive [for the environment],” he said.  

If the advisory committee “sees advantages in having livestock agriculture as part of the food system, I think there’s a sound scientific basis to assume that,” he added. “It doesn’t mean that it’s carte blanche or ‘anything goes’ at all.” 

(Reporting by Arthur Neslen; editing by Megan Rowling and Joe Lo)

The post FAO draft report backs growth of livestock industry despite emissions  appeared first on Climate Home News.

At the talks in Sofia, Bulgaria, most countries supported a faster process that would see three flagship reports assessing the state of climate science delivered by mid-2028, in time for the next global stocktake – the UN’s scorecard of collective climate action.

But a group of high-emitting developing countries made up of China, India, Saudi Arabia, Russia and South Africa – backed by Kenya – opposed an accelerated timeline, citing concerns that it would be harder to include scientists from the Global South, three sources present at the talks told Climate Home.

Governments were unable to reach a decision for the second time this year after “fraught talks” in January ended with the same outcome. The issue will be debated again at the next gathering in February 2025, while a separate expert meeting is tasked with drafting the outline of those reports by the end of 2024.

Fight over climate science

Adão Soares Barbosa, IPCC representative for Timor-Leste within the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) group, expressed his disappointment over the lack of agreement in Sofia resulting from “strong polarisation in the room”.

“If the assessment reports are not able to feed information into the global stocktake process, what are they good for?” he said, speaking to Climate Home.

Joyce Kimutai, who represented Kenya at the Sofia talks, said her country’s opposition to the proposed shortened timeline was “absolutely not intended to frustrate the process” but to highlight the challenges countries with more limited resources would be facing.

“With such a tight timeline, it is likely that we will produce a report that is not comprehensive, not robust. We found that very problematic,” she told Climate Home on Monday.

IPCC delegates exchange views in an informal huddle in Sofia, Bulgaria. Photo: IISD/ENB | Anastasia Rodopoulou

The primary purpose of the IPCC is to provide credible scientific assessments to the UN’s climate body (UNFCCC) and national decision-makers. The findings of its reports – which are usually compiled over several years by scientists working on a voluntary basis around the world – have been highly influential. They synthesise the latest research on climate change, as well as efforts to curb planet-heating emissions and adapt to the impacts of global warming.

The sixth series, whose final report was issued in March 2023, played a prominent role in informing the first UNFCCC global stocktake which resulted in governments agreeing for the first time to begin “transitioning away from fossil fuels” at COP28 in Dubai last December.

But some fossil fuel-rich countries like Saudi Arabia – which have pushed back against clear language on the need to cut production – have previously opposed strong recognition of IPCC reports in UNFCCC negotiations.

The UN climate body has officially requested that its scientific counterpart align its activities with the timeline of the next global stocktake. The IPCC’s input will be “invaluable” for the international review of climate action, Simon Stiell, chief of the UN climate body, told the IPCC meeting in January.

Reputation ‘at risk’

As he opened the session in Sofia, the IPCC chair Jim Skea warned of a “complex and testing” agenda.

The discussion over the report production schedule would have “far-reaching implications in terms of the timeliness of our products, and the inclusivity of both our own processes and the science that is being assessed”, he added. 

Scientists and government officials were presented with a proposal drafted by the IPCC secretariat – its administrative arm – which would see the assessment reports completed between May and August 2028. That would be a few months before the global stocktake process is scheduled to end in November 2028.

The IPCC must produce its flagship report in time for the next UN global stocktake

A majority of countries, including EU member states, the UK, the US and most vulnerable developing nations, supported the proposal, stressing the importance of the scientific reports feeding into the global stocktake, according to sources and a summary of discussions by the IISD’s Earth Negotiations Bulletin. Many supporters added that the IPCC’s reputation would otherwise be at risk.

Small island states and least-developed countries argued that IPCC input is crucial for those that lack capacity to produce their own research and are most vulnerable to the immediate impacts of climate change, according to the IISD summary.

But a dozen developing countries – with India, Saudi Arabia and China being the most vocal – opposed speeding up the process, arguing that more time is needed to ensure greater inclusion of experts and research from the Global South, which would result in “robust and rigorous” scientific output.

South Africa, Russia, Kenya, Algeria, Burundi, Congo, Jordan, Libya and Venezuela expressed similar views, according to IISD.

More time for more voices

India said that “producing the best science needs time, haste leads to shoddy work”, while Saudi Arabia claimed that the shortened timeline would “lead to incomplete science and would be a disservice to the world”, according to the IISD summary of the discussions.

Kenya’s Kimutai told Climate Home that producing scientific literature and reviewing submissions takes a lot of time and, unlike their counterparts in richer countries, scientists in the Global South can rarely count on the help of junior researchers at well-funded institutions.

“We love this process – we find it important,” she added, “but we’re trying to say that, while it may be an easy process in other regions, it is not for us”.

As first airline drops goal, are aviation’s 2030 targets achievable without carbon offsets?

The IPCC has long struggled with ensuring adequate representation of expert voices from the Global South. Only 35% of the authors working on its sixth and latest assessment report hailed from developing countries, according to a study published in the journal Climate, up from 31% in the previous cycle.

In Sofia, several delegates pointed out that the IPCC is working to improve inclusivity and that a slight extension of the schedule would not be the solution. Similar views were aired by forty IPCC authors from developing countries in a letter circulated ahead of last week’s talks, urging countries to ensure that the reports are ready in time for the global stocktake.

While recognising concerns over the inclusion of under-represented communities, they argued that it would not be achieved by allowing more time but through “deliberate efforts to counterbalance long-standing inequalities” in the research world.

Writing for Climate Home, Malian scientist Youba Sokona, one of the letter’s authors, warned that the IPCC risks losing its relevance and influence over global climate policy-making if its output cannot be used in the global stocktake.

IPCC Chair Jim Skea gavels the session to a close. Photo: Photo by IISD/ENB | Anastasia Rodopoulou

Despite lengthy exchanges, scientists in Sofia could not find a solution and decided to postpone a decision on the timeline until the next IPCC session in February 2025, when countries will also need to agree on the outline of the reports’ content.

Kenya’s Kimutai has proposed a compromise that would see reports on adaptation and mitigation completed in time for the global stocktake, with a third on the physical science of climate change coming in later.

Richard Klein, a senior researcher at the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) and a lead author of previous IPCC reports, told Climate Home the ongoing row was “problematic”. “With these delays, a shorter [report] cycle in time for the global stocktake may not be feasible anymore, which in turn makes it less likely we will see ambitious nationally-determined contributions (NDCs) after that process,” he warned.

Expert scientists from the IPCC will meet again this December at a “scoping” session to sketch out a framework for what the assessment reports should include.

Barbosa of Timor-Leste is worried that those discussions will also become “heavily politicised”.

“We are concerned that high-emitting developing countries will try water down the work on emission-cutting measures and keep out strong messages on things like the need to phase out fossil fuels,” he told Climate Home.

(Reporting by Matteo Civillini; editing by Megan Rowling)

The post IPCC’s input into key UN climate review at risk as countries clash over timeline appeared first on Climate Home News.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) seventh Assessment Report can and must be ready in time for the second Global Stocktake (GST).

The IPCC report plays a pivotal role in assessing climate change science and informing government decisions, especially in the context of multilateral negotiations. 

The GST is a key element of the Paris Agreement, designed to evaluate the world’s progress towards long-term climate goals. It must be conducted “in the light of equity and the best available science,” underscoring the importance of IPCC assessments as a primary input for the GST.

As an IPCC author from the Global South, I believe that ensuring the IPCC cycle aligns with GST timelines is crucial for maintaining the integrity of international climate cooperation. 

Efforts to enhance the inclusion of developing country voices should be prioritized over inordinate delays, which could risk the irrelevance of the IPCC report for the second Global Stocktake – taking place in 2028.

Concerns over accelerating process

A delayed production at the three IPCC working groups—which craft three reports covering the physical science of climate change, impacts and adaptation, and mitigation— is being justified under three main arguments.

First, those in favour of delaying the report claim that expediting the process could risk a lack of representation of underrepresented communities. A delay may impact the inclusion of voices from the Global South and non-English speakers, reducing the diversity of perspectives essential for a comprehensive assessment.

Comment: It’s time for Azerbaijan to shift gears on diplomacy ahead of COP29

Another argument is that the topics covered in the report could also be reduced in range. Ensuring a broad array of topics is vital for addressing the multifaceted nature of climate change and providing a holistic understanding.

Finally, delays would risk spreading out key messages from the different IPCC working groups. Timely integration of insights from the different working groups is crucial for a cohesive and comprehensive assessment.

Measures for inclusion 

The IPCC’s role is to provide credible scientific assessments to the UNFCCC process and national decision-makers. Time constraints may lead to some compromises, but it is better to minimize these than to forego IPCC input entirely. The IPCC must ensure its assessments are available in time for the second GST to maintain its relevance and impact on global climate policy-making.

On the inclusion of underrepresented communities, ensuring representation is more about deliberate efforts than merely the time available. Creating networks for southern scholars, facilitating special issues in academic journals, and convening regional meetings can enhance representation.

Delegates convene in a huddle on the fourth day of IPCC-61 in Sofia, Bulgaria. Photo: IISD/ENB | Anastasia Rodopoulou

Focused attention on these efforts in the next IPCC cycle is more effective than strictly adhering to traditional timelines. My experience as an IPCC author from the Global South indicates that inclusion results from proactive initiatives rather than extended timelines.

Successive IPCC cycles have increasingly included literature from developing regions and better represented perspectives from the Global South. For instance, AR6 highlighted issues of equity, impacts on vulnerable communities, and development pathways relevant to developing countries.

Without IPCC input, the GST may lack essential Southern perspectives. The direction of travel within the IPCC has been towards greater concern for under-represented regions, countries, and research communities. Removing IPCC input risks losing an important source of southern perspectives.

No risk of losing quality

Accelerating the cycle by a few months does not significantly compromise the report’s robustness. Past assessments have been completed within five to six years, and with urgency, drafting and expert reviews can be slightly expedited.

Reviews by governments remain crucial to the science-policy interface. The effective time required for a single working group report is approximately four years from the call for experts for the scoping meeting. Given the urgency of the climate crisis, it is feasible to shorten the drafting and review process by a few months without compromising the quality.

Concerns about topic range and integration can be mitigated through proper planning of publications and coordinated efforts across working groups. Modifying the assessment report process to be more flexible is preferable to rendering the IPCC policy irrelevant. Appropriate planning can achieve a significant degree of integration, even if not perfect.

UN chief appeals for global action to tackle deadly extreme heat

Designing the IPCC cycle in ways that prevent input to the GST risks undercutting an essential element of international cooperation—providing scientific assessment to political decision-makers.

Concerns about the under-representation of developing country voices are legitimate but can be better addressed by redoubling efforts to enhance these voices in the IPCC, rather than through delay. Ensuring timely IPCC input to the second GST is essential for effective global action on climate change and for the voices of developing countries to be adequately represented.

This opinion piece is adapted from a letter written by Dr Sokona and 39 other IPCC authors from developing countries ahead of the IPCC’s plenary session in Sofia, Bulgaria

The post The IPCC must produce its flagship report in time for the next UN global stocktake appeared first on Climate Home News.

Calling for global action to limit the devastating consequences, the head of the United Nations said “billions of people are facing an extreme heat epidemic – wilting under increasingly deadly heatwaves”.

Extreme-heat events have been getting more frequent, intense and longer-lasting in recent decades as a result of human-made climate change.

Guterres’ appeal comes as the record for the world’s hottest day was broken twice on consecutive days this week, according to Europe’s Copernicus Climate Change Service. Monday beat Sunday, with the global average surface air temperature reaching 17.16 Celsius, as parts of the world sweltered through fierce heatwaves from the Mediterranean to Russia and Canada.

Guterres said the UN had just received preliminary data indicating that Tuesday “was in the same range”, which would make a third hottest straight day on record, if confirmed.

In a speech, he noted that heat – driven by “fossil fuel-charged, human-induced climate change” – is estimated to kill almost half a million people a year, about 30 times more than tropical cyclones.

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres speaks during the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28) in Dubai, December 1, 2023. COP28/Christophe Viseux/Handout via REUTERS

This year alone, extreme heat struck highly vulnerable communities across the Sahel region, killed at least 1,300 pilgrims in Mecca during Hajj and shut down schools across Asia and Africa affecting more than 80 million children.

“And we know it’s going to get worse. Extreme heat is the new abnormal,” Guterres added in his speech to journalists at UN headquarters in New York.

The Secretary-General’s “call for action” brings together ten specialised UN agencies for the first time in an urgent and concerted push to strengthen international cooperation in addressing extreme heat.

Focus on most vulnerable

Guterres listed four areas where greater efforts could be made to keep people, societies and economies safer from the negative consequences of rising global temperatures.

He emphasised the importance of “caring for the most vulnerable” – with those at greatest risk including poor people in urban areas, pregnant women, people with disabilities, the elderly, children, those who are sick and people who are displaced from their homes.

Households living in poverty often live in substandard homes without access to cooling, he added, appealing for a boost in access to low-carbon cooling and expanded use of natural measures – which include planting trees for shade – and better urban design, alongside a ramp-up of heat warning systems.

Graphic from Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change

Workers also need more protection, he said, as a new report from the International Labour Organization warned that over 70 percent of the global workforce – 2.4 billion people – are now at high risk of extreme heat, especially in Asia-Pacific, Africa and the Arab States.

The UN is calling on governments to urgently review laws and regulations on occupational safety and health to integrate provisions for extreme heat, including the right to refuse working in extreme hot weather.

Energy transition and adaptation

A third area targeted by the UN for action is making economies and societies better able to withstand heat, through stronger infrastructure, more resilient crops, and efforts to ease the pressure on health systems and water supplies.

“Countries, cities, and sectors need comprehensive, tailored Heat Action Plans, based on the best science and data,” Guterres said.

Lastly, the UN chief urged stepped-up action to “fight the disease”, by phasing out fossil fuels “fast and fairly” including no new coal projects, with the aim of limiting global warming to 1.5C – a goal nearly 200 governments signed up to in the 2015 Paris Agreement.

“I must call out the flood of fossil fuel expansion we are seeing in some of the world’s wealthiest countries,” he emphasised. “In signing such a surge of new oil and gas licenses, they are signing away our future.”

The United States, Canada, Australia, Norway and the UK have issued two-thirds of the global number of oil and gas licences since 2020, according to research published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development this week.

‘Still time to act’

Commenting on the UN’s call to action, Alan Dangour, director of climate and health at Wellcome, a UK-based science foundation, noted that people working outside in physical jobs and those who cannot afford to adapt to rising heat are particularly exposed – but the effects are far broader.

“The levels of heat we now routinely see around the world put every part of society under extreme pressure, directly harming our health while also affecting food and water security and much of our vital infrastructures,” he said in a statement.

Speaking to journalists on Thursday, scientists convened by Wellcome said there are positive measures that can be taken to combat the problem of extreme heat, which can also bring wider social benefits.

UAE’s ALTÉRRA invests in fund backing fossil gas despite “climate solutions” pledge

For example, they explained that using community facilities as cooling centres can offer older people a place to chat or play cards, tackling social isolation and heat stress at the same time. Or adding shades with solar panels to market stalls can help women traders keep working on hot days while also providing free electricity for their businesses.

“There is still time for concerted action to save lives from the impacts of climate change, but we can no longer afford to delay,” Dangour said.

A construction worker drinks water while working on a building during hot weather in Pristina, Kosovo, June 19, 2024. (Photo: REUTERS/Valdrin Xhemaj)

The UN’s call for action points out that existing tools to reduce the devastating consequences of extreme heat could be deployed with large and far-reaching effects. Guterres said the good news is that “there are solutions… that we can save lives and limit its impact”.

For example, a global scale-up of heat health warning systems could save more than 98,000 lives every year, according to the World Health Organization. And the rollout of occupational safety and health measures could avoid $361 billion a year in medical and other costs, the ILO has estimated.

The UN chief urged a “huge acceleration of all the dimensions of climate action” as global warming is currently outpacing efforts to fight it. That could start to change, he added, as heatwaves, impacts on public health and disasters such as Canada’s wildfires are now hitting the richest countries as well as poorer ones.

“The heat is being felt by those that have decision-making capacity – and that is my hope,” he said.

(Reporting and editing by Matteo Civillini and Megan Rowling)

The post UN chief appeals for global action to tackle deadly extreme heat appeared first on Climate Home News.

Global temperatures have crossed 1.1^oC above pre-industrial levels. They are likely to cross the 1.5^oC Paris Agreement threshold within the next decade, and despite countries’ pledges to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions entering the atmosphere, the world is likely to breach  2^oC of warming.

Moving beyond these thresholds significantly raises the threat of irreversible tipping points around the world. 

While scientists insist that decarbonization efforts, net-zero targets, and wide-scale adaptation must be prioritized, the Global Stocktake Report notes that our emissions keep rising. Given this race against time, controversial approaches are being put on the table, such as solar radiation modification (SRM, also known as solar geoengineering), a potential stopgap measure against worsening climate change. 

Still in its research infancy, SRM refers to large-scale, intentional interventions that increase the amount of sunlight reflected back into space to counteract some types of climate change impacts.

If ever used, it is proposed as a range of relatively fast-acting approaches with potential global benefits, but even this may well be debatable. Governance over the use or non-use of these technologies needs a global approach that requires deep public understanding. 

Untangling uncertainty

SRM technologies offer two sides of the same coin –  potential benefits include reducing global temperature rise and secondary benefits such as slowing the rate of sea level rise, and limiting harm to the poles, but potential risks include impacts on precipitation patterns, agriculture, and biodiversity. 

Uncertainty exists in both the science and the social response.

The usefulness of SRM in the context of climate change is deeply dependent on how science unfolds, who the decision makers are, who has access, willingness, capacity and resources required to master these technologies and the context within which it exists.

Nations fail to agree ban or research on solar geoengineering

To be clear, SRM is not a solution to climate change. It can only be considered alongside robust decarbonization and adaptation efforts. Given the early stages of the development of SRM, more information, discussion, and open-minded conversations with broad groups of stakeholders are needed.

We are at a clear inflection point for the field where momentum is clearly shifting in funding, research, media, and governance. However, much of the narrative about SRM is currently being built in the Global North, where the majority of research and funding on this subject exists.

African voices unheard

The use, or non-use, of this suite of technologies will have global impacts. It is all the more important for the Global South to be actively and effectively engaged with SRM research and governance, due to its potential impacts on their climate vulnerable communities. 

Despite Africa’s low contributions (< 4%) to global greenhouse gas emissions, it suffers disproportionate climate change impacts. Its agrarian-dependent economy  necessitates an elevated interest in changing local and regional weather patterns; there are strong incentives for Africa to better understand the physical and socio-economic implications of SRM. 

African research and policy perspectives on SRM are starting, highlighting several gaps that exist in understanding how these technologies may benefit or harm the continent’s climate efforts.

EU “green” funds invest millions in expanding coal giants in China, India

One key example is the recent deliberation on a SRM resolution at the Sixth United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA-6). The Africa Group (AG) functioned as a bloc during the deliberation, and proposed the establishment of a publicly accessible repository of existing scientific information, research, and activities on SRM, including submissions from member states and stakeholders.

While the resolution did not reach consensus, the deliberations signified an important shift that African nations are starting to weigh in on the issue. 

Building awareness

But more resources, expertise, and engagement are necessary to generate African knowledge and capacity across a range of sectors to contribute to – and start leading – SRM deliberations in the international sphere.

Policymakers across Africa need access to relevant information and an informed civil society sector to shape decisions. Diverse perspectives on whether and how to consider SRM, with grounding and knowledge in the near term, can help African nations prepare for the critical decisions to come.   

Building awareness on this topic, with unbiased information rooted in science and based in the African context, will provide answers from both physical and social science perspectives for inclusive and fair SRM decision-making.

UN action on gender and climate faces uphill climb as warming hurts women

Driving demand to focus on specific issues that Africans are raising, and building their capacity to govern through their key government and NGO institutions, is necessary to enable informed deliberations on SRM regulations at national, regional and international levels. 

This summer, the African Climate Foundation and The Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering are kicking off a series of Africa-focused workshops to build knowledge around the science, governance, and justice dimensions of SRM.

The first two in the series will highlight African scientists and thought leaders and are virtual and open to the public.

We hope to catalyze interest and engagement across the African continent, widen public discourse on SRM and ensure these discussions go beyond certain circles of experts and the negotiating community. Debates on SRM need to reflect the full spectrum of interests in Africa, and it is time for voices across the continent to coordinate and coalesce.

The post Africa cannot afford to be complacent about solar radiation management appeared first on Climate Home News.

For the first time this year, Saudi authorities required all pilgrims to wear identification on a “Nusuk Card” around their neck, allowing security forces to check they had the Hajj visa. Banners and phone messages warned against attending Hajj without this visa and many breaching these rules were deported.

A government-controlled Youtube channel said before the Hajj that the Nusuk Card “enables access to urgent medical care” and one survivor told Climate Home that, despite feeling tired and dizzy, he felt unable to ask for medical help for fear of punishment and deportation because he only had a tourist visa.

Temperatures in Mecca reached 51.8C this year, an unusually high figure which Climatemeter scientists have said was “mostly exacerbated by human-driven climate change”.

Over 1,300 people died during the heatwave and more than four-fifths of them were without official permits, according to Saudi Health Minister Fahad Al-Jalajel. Foreign governments have largely blamed travel agents for facilitating these irregular pilgrimages, while the Saudi authorities and climate change have mostly escaped blame.

One of those without a permit was Ibrahim, a retired Egyptian head teacher. To dodge visa checks, he walked 19 km in the baking heat to Arafat, a sacred hill near Mecca. He told Climate Home that he had asked buses carrying pilgrims with permits to stop and take him “but no one stopped, no one helped us”.

#No_Hajj_without_a_permit because services are directly linked to it, and accessing the Holy Sites without a permit is a violation that merits legal consequences.#Makkah_and_Madinah_Eagerly_Await_You#No_Hajj_without_a_permit#Hajj_1445H pic.twitter.com/aapODeC018

— Ministry of Hajj and Umrah (@MoHU_En) May 22, 2024

Fahad Saeed, a Pakistani climate scientist with Climate Analytics, told Climate Home: “The Hajj pilgrimage is a profound reminder to every Muslim of equality in the eyes of God. Yet, the disparity in the safety of pilgrims based on their financial means starkly contradicts this spirit of equality.”

Two-tier system

The city of Mecca is where the founder of Islam, the Prophet Muhammad, was born and lived most of his life. One of the religion’s five central pillars is that all believers should, if they’re healthy and can afford it, visit the city at least once on a pilgrimage known as Hajj and carry out a series of rituals.

Since Muhammad’s time, Islam has expanded across the globe and is now the religion of about a quarter of the world’s people. As the Hajj takes place for a single five-day period each year, there are far more people wanting to take part than the city can handle. Over 1.5 million pilgrims arrived in Mecca for the event last June. 

Beyond lithium: how a Swedish battery company wants to power Europe’s green transition with salt

Official visas to enter Mecca during the Hajj are rationed through a lottery system, working with specialist travel agencies. But some travel agents also advise pilgrims on how to enter Mecca without an official visa.

That was how Ibrahim, who had been saving up for the Hajj for thirty years, got to Mecca. He did not want to reveal his second name out of fear of the Saudi government’s punishment.

He told Climate Home that he couldn’t afford an official visa 500,000EGP ($10,000). He entered Saudi Arabia with a normal tourist one and, with the help of a tourism company, he was able to bribe his way through checkpoints into Mecca.

He found accommodation in the suburb of Al-Aziziyah but authorities quickly raided the area before the start of Hajj. Many pilgrims without official visas were fingerprinted and deported but Ibrahim was just driven out of the city towards Jeddah.

For 1,000 Riyals ($267), he found a taxi to take him back to Al-Aziziya where he hid until the first day of Hajj. This is the pilgrimage’s most important day when pilgrims spend a day next to Mount Arafat, where Prophet Muhammad delivered his Farewell Sermon. There, they pray and ask for forgiveness.

Most pilgrims get buses from Mecca to Arafat but, worried about soldiers searching these buses, Ibrahim and his companions made the 19 km journey on foot. When he got there, the area was crowded and the temperature reached nearly 50C (122F).

The 62-year old said he began to feel exhausted and dizzy even though he was not fasting that day. “My foot, which had undergone three surgeries before, felt like a piece of fire. I could not walk”, he said.

Standing up in the heat lessens the blood flow to the brain, which can cause fainting but also heart or kidney failures, explained Mike Tipton, a British professor who advises athletes and soldiers on heat.

Muslim worshippers make their way to cast stones as part of a symbolic stoning of the devil ritual on June 18, 2023. (Photo: Medhat Hajjaj/apaimages)

Ibrahim said that getting water for him was difficult and that he did not want to ask the clinics along the road to Arafat for medical help because of his lack of visa. “We saw the bodies of pilgrims on the road in need of help,” he said, “some of them were dead, some were suffering from heat exhaustion and no one was helping them”.

The claim that irregular pilgrims were denied help has been made by many, including the official spokesperson for pilgrims from Iraq’s autonomous Kurdistan region Karwan Stoni, who told Agence France Presse they could not access air-conditioned spaces that the authorities had made available.

Ibrahim survived, completed his Hajj and returned to Egypt. But Jordanian cousins Tariq, 48, and Hossam Al-Bustanji, 52, were not so lucky. Their cousin Ahmed told Climate Home that their companions told him they died after walking about for seven or eight hours without any services.

“They fell and pleaded for water but no one helped them”, he said. “Their bodies were buried in Mecca and were not sent to Jordan despite our requests”.

Pilgrims receive a spray of water from volunteers in Mecca on June 17, 2024 (Photo: Arab World Press)

While irregular pilgrims had it worse, even those with official visas suffered and some died in the heat. Jordanian Rania Bassam told Climate Home her brother and his family went to Mecca, where he volunteered as a doctor. 

She said they complained to her about the services provided and the extreme heat. Bassam’s brother later died in Arafat. “His body was identified by his fingerprint but we were prevented from seeing him and saying goodbye”, she said.

Tipton said that, while many of the dead were likely to be over 65-years old with existing heart problems, the heat can kill healthy young people too from heat stroke. 

Without getting bodies into cold water, heat stroke can be a “runaway route to hypothermia with death occurring at [a core temperature of] 40-44C”.

Safer Hajj

Campaigners are appealing to Saudi authorities to take measures that would reduce the risk of mass deaths, especially as the situation is expected to get worse as the world warms.

A 2021 study published in Environmental Research Letters found that if the world warms by 1.5 C above pre-industrial levels, heat stroke risk for pilgrims on the Hajj will be five times greater.

Heat expert Mike Tipton said that they should encourage people to sit down when they can, reduce any stress, fan people and cool their hands, feet and bodies down with cold water. But, he said, it’s difficult to look after so many people.

Sign up to get our weekly newsletter straight to your inbox, plus breaking news, investigations and extra bulletins from key events

Limiting numbers would help, he said, and that’s the route the authorities have been going down. Government reactions in Saudi Arabia and across the Muslim world have been to prosecute and crack down on travel agents who encourage pilgrims to evade visa laws.

But that has not been enough to dissuade Ibrahim’s wife. Despite her husband’s ordeals, she is keen to follow in his footsteps next year, performing Hajj unofficially.

But speaking in their Giza home, Ibrahim warned her against the idea. “You will not be alive again if you go unofficially – either you go on an official Hajj or not at all”, he said.

(Reporting by Eman Muhammed and Joe Lo, editing by Joe Lo and Matteo Civillini)

The post Saudi visa crackdown left heatwave-hit Hajj pilgrims scared to ask for help appeared first on Climate Home News.

The regulation, which tasks the EU’s 27 member states with reviving their land and water habitats and planting billions of trees, was narrowly passed by EU environment ministers.

The controversial law only gained enough backing because Austria’s minister for climate action, Leonore Gewessler, defied her country’s leader and voted in favour of it, a decision which may be challenged legally. 

But, while celebrating the bill’s approval, climate campaigners and scientists warned that its ambition had been diluted and it must be implemented effectively to reverse the destruction of Europe’s natural carbon sinks.

EU warns “delaying tactics” have made plastic treaty deal “very difficult”

The law requires each EU country to rejuvenate 20% of their degraded land and water habitats by 2030 and all of them by 2050, and to plant three billion more trees across the bloc by 2030.

It also requires countries to restore 30% of their drained peatlands by 2030 and 50% by mid-century.

Peatlands that have been drained, largely for farming, forestry and peat extraction, are responsible for 5% of Europe’s total greenhouse gas emissions. 

Climate breakthrough

Belgium’s climate minister Zakia Khatattabi told Climate Home that the law’s passing is “not only a breakthrough for nature but also for the climate”, and would enable the EU to meet its emissions-cutting targets.

Olivier De Schutter, the United Nations special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, said that “without it, carbon neutrality in Europe would have been put beyond reach”.

The amount of carbon dioxide sucked in by Europe’s carbon sinks – including forests, peatlands, grassland, soil and oceans –  has been falling since 2010. For forests, the World Resources Institute blames logging for timber and biomass and more wildfires and pests for the decline.

The amount of carbon sucked in is shrinking (black line) when it needs to increase to meet targets for 2030 (orange dot) and 2050 (blue dot)

But the EU’s plan to meet its goal of net-zero emissions by 2050 involves halting this decline and reversing it into a 15% increase on 2021 levels by 2030.

Jette Bredahl Jacobsen, vice-chair of the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change, told Climate Home the new nature law “can contribute substantially to this, as healthy ecosystems can store more carbon and are more resilient against climate change impacts”.

The law is extremely popular with the EU public, with 75% of people polled in six EU countries saying they agree with it and just 6% opposing.

Watered down

But farmer trade associations were fiercely against it, and it became a symbolic battleground between right-wing and populist parties on one side and defenders of the EU Green Deal on the other.

Several of the law’s strongest passages ended up diluted before it reached ministers for approval, including caveats added to an obligation for countries to prevent any “net loss” of urban green space and tree cover this decade.

A new clause was introduced to deter EU states from using funds from the Common Agricultural Policy or Common Fisheries Policy to finance nature restoration – raising questions as to where money to implement the law will come from.

And, most importantly, an obligation to restore peatlands that have been drained for farming – a major source of emissions – was weakened.

A peat bog under restoration in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, pictured in January 2022. (Photo: Imago Images/Rüdiger Wölk via Reuters)

The original regulation would have instructed countries to rewet 30% of peatlands drained for agricultural use by 2030 and 70% by 2050 – the most effective way of restoring them. 

But, as a concession to farmers, the final version of the nature law mandates rewetting just 7.5% of these peatlands by 2030 and 16.7% by 2050, with exceptions possible for actions such as replacing peatlands drained for agriculture with other uses.

Rewetting usually involves blocking drainage ditches. As well as reducing emissions, this helps an area adapt to climate change, protecting it from floods, and improving the water quality, soil and biodiversity.

But the Commission will also count other actions as peatland “restoration”, such as the partial raising of water tables, bans on the use of heavy machinery, tree removal, the reintroduction of peat-forming vegetation or fire prevention measures. 

That’s despite the European Commission’s own rulebook describing these measures as “supplementary to gain better results” and saying that “peatland restoration should always primarily focus on rewetting”.

Lessons from trade tensions targeting “overcapacity” in China’s cleantech industry

Where rewetting does take place, as with all restoration measures in the final version of the regulation, EU states will be obliged to prioritise action in particular areas known as Natura 2000 sites. These cover around 18% of the EU’s territory, and should already have been restored under existing legislation.  

Environmentalists maintain that the legislation still has tremendous potential, pointing to possible actions such as the restoration of seagrass meadows which cover less than 0.1% of the ocean floor but absorb more than 10% of its carbon.    

EU countries will now draft national nature restoration plans over the next two years showing how they intend to meet their targets, for assessment by the Commission.

(Reporting by Arthur Neslen; editing by Joe Lo and Megan Rowling)

The post Despite dilution, officials say new nature law can restore EU carbon sinks appeared first on Climate Home News.

The post Bonn bulletin: Fears over “1.5 washing” in national climate plans appeared first on Climate Home News.

Thousands of country representatives have spent the last two weeks in Germany at the UN Bonn Climate Conference, marking the mid-year point to the biggest climate summit of the year: COP29. 

But despite being a core milestone each year for global climate discussions, there is troublingly little to show for it. And with less than six months before COP29 – and after years of negotiations – there has been a shameful lack of commitment on delivering for those on the frontline of the climate crisis.   

Climate finance and adaptation play imperative roles in ensuring communities are able to thrive in the face of unpredictable and unforgiving weather patterns. And while both topics have been heavy on the Bonn agenda, finance negotiations so far have failed to really consider those living with climate uncertainty right now. 

Want climate news from the Bonn talks in your inbox? Sign up for free to get our weekly newsletter and occasional extra bulletins

WaterAid has been on the ground at the Bonn talks, calling for robust water, sanitation and hygiene indicators to flow directly through key climate adaptation frameworks, especially the Global Goal on Adaptation and the Loss and Damage Fund – both of which will change the course of the future for those living on the frontlines of the climate crisis. 

Support lacking for those on the frontline

Yet countries at Bonn have hit a roadblock on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA), with discussions struggling to go beyond a shared acknowledgement of the value of including the support of experts to progress on areas of concern. Progress on GGA targets remains stagnant as parties grapple over country-specific concerns instead of coming to a collective outcome, with less than two days left of the conference. 

Meanwhile, the most recent talks on the Loss and Damage Fund failed to consider the urgency of the escalating climate crisis at hand and the scale of financing needed to ensure frontline nations can recover and rebuild from impacts of climate change. 

North Africa’s disappearing nomads: Why my community needs climate finance

The new collective quantified goal on climate finance (NCQG) – a new and larger target that is expected to replace the current $100bn climate finance goal – is also high on the Bonn agenda. Many core elements of this new climate fund goal are yet to be agreed.

WaterAid is calling for the NCQG to have sub-goals for adaptation and loss and damage, as well as for the finance pot to have a direct channel to vulnerable communities so they can be involved in ensuring the funds go to where the support is most needed.  

Too much or too little water

Whilst conversations at Bonn have been lukewarm, the climate crisis has remained red hot. Right now, countries around the world are watching it unfold in real time. From flooding and cyclones to drought and deadly heatwaves, communities are dealing with the terrifying reality of living with too much or too little water.  

Southern Asia is being exposed in particular to a dangerous and chaotic cocktail of unpredictable weather, making life unbearable for those on the climate frontline. 

In late May, Cyclone Remal hit coastal parts of southern Bangladesh with gale speeds of up to 110km/h causing devastation across the country for 8.4 million people, leaving many without power, damaging crops and making tube wells and latrines unusable.  

Meanwhile, record temperatures were recorded in Bangladesh through April and May where temperatures soared above 43 degrees Celsius, scorching 80% of the country and leaving thousands without power. 

At the same time, Pakistan witnessed its wettest April since 1961, with the south-western province of Punjab experiencing a staggering 437 percent more rainfall than usual, fuelling the malnourishment of 1.5 million children and damaging 3,500 homes.  

Water infrastructure key to adaptation

Water, sanitation and hygiene equip communities like those across South Asia with the ability to adapt to climate change, protecting livelihoods and farms. These basic essentials ensure people are not subject to the spread of waterborne diseases while preventing families from being forced to migrate due to sea level rises.  

From flood defences to drought resistance, water also acts as a guiding light as to where donors should direct climate finance, ensuring long-term support reaches the people who need it most. Investment in water-related infrastructure in low and middle-income countries is expected to deliver at least $500 billion a year in economic value, protecting countless lives and boosting economic prosperity. 

Bonn talks on climate finance goal end in stalemate on numbers

Now is the time for global leaders to put pen to paper and set plans in motion to ensure that we see real progress on how we achieve the GGA targets at the grassroots and that the necessary level of climate funding reaches those who need it most, without further delay.  

This truly is a matter of life and death – and prioritising action on water, sanitation and hygiene across global adaptation goals may be our only hope to prevent climate change from washing away people’s futures.  

The post Bonn makes only lukewarm progress to tackle a red-hot climate crisis appeared first on Climate Home News.

In three vital and interrelated areas – climate, development and nature – the next UK government could play a significant role in driving progress at a critical time.

It needs to start office on day one with a plan that positions the UK ahead of key summits on those issues – summits that will have a critical bearing on people, planet, and future generations. The time to start preparing is now.

The NATO summit begins within days of the UK general election now planned for July 4. The year ends with G20 meetings in Brazil, a global biodiversity summit (COP16) in Colombia, and the COP29 climate conference in Azerbaijan. A new UK government could play an important role in rebuilding trust and make a positive contribution to the world by adopting far-sighted positions on climate, development and nature. 

On climate, the next government could immediately signal its intent by comprehensively stepping up its efforts to meet its own national climate commitments, after a period of drift and uncertainty. There is no more powerful message from the UK to the cause of global climate action than the country decisively implementing its own pledges, through concerted action on green energy, transport, infrastructure and land use.  

Progress at home needs to be matched in real time by leadership on the international stage in negotiating an appropriately ambitious and credible ‘new collective quantified goal’ on climate finance.

Rich nations meet $100bn climate finance goal – two years late

A strong finance outcome at COP29 would acknowledge the historic responsibility for climate change from some of the wealthiest nations, including the UK, while ensuring that all countries play their full part in mobilising the flows of public as well as private finance needed to transition to a 1.5 degree-aligned, resilient and nature-positive economy. Successful resolution of the finance negotiations this year in Baku would open up the possibility for a more ambitious round of climate action en route to COP30 in Belem, Brazil in November 2025. 

Development finance

On international development, the UK can move fast by upholding and restoring its development finance commitments, including to some of the world’s poorest people; by updating its toolkit to meet today’s interlinked development, climate and nature challenges; and by using all of the means at its disposal (including debt relief, multilateral development bank reform, and capital increases) to drive global financial architecture reform and a successful replenishment of the International Development Association 21 later this year.  

The UK can also lead the way in pressing for international support to be integrated and aligned behind countries’ own inclusive, green development plans; and by making the case for multilateral trade reform aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement.  

In addition, the UK has a particular responsibility to resume a global leadership role on debt relief, a role it last played in the early 2000s during the era of former Prime Minister Gordon Brown. It could take legal and other action to unstick debt cancellation processes for some of the most indebted countries, by bringing private creditors to the table and brokering concerted action on debt relief at the G20.  

Global billionaires tax to fight climate change, hunger rises up political agenda

The UK should lend its political support to the Brazilian government’s laudable G20 initiative on tax reform, as well as its important work on climate and hunger; and support other promising efforts to raise revenue for development, such as levies on shipping and aviation. The next finance minister should consider the UK’s global role on these issues as being as centrally important to their legacy as issues of national economics; and ensure that the UK drives global progress on new flows of finance for climate and development, at the scale set out by economists Nick Stern and Vera Songwe in their 2022 report.   

Protect and restore nature

On nature, the UK should redouble its actions to protect and restore nature and biodiversity at home, including through pursuing more sustainable farming and land management. At the same time, the UK should use its influence and finance to drive global progress on the nature agenda, both in terrestrial ecosystems as well as the ocean. The goal here is to protect at least 30% of the planet by 2030 and to mobilise major flows of public and private finance to support countries, local communities and Indigenous Peoples to protect their ecosystems.

At the UN biodiversity conference in Colombia in October, the UK could assume a critical role on the global stage by making the case for the protection and restoration of natural ecosystems as fundamental to human life, to addressing the climate crisis, and as one of the most effective forms of pro-poor development assistance.   

At a deeply troubling and fractured time in multilateral affairs, revitalised global leadership from the next UK government on climate, development and nature could make a very constructive contribution to securing the better, fairer, more sustainable and more peaceful world which is still within our grasp to secure.   

 Editor’s note: The latest BBC analysis of opinion polls ahead of the July 4 general election in the UK shows the opposition Labour Party with 45% of voter support, while the ruling Conservative Party trails with 24%.

The post Climate, development and nature: three urgent priorities for next UK government appeared first on Climate Home News.

Pakistan’s southern province of Sindh has been sweltering under 52°C heat in recent days. Not in the news however is that wet-bulb temperatures in the region – a more accurate indicator of risk to human health that accounts for heat and humidity – passed a key danger threshold of 30°C.  

Climate change is increasing the risk of deadly humid heat in developing countries like Pakistan, Mexico and India, and without international support to adapt, vulnerable communities could face catastrophe.  

What is wet-bulb temperature? 

Wet-bulb temperature is an important scientific heat stress metric that accounts for both heat and humidity. When it’s both hot and humid, sweating – the body’s main way of cooling – becomes less effective as there’s too much moisture in the air. This can limit our ability to maintain a core temperature of 37°C – something we all must do to survive. 

A recent study suggests that wet-bulb temperatures beyond 30°C pose severe risks to human health, but the hard physiological limit comes at prolonged exposure (about 6-8 hours) to wet-bulb temperatures of 35°C. At this point, people can experience heat strokes, organ failure, and in extreme cases, even death. 

Climate change and deadly heat 

Globally, around 30% of people are exposed to lethal humid heat. This could reach as much as 50% by 2100 due to global warming. To date, the climate has warmed around 1.3°C as a result of human activity, primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels. And along with the extra heat, with every 1°C rise the air can hold up to 7% more moisture. 

A comprehensive evaluation of global weather station data reveals that the frequency of extreme humid heat has more than doubled since 1979, with several wet-bulb exceedances of 31-33°C. Another recent study predicts a surge in the frequency and geographic spread of extreme heat events, even at 1.5°C warming.   

Rich nations meet $100bn climate finance goal – two years late

What this shows is that the humid tropics including monsoon belts are all careening towards the 35°C threshold, which is very worrying for countries like Pakistan. The city of Jacobabad has already breached 35°C wet bulb temperatures many times. More areas of the country are likely to be exposed to such life-threatening conditions more often due to climate change.   

At 1.5°C of warming, much of South Asia, large parts Sahelian Africa, inland Latin America and northern Australia could be subject to at least one day per year of lethal heat. If the world gets to 3°C, this exposure explodes, covering most of South Asia, large parts of Eastern China and Southeast Asia, much of central and west Africa, most of Latin America and Australia and significant parts of the southeastern USA and the Gulf of Mexico.  

Areas of the world that will experience at least one day of deadly heat per year at different levels of warming   

Source: ScienceAdvances 

 Even at 1.5°C of warming, there will be high exposure to lethal heat in large regions where billions presently live. This terrible threat to human life calls for urgent action to limit warming and help at risk communities adapt.  

Adapting to hard limits 

 While 35°C can prove deadly, one study suggests a 32°C wet-bulb threshold as the hard limit for labour. More realistic, human-centred models found this overly optimistic, as direct exposure and other vulnerability factors were ignored. Vulnerable groups including unskilled labourers would be most at risk of losing their income.  

In densely populated urban centres, lethal humid heat is not just a future projection but a current reality. This calls for urgent adaptation measures which integrate the risk of deadly heat into urban planning, public health, early-warning systems and emergency response.  

Investments in green spaces, heat-resilient buildings and urban cooling are vital adaptation strategies. Community initiatives like awareness campaigns, indigenous cooling strategies and local heat action plans are also essential. Households could consider investing in cooling technologies or migrating – options mostly available to the wealthy.  

In Malawi, dubious cyclone aid highlights need for loss and damage fund

As climate change makes lethal humid heat a growing threat in some of the world’s most populous areas, more attention must be paid to understanding its risks – especially in vulnerable regions with huge data gaps. This demands a multidimensional response that combines scientific research, policymaking and community engagement.  

The potential scale and level of risk to human life also reinforces the importance of ensuring that the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C global warming limit is met. To do this, we need to halve emissions by 2030. Countries should therefore strengthen their 2030 emissions targets in line with the warming limit as they prepare equally ambitious 2035 targets in updated NDCs. 

The Pakistan heatwave is a terrible reminder of this often-underestimated threat. We must act now to limit warming while we adapt to the growing danger of deadly heat if we are to avoid potentially wide-reaching tragedies in the future.  

The post Developing countries need support adapting to deadly heat appeared first on Climate Home News.

The dire outlook for Argentina’s renowned higher education system under President Javier Milei, a right-wing populist, was highlighted on April 22 – Earth Day – by Argentine plant ecologist Pedro Jaureguiberry, who was announced as a finalist in the prestigious Frontiers Planet Prize.

​“The current budget for universities in 2024 is insufficient, adding to the fact that in recent years we have only received 20% of the budget we asked for conducting research at our lab,” Jaureguiberry,  an assistant researcher with the Multidisciplinary Institute of Plant Biology at the National University of Córdoba (UNC), told Climate Home.

The 44-year-old scientist, who has spent his entire academic career in Argentina, was shortlisted for the award as one of 23 national champions drawn from science research teams across six continents, in recognition of a study he led on the drivers of human-caused biodiversity loss.

Dr Jaureguiberry conducting fieldwork in central western Argentina. (Photo: Diego Gurvich)

Of the finalists, three international winners will be announced in June in Switzerland, receiving prize money of $1.1 million each for their role in groundbreaking scientific research.

Global billionaires tax to fight climate change, hunger rises up political agenda

With annual inflation running close to 300%, this year’s freeze on Argentina’s government budget for universities and scientific research amounts to a spending cut in real terms of around 80%, according to the University of Buenos Aires, which this month declared itself in an “economic emergency”.

On Tuesday, university teaching staff and students, backed by trade unions, will march in Buenos Aires and other cities “in defence of public education”, which they say faces a grave threat from the budget squeeze.

Met office hit by layoffs

Argentine meteorologist Carolina Vera, former vice-chair of a key working group responsible for the latest assessment report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said that in four decades of teaching and research she had never seen “such a level of dismantling through the reduction of research grants and programs with such disdain for knowledge”.

“This is very serious for atmospheric and ocean sciences, key to issues such as climate change, placing a whole new generation of meteorologists and climatologists in danger,” she told Climate Home from Trevelin, in the southern province of Chubut.

There has been widespread condemnation of 86 layoffs affecting administrative and other contractors at the National Scientific and Technical Research Council (CONICET), while Vera added that she is concerned about the situation at the National Meteorological Service, where 73 technicians have been let go. That, she warned, would affect the functionality of early warning and disaster prevention systems.

Canadian minister vows to fight attempts to weaken plastic pollution treaty

Climatic and meteorological challenges are increasing in Argentina, from heavy rains due to the El Niño weather phenomenon – which has caused an ongoing dengue epidemic – to extreme heat and wildfires.

A significant drought is forecast for the southern hemisphere summer of 2024-2025, from November to February, as El Niño gives way to an expected La Niña, with the National Meteorological Service having a key role to play in predicting conditions and disseminating information about them ahead of time.

Vera added that the budget restrictions on CONICET would also limit its research capabilities, particularly relating to climate change. “​We hope that this will be reversed soon,” she added.

Greenlight for extractive industries

Milei has branded climate change a “socialist lie” since 2021 and has also questioned public education for “brainwashing people” with Marxist ideology.

Sergio Federovisky, deputy minister of environment during the previous presidency of Alberto Fernández, said Milei is not only disdainful of scientific views on global warming but also on broader environmental protection. For example, Milei – a former university professor and television pundit – said during his presidential campaign that “a company can pollute a river all it wants”.

“Climate denialism is not a scientific position, but rather an argument used to release all types of extractive actions that could be hindered by an environmental policy on the use of natural resources and the concentration of wealth,” Federovisky told Climate Home from Buenos Aires.

Meeting between Argentine President Javier Milei and Elon Musk in Texas, United States, at the Tesla factory on April 12 2024, forging a partnership through which the government is betting on attracting investment to Argentina. (Photo: Prensa Casa Rosada via / Latin America News Agency / Reuters)

In an economic review published on February 1, which unlocked $4.7 billion to support the new government’s policies, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) expressed its support for investment to increase the exploitation of oil and gas reserves and metals mining in Argentina, in order to boost exports and government revenues.

World Bank head Ajay Banga told journalists before last week’s Spring Meetings that the Argentine economy is going through a “whole economic realignment”. The bank “is supportive of the direction of that economy” and looks forward “to working closely with their leadership to help them as they go forward”, he added.

Yet he also noted that the bank’s latest review of economic prospects for the region highlighted challenges, including the impacts of Argentina’s correction, with regional GDP projected to expand by 1.6 percent in 2024, one of the lowest rates in the world and insufficient to drive prosperity.

World Bank climate funding greens African hotels while fishermen sink

The IMF’s support for Milei’s neoliberal economic policies has been strongly criticised by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), which said on Friday that fiscal austerity “is not the answer when people’s lives and their democratic rights are at stake”.

“The IMF is celebrating the budget surplus in Argentina, but it’s indefensible to ignore the human cost of this economic shock therapy,” the ITUC’s General Secretary Luc Triangle said in a statement.

“Pensions have been slashed, thousands of public sector workers fired, public services are on the verge of collapse, unemployment is growing and food poverty spreading.”

Last week the government attempted to head off Tuesday’s protest by announcing a last-minute budget increase for maintenance costs for universities. But that was rejected by a national council of rectors and has not deterred the movement against the austerity measures, with large numbers set to come out onto the streets as planned.

(Reporting by Julián Reingold; editing by Megan Rowling)

The post Argentinian scientists condemn budget cuts ahead of university protest appeared first on Climate Home News.

This week, the UN climate change body (UNFCCC) confirmed that this year’s Regional Climate Weeks will be cancelled until further notice due to lack of funding.

The update comes shortly after UNFCCC chief Simon Stiell made an urgent plea at the Copenhagen Climate Ministerial last week to plug the body’s funding gap, stating that it is facing “severe financial challenges” – putting a rising workload at risk due to “governments’ failure to provide enough money”.

The suspension of the Regional Climate Weeks is hugely disappointing news.

It means that a vital platform to express the concerns of people and communities most affected by climate change has been taken away.

UN’s climate body faces “severe financial challenges” which put work at risk

The climate weeks are a vital opportunity to bring a stronger regional voice – those who are footing the bill in developing countries for a crisis they have done the least to cause – to the international table in the lead-up to the UN COP climate summits.

Last year we saw four regional climate weeks: Africa Climate Week in Nairobi, Kenya; Middle East and North Africa Climate Week in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; Latin America and the Caribbean Climate Week in Panama City, Panama; and Asia-Pacific Climate Week in Johor Bahru, Malaysia.

These attracted 26,000 participants in 900 sessions and brought together policymakers, scientists and other experts from the multiple regions, with fundamental contributions feeding into the COP28 agenda. 

At Africa Climate Summit alone, over 20 commitments were made by African heads of state – commitments and announcements that equated to a combined investment of nearly $26 billion from public, private sector and multilateral development banks, philanthropic foundations and other financing partners.

This is the right way forward because, while extreme weather events affect all of us, we know their impacts are not felt equally.

Shrinking water access

Extremes of both drought and floods are threatening people’s access to the three essentials they need to survive – clean water, decent toilets and good hygiene – as boreholes run dry, floods wash away latrines, and supplies are contaminated by silt and debris.

Around the world, ordinary people – farmers, community leaders, family members – are doing everything they can to adapt to the realities of life on the frontlines of climate change.

They’re working together to monitor water reserves, conserving supplies to make every drop last. They’re sowing crops that can withstand droughts, and planting trees to protect them from floods. And they’re building with future threats in mind, raising homes and toilets off the ground and making them safe from floodwaters.

Expectations mount as loss and damage fund staggers to its feet

Each Regional Climate Week provides a vital platform for those shouldering the heaviest burden of the climate crisis – such as women and girls, people experiencing marginalisation, and Indigenous communities – to share their experiences, expertise, and unique perspectives.  

The climate crisis is a water crisis, and the people on the frontlines of this crisis are vital to solving it. 

With leadership and participation from those vulnerable communities and groups, we are all better equipped to adapt to our changing climate – and to ensure that everyone, everywhere has climate-resilient water, sanitation and hygiene.

Each and every UN climate conference matters. We urgently need global governments to fuel their words with action, open their wallets and prioritise the voices, experiences and solutions of those most affected by the climate crisis. If not, we’ll continue to see climate change wash away people’s futures.

Dulce Marrumbe is head of partnerships and advocacy at WaterAid’s regional office for Southern Africa.

The post Cancellation of UN climate weeks removes platform for worst-hit communities appeared first on Climate Home News.

Debt-laden growers want an existing government procurement system to be made legally binding and to raise the minimum price for a wider range of crops – which could help them move away from thirsty rice and wheat farming.

But some agricultural analysts argue that bolstering the Minimum Support Price (MSP) for produce would not resolve the wider climate problems farmers face, nor ease demand for scarce water resources.

Expectations mount as loss and damage fund staggers to its feet

Deedar Singh, a 50-year-old farmer from Patiala, joined a march towards Delhi in mid-February and spoke to Climate Home at a camp on the Punjab-Haryana border, 200 km from Delhi. He participated in a similar mobilisation back in 2020 that lasted for just over a year.

With a family of nine to support, he complained that his five-acre landholding and meagre income of 200,000 rupees per year ($2,400) cannot provide a decent quality of life, especially as weather extremes worsen.

“If untimely rain destroys our rice or hot temperatures shrink the wheat grain, our crops are ruined, leaving us unable to even cover the costs of the next cropping season,” said Singh. Most people in his village rely on financial support sent by their children who have migrated abroad, he added.

Farmers gather at the Shambhu border, between Punjab and Haryana, to burn effigies of political leaders and shout slogans in support of the protest, February 27 2024 (Photo: Kanika Gupta)

Globally, India accounts for 10% of agricultural output and is the second-largest producer of rice and wheat. It is also the biggest consumer of groundwater. Its 260 million farmers depend heavily on depleting water reserves to irrigate their crops.

That means they are also struggling with climate change, as about 65% of the country’s cropped area depends on rainwater. Erratic rainfall and shorter winters are harming yields, with heavy downpours causing flooding and a sudden spike in temperatures a year ago causing wheat grain to shrink.

The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) reports that for every 1C increase in temperature, wheat production suffers a significant decline of 4-5 million tonnes.

Debt drives suicides

Water resources are running low and farmers’ input costs have soared – yet the government-administered minimum support price (MSP) has not risen accordingly, said Ramandeep Singh Mann, an agriculturist and member of Kisan Mazdoor Morcha, an umbrella body spearheading the current protest.

That has left farmers with no money to pay for contingencies and has forced many to take on high levels of debt, he said.

“At some point your back breaks. When that happens, there is no other solution but to take extreme steps,” he added, referring to suicides among indebted farmers.

To boost falling yields, farmers are using more inputs like water and fertilisers, leaving them with higher production costs and lower profit margins.

Some states have provided free or subsidised electricity, as well as loan forgiveness for debt-strapped farmers, but since 2014, only half of the intended waiver recipients have benefited, according to a study by the State Bank of India.

These woes have fuelled a growing wave of protest, as farmers feel they have no other recourse.

Nonetheless, Sardara Singh Johl, a 97-year-old agricultural economist from Ludhiana and former vice-chancellor at Punjab Agricultural University, said the latest mobilisation was unlikely to result in the dialogue required to address the broader problems facing farmers.

“They already have MSP for wheat and rice, and these are high-paying crops. Even if you reduce the price risk with MSP, what can you do about the other uncertainties?” he asked.

In mid-February, at the last round of talks with the government, ministers proposed to purchase five additional crops – moong dal, urad dal, tur dal, maize and cotton – from farmers at an MSP for five years through central agencies, but farmers rejected the offer.

Jagjit Singh Dallewal, leader of the non-political Samyukta Kisan Morcha group, which is also involved in organising the farmers’ protest, said the proposal would mainly benefit farmers willing to switch from paddy or wheat to other crops and would not ensure a stable income.

Farmer leaders give a press conference at Shambhu border, between Punjab and Haryana, on February 27 2024. Photo: Kanika Gupta)

Water reserves shrink amid over-use

Economist Johl argued that, irrespective of its profitability, rice is no longer a suitable crop for Punjab as its water table recedes to a dangerously low level.

A study by Punjab Agricultural University found that between 1998 and 2018, groundwater levels in the region had dropped drastically, from 10 metres below ground to 30 metres, largely due to a shift from traditional canal irrigation to widespread adoption of tube wells for water extraction.

Farmers are aware of Punjab’s dwindling water resources, said Mann, but they need guaranteed price support for more crops in order to shift away from water-intensive rice cultivation.

“They know that if they are able to earn as much as they do from paddy, they will grow other crops. But without fair support of MSP, it is hard to make that switch,” he said.

In Somalia, Green Climate Fund tests new approach for left-out communities

Uday Chandra, a professor of government at the Georgetown University in Qatar, said key food-supplying states like Punjab have struggled to get their problems heard and dealt with by the national government.

“The problem is that what the Punjab farmer wants isn’t sustainable,” he said, referring to the state’s shrinking water supplies. “The best way would be to bring them into discussion and find a solution that is specific to them.”

Trucks lined up at the Shambhu border, 200 km from Delhi, after being stopped by the central government from advancing to the Indian capital, February 27 2024 (Photo: Kanika Gupta)

Thousands of farmers who were initially stopped by heavy police control outside Delhi have now made it to the capital after receiving permission to protest at the Ramlila Maidan ground. They are determined to maintain their mobilisation during the general elections – which will take place over several weeks from late April until the start of June – if their MSP demands go unmet.

In 2021, angry farmers backed down after the government rowed back on laws that had sparked huge protests. But they have now returned to direct action, calling on the government to fulfill its promises, including demands for pensions, debt waivers, penalties for selling counterfeit agricultural inputs, and withdrawal from the World Trade Organization.

Call for high-tech solutions

Mann said climate change is compounding their woes – yet while the government acknowledges the problem, it is doing little to help the sector deal with it.

The Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

However, at the ICAR’s Annual General Meeting last month, Arjun Munda, Union Minister of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, said the Modi government is committed to bolstering the agricultural sector and supporting farmers, including with high-yielding, resilient seed varieties released by ICAR in the past decade.

It also issues Agromet weather-based crop advisories with the India Meteorological Department to about 60 million farmers twice a week and promotes practices for more efficient use of water and nutrients.

But protesting farmers said the government’s measures are failing to help them adapt adequately to a changing climate and water shortages.

Bhupinder Singh, a farmer in Punjab’s Mohali district, discusses his transition to organic farming methods as a means to prevent the burning of stubble remaining after rice cultivation, November 26 2023. (Photo: Kanika Gupta)

Haranjeet Singh, 53, of Ludhiana in Punjab, said the rice variety farmers are now planting gives smaller harvests, after the government suspended use of a more productive but thirstier variety which also took longer to mature and produced more stubble – a major cause of air pollution when burned.

“Unfortunately, these new seeds don’t give us as much yield,” he said. “We are spending the same amount of money and getting less in return.”

Madhura Swaminathan, daughter of the late MS Swaminathan – the architect of India’s Green Revolution which boosted crop yields and tackled the nation’s food scarcity issues in the 1970s – believes greater use of technology could help.

The professor at the Indian Statistical Institute in Bangalore pointed to an example she encountered in Amritsar a few years ago, where groundwater sensors were connected to mobile apps, enabling users to remotely control water pumps and conserve water.

“We must embrace new technologies, farming practices, and techniques to tackle the challenges brought by climate change,” she said.

The post What will it take to protect India’s angry farmers from climate threats? appeared first on Climate Home News.

It is proposing to create the first United Nations expert group to “examine risks and opportunities” of solar radiation management (SRM), a suite of largely untested technologies aimed at dimming the sun.

The panel would be made up of experts appointed by member states of the UN’s environment programme (Unep) and representatives of international scientific bodies, according to a draft resolution submitted by Switzerland and seen by Climate Home.

Governments will negotiate and vote on the proposal at Unep’s meeting due to start at the end of February in Nairobi, Kenya. It has been formally endorsed by Senegal, Georgia, Monaco and Guinea.

A Swiss government spokesperson told Climate Home that SRM is “a new topic on the political agenda” and Switzerland is “committed to ensuring that states are informed about these technologies, in particular about possible risks and cross-border effects”.

Split scientific opinions

Solar geoengineering is a deeply contested topic and scientists are divided over whether it should be explored at all as a potential solution.

Ines Camilloni, a climatology professor at the University of Buenos Aires, welcomed Switzerland’s proposal, saying the UN “is in a good position to facilitate equitable, transparent, and inclusive discussions”.

“There is an urgent need to continue researching the benefits and risks of SRM to guide decisions around research activities and deployment”, she told Climate Home.

Shell accused of trying to wash hands of Nigerian oil spill mess

But Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, head of climate science at Climate Analytics, says he is concerned about that prospect.

“The risk of such an initiative is that it elevates SRM as a real solution and contributes to the normalisation of something that is still very premature and hypothetical from a scientific perspective”, he added. “You need to be careful about unintended consequences and consider the risks of opening a Pandora’s box”.

An open letter signed by more than 400 scientists in 2022 called for an international “non-use agreement” on solar geoengineering. It also said United Nations bodies, including Unep, “are all incapable of guaranteeing equitable and effective multilateral control over the deployment of solar geoengineering technologies at planetary scale”.

Poorly understood risks

Long touted as a futuristic climate hack, solar geoengineering has risen in prominence in recent years as the prospect  of curbing emissions enough to limit global warming to 1.5C has faded.

The technologies aim to reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the planet’s surface. This could be achieved by pumping aerosols into the high atmosphere or by whitening clouds.

Its supporters say it could be a relatively cheap and fast way to counter extreme heat. But it would only temporarily reduce the impact of rising emissions, without tackling the root causes.

Argentine resistance hinders Milei’s forest and glacier destruction

The regional effects of manipulating the weather are hard to predict and large uncertainties over wider climate, social and economic implications remain.

Solar geoengineering could “introduce a widespread range of new risks to people and ecosystems, which are not well-understood”, the IPCC’s scientists said in their latest assessment of climate science.

Its critics argue that putting the SRM option on the table undermines existing climate policies and relieves pressure on polluters to reduce emissions as quickly as possible. There are also questions about how long this technology would be needed and what happens after it is stopped.

Space for discussion

In its proposal to the Unep assembly, Switzerland acknowledges the “potential global risks and adverse impacts”.

The 25-people-strong group would first be tasked with writing a comprehensive scientific report on solar geoengineering.

But the main goal would be to establish “a space for an informed discussion” about research on the potential use of SRM, giving the possibility for future decisions on how that should be governed, according to an accompanying technical note seen by Climate Home.

It is not the first time Switzerland brings a resolution on solar geoengineering to the Unep summit. In 2019, its attempt to get countries to agree to the development of a governance framework failed as a result of opposition from Donald Trump’s USA and Saudi Arabia – who didn’t want restrictions on geoengineering.

Calls for more research

Last year, Unep produced an “independent expert review” of the subject, concluding that “far more research” is needed “before any consideration for potential deployment” of SRM.

A Unep spokesperson said the exact characteristics of the group proposed by Switzerland would need to be negotiated at the upcoming summit. But, if approved, it would differ from any previous panel “because it would have a clear mandate from member states” with experts directly appointed by them.

Problems mount for Sahara gas pipeline, leaving Nigerian taxpayers at risk

Ines Camilloni was one of the authors of last year’s UNEP report. She says “managing the risks of climate change requires a portfolio of policy responses”, of which mitigation and adaptation would be the most important and urgent.

But she added that “SRM has been proposed as a complementary approach” and more research is needed to weigh its benefits and risks against the impact of adverse climate scenarios.

A panel of leaders called the Overshoot Commission also recommended last year that governments expand research into solar geoengineering while placing a moratorium on large-scale experiments outdoors. 

A rogue SRM experiment conducted by a US startup in Mexico led the Mexican government to announce a ban on solar geoengineering in January 2023.

‘Precautionary approach’

Mary Church, a campaigner at the CEnter for International Environmental Law, says “it’s hard to see what could be gained from establishing an expert group under Unep”.

“There’s a real risk that such a group could undermine the existing regulatory framework and inadvertently provide legitimacy for solar geoengineering technology development and experimentation”.

Countries should instead “take a precautionary approach, commit to non-use, and prioritise a fast, fair and funded phase out of fossil fuels”, she added.

The post Switzerland proposes first UN expert group on solar geoengineering appeared first on Climate Home News.

This global goal is a playbook for how the world is going to adapt to a climate that is changing rapidly and will continue to change, even if we ended fossil fuel use today. Across the world millions of people, most of whom are least responsible for carbon emissions, are attempting to adapt their lives and livelihoods to a distorted climate.

This adaptation playbook is about more than money. It covers adaptation plans for a host of sectors, including farming, nature, health, water and transport among others. To be useful, this playbook needs a series of targets to plan actions, track investments and assess the effectiveness of adaptation measures and spending. These metrics need to specify what changes are needed to be in line with the science, by when and how to measure progress.

Funding gap

Although it isn’t just about money, funding is important and severely lacking. The goal for 2023 was to raise $300m for the Adaptation Fund, but at Cop28 we’ve only seen $169m in pledges, a mere 56% of the intended amount.

This is particularly galling considering that only last month, the UN’s Environment Programme published its Adaptation Gap report which calculates the difference between the world’s adaptation need and the amount of finance that has been committed. It found that this gap stands at around $387 billion. This is 10-18 times the actual finance flows to the countries and 50% more than the previous estimate.

Considering emissions are still going up, it’s a travesty that adaptation spending is falling. We are on course for a humanitarian crisis if this adaptation funding doesn’t match the rise in emissions.  And adaptation finance is great value for money.  As Barbados prime minister Mia Mottley pointed out at Cop28, every $1 invested in adaptation saves $7 in loss and damage.

For example, small-scale family farms are especially vulnerable and need urgent scaling up of adaptation finance; 2.5 billion people rely on them for a livelihood. They produce a third of the world’s food and as much as half of the calories consumed globally but receive just 0.3% of climate finance.

US blocking

The problem is that here in Dubai, rich countries, especially the US, are blocking progress on the adaptation playbook. To some degree that’s understandable. It is rich, high emitting countries like the US that need to contribute most to adaptation funding and take responsibility for the climate harm they have caused and continue to cause.

But by dragging their feet, these countries are playing games with people’s lives. The adaptation talks at Cop28 are crucial as we’re not going to reduce emissions fast enough and therefore do actually need to tackle the impacts of climate change. We can’t just settle for vague and aspirational objectives, we need a concrete plan that spells out how adaptation will be implemented for the people that need it most.

African countries are the biggest cheerleaders for adaptation. It is Africans who are facing some of the most damaging impacts from the climate crisis. It’s no wonder that Africa’s chief negotiator in Dubai said agreement in Dubai on adaptation was a matter of life and death.

The Cop28 host nation’s close ties with the fossil fuel industry understandably makes for an easy story, but when it comes to whether this Cop did enough to help the world’s climate vulnerable, it will be on whether it delivers strong language on a robust global response to the adaptation crisis that will be the real test.

Mohamed Adow is the founder and director of Power Shift Africa

The post Adaptation playbook is the true test of Cop28 for world’s vulnerable appeared first on Climate Home News.

The claim made by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which carries out an annual assessment of the pledge, is based “on preliminary and as yet unverified data” that has not been made public.

Detailed figures have been made available for 2021, when developed nations gave $89.6 billion to developing countries – a slight increase from the amount of money provided the previous year.

“Symbolic” milestone

The figures pale in comparison with the trillions of dollars that vulnerable nations are estimated to need to cut emissions and better cope with the effects of climate change. But the “symbolic” $100 billion commitment, first made in 2009 in Copenhagen, has been a continuous source of diplomatic tensions since countries failed to hit the target by the 2020 deadline.

Germany’s climate minister Jennifer Morgan told reporters she hoped this sends “a reassuring signal to our partners”.

“It is a target that we had hoped to meet earlier”, she added. “We hope that this is a foundation to perhaps build some confidence in our commitment to work together with developing countries moving forward”.

Adaptation money falls

Despite the overall increase, specific funding for adaptation declined by $4 billion to $24.6 billion. The setback casts doubts over whether developed countries will be able to meet a pledge made at Cop26 to double their provision of adaptation finance to $40.6 billion by 2025.

Poor countries heavily rely on international public finance for things like early warning systems, flood barriers or drought-resistant agriculture that are less attractive to investors than renewables.

“We have seen a reduction in finance and a stalling of flows for adaptation initiatives,” UNEP’s chief scientist Dr. Andrea Hinwood told Climate Home earlier this month. “We really must act now. It’s only with fast, urgent, consolidated action with appropriate finance flows that we have a chance to address those issues.”

Loans fuel debt fears

Vulnerable countries have long called for a significant increase in the provision of grants over loans, which they argue push them further into debt. But loans continued to represent over two-thirds of the money provided in 2021, with grants making up 30% of the total.

Harjeet Singh, Climate Action Network’s head of global political strategy, said the prevalence of loans exacerbates financial disparities. “It is imperative that rich countries radically shift their approach, focusing on providing substantive support rather than resorting to symbolic gestures”, he added.

France, Kenya set to launch Cop28 coalition for global taxes to fund climate action

Canada’s climate minister Steven Guilbeault recognised more needs to be done, saying the $100 billion goal is “an important milestone, but it does not solve all of our problems”.

“We know the conversation needs to shift from mobilizing a hundred billion dollars to mobilizing 10-15 times that. That’s what our collective challenge is”, he added.

UK aid cuts leave Malawi vulnerable to droughts and cyclones

With significantly more money unlikely to be dished out of public purses, rich countries are increasingly looking at alternative solutions. Alongside reforms of multilateral development banks, like the World Bank, big hopes are pinned on contributions from the private sector.

But the latest OECD data risks dampening some of that enthusiasm. Private capital mobilised through public incentives, such as guarantees, has broadly stagnated since 2017, with only $14.4 billion made available to developing countries last year.

The post OECD: Rich countries ‘likely’ to hit $100bn climate finance goal in 2022 appeared first on Climate Home News.

Flood water had destroyed all her corn crops, an essential lifeline to feed her family and earn a modest income. The spiralling costs of seeds and fertilisers put replanting beyond her reach.

“The cyclone left me completely with nothing”, she told Climate Home News.

As Sandram searched for help, she said no relief was available aside from the limited support she could obtain from family members.

Elube Sandram was among the beneficiaries of the UK-funded programme in Malawi’s Chikwawa district. Photo: Raphael Mweninguwe

Her problems could have been prevented. In 2018, she registered for a £52 million ($63m) UK aid programme which helped vulnerable Malawians better cope with climate-driven floods and droughts.

But during the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, the UK government cut back its aid spending, ending support for Sandram and many others in Malawi and around the world.

Let down

The programme that Sandram was involved with was run by UN agencies and NGOs and helped farmers by providing them with tools, training on things like pig farming and financial assistance like weather-related insurance or cash transfers.

The idea was that it’s not quite so disastrous if a flood or a drought destroys a farmers’ crops if they have livestock or an insurance payout to keep putting food on the table.

But following the UK’s cutbacks, several parts of the scheme have been reduced or axed altogether.

The activities run by a group of NGOs were wound down in 2021, two and a half years before their scheduled end. Concern Worldwide and Goal Malawi, the main implementing partners, closed their local offices. Only a series of projects with a more limited scope operated by UN agencies are still running.

Aubrey Kabudula, a farmer from Kwataine Village in Chikwawa, told Climate Home: “We were told that one of the objectives is to help people to be climate-resilient.”

“With its abrupt closure we do not think that has been achieved,” he said.

World Bank to initially host loss and damage fund under draft deal

It is an assessment shared by the Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI), the UK body tasked with scrutinising how foreign aid is spent.

In June, they said that the project had been “highly effective and coherent” but had been “undermined” by cutbacks to aid and the downsizing or removal of components.

A rice field in Malawi’s Karonga region affected by drought in early 2023. Credit: Eldson Chagara

Issues are only likely to get worse. Malawi is increasingly struggling with more frequent and intense cycles of flooding and droughts. The passage of Cyclone Freddy in March killed more than 600 people and displaced at least 650,000 more, while also dismantling infrastructures and livelihoods.

Climate shocks have exacerbated poverty levels, especially for rural farmers. The World Bank estimates that over half of the country’s 19.1 million people live in poverty with women being the most affected. Low agriculture production because of droughts and floods is cited as one of the main causes.

Rishi Sunak’s rollbacks

Countries like Malawi cannot afford to address these problems alone.

Unsustainable levels of existing public debt rule out borrowing at expensive rates as an option. Most of Malawi’s climate plans are funded through grant-based international public finance provided by rich countries like the United Kingdom.

At the United National General Assembly in 2019 the then-prime minister Boris Johnson made a big, and unexpected, announcement.

He promised the UK would double its international climate finance to reach a target of £11.6 billion ($14.2bn) in 2026.

Only a few months later the global Covid-19 pandemic upended daily lives and economic orders, prompting an abrupt rethink of spending priorities.

International aid was one of the casualties. Then finance minister Rishi Sunak cut its foreign aid target from 0.7% of gross national income to 0.5%.

With Sunak now prime minister, this “temporary measure” has yet to be reversed.

Since then, the competition for a shrinking pool of money has intensified as aid funding has been diverted to support Afghan and Ukrainian refugees hosted in the UK.

Australia to accept migrants from climate-hit Tuvalu in security pact

An internal government document reported on by the Guardian suggested the £11.6bn goal could be dropped as general aid cut-backs make it a “huge challenge”.

Not just Malawi

The cuts have hit climate projects around the world. UK-funded climate resilience projects have been cut or delayed in India, Pakistan, Nepal, Kenya and small-island states.

Government figures show that the number of people whose climate resilience was improved by UK aid flatlined for the first time since records began in the last financial year.

In India, a foreign office report found that budget cuts meant that activities to help rural communities cope with climate impacts had been “reduced, slowed down and stopped in some instances”.

In Pakistan, a foreign office report found that a £38 million ($46m) climate resilience plan had been paused for 18 months because of “uncertainty… following significant and unanticipated costs incurred to support the people of Ukraine and Afghanistan in finding refuge in the UK.

A large-scale project aiming to help a series of African countries build resilience to climate change suffered a significant “scale back from its original ambition”, as its annual summary said.

The programme envisaged a £250 million ($306m) budget in its business case, but this has now been reduced to “up to £100 million” ($122m).

Targets have been scaled back too. One original target was to improve the resilience of four million people through an early-warning system. That’s been reduced to three million.

In Chikwawa the climate project has still left a mark in the minds of many people despite the cutbacks.

The beneficiaries now hope that the country, a former British colony, will not be entirely forgotten.

“I am still optimistic that the assistance that we were receiving from the donor [UK government], will not be gone forever,” said Sandram. “And if I were to be asked whether that funding should resume or not, I will say it should resume because climate change is here to stay.”

The post UK aid cuts leave Malawi vulnerable to droughts and cyclones appeared first on Climate Home News.

At Cop28 next month, governments are expected to approve a framework to make the Paris Agreement’s global goal on adaptation (GGA) more concrete. The initiative is aimed at enhancing nations’ resilience to extreme weather events, flooding, droughts and sea level rise.

Adaptation is one of the key priorities of the Paris Agreement, alongside emission reductions. But challenges in defining, measuring and funding action on this front have held back progress at the same time as climate risks are accelerating.

Two years ago, at Cop26, countries agreed to a two-year work programme to fill this gap. Developing countries most affected by climate change hoped this would unlock finance to reduce their vulnerability.

Widening finance gap

Developing countries need an estimated $387 billion a year to carry out their current adaptation plans, but in 2021 they only received $21 billion in international adaptation finance, according to a recent report by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP).

“We have seen a reduction in finance and a stalling of flows for adaptation initiatives,” UNEP’s chief scientist Dr. Andrea Hinwood told Climate Home. “We really must act now. It’s only with fast, urgent, consolidated action with appropriate finance flows that we have a chance to address those issues.”

World Bank to initially host loss and damage fund under draft deal

Money is a sticking point in negotiations over the adaptation framework.

Developing countries want the agreement to tackle the question of finance directly, ideally with a dedicated target. On the other hand, developed countries, which would be called upon to foot the bill, oppose any mention of money in the text.

Money struggles

Disagreements nearly sunk talks over the framework in Bonn last June, before being rescued in the eleventh hour. Four months later, as negotiators met for one last time before Cop28, fundamental divisions remained.

The African group proposed the inclusion of a target for the funding of “at least 80% of expressed needs by developing countries” with the size of adaptation finance reaching at least $400bn annually by 2030.

A proposal by China on behalf of the “like-minded group” of developing countries says the framework should require developed countries to provide developing countries with “long-term, scaled-up, predictable, new and additional finance”.

A girl fetches water by digging a hole in a dried up waterbed during a drought in Somalia (Photo: UNDP Somalia/Flickr)

A developed country negotiator told Climate Home they “cannot live” with any references to finance in the framework.

“We want to discuss the substance and not the money. We don’t see the GGA framework as the space to talk about a new climate finance target for adaptation,” they said. “Adaptation finance will be addressed somewhere else and will enable the framework to be effective.”

The European Union suggested in its latest proposal that the role of finance in delivering the targets could be referenced in a decision text outside of the framework.

Forests, methane, finance: Where are the Cop26 pledges now?

But developing countries fear that approving a set of actions without clear indications within the text of how to fund them would lead to an “empty framework”.

Lisa Yassin, a negotiator from the group of least developed countries, told Climate Home “it is critical” the question of finance is addressed within the framework.

“It ensures a commitment to ongoing and enhanced funding that is directly responsive to the needs outlined within the framework’s targets,” she said. “It also guarantees its centrality and better accountability beyond Cop28.”

Broken promises

Fuelling divisions is a deepening distrust by developing countries over rich nations’ failure to cough up cash promised for climate action. Developed countries have still not made good on a 2009 pledge to collectively provide $100bn a year by 2020 to help developing countries cut their emissions and adapt to climate impacts.

They are also off track to meet a promise made at Cop26 to double the adaptation finance for developing countries to around $40 billion by 2025. Adaptation public finance flows to developing countries declined by 15% in 2021 to $21 billion, according to UNEP.

Richard Klein, senior research fellow at the Stockholm Environment Institute, expects “a very difficult conversation” about adaptation finance at Cop28. “If trust and confidence were there that there will be enough money on the table, the question of money under the GGA framework would have not been that crucial. But everybody sees that is not the case,” he added.

Numbers vs high-level targets

Money is not the only dividing line in talks over the adaptation framework. Governments are also split over the wider set of targets that should be included in the text.

Developing nations are pushing for specific numerical targets driving adaptation action. A long list of proposed options includes, for example, measures to protect all humanity with early warning systems for hazardous events by 2027, to boost climate resilience by at least 50% by 2030, and to reduce adverse climate impacts on agricultural production by 50% by 2030.

The OECD must take its chance to stop funding oil and gas

Developed countries, on the other hand, prefer high-level targets that focus more on the process of adaptation policy rather than on specific activities. Both the EU and the UK, for instance, have called for the inclusion of a deadline by which all countries have national adaptation plans in place.

“We are hesitant on quantification. You cannot copy and paste the template of emission reduction targets, it doesn’t really work for adaptation,” a developed country negotiator told Climate Home. “We don’t have baselines, it’s difficult to measure, there are plenty of questions there.”

The post Talks to boost ‘underfinanced’ climate adaptation split over money appeared first on Climate Home News.

The plan, announced in late August by the country’s Minister of Transportation, Renan Filho, was met with suspicion by environmentalists who are familiar with the fund’s guidelines.

During a press conference announcing new infrastructure investments, Filho said he plans to pitch the fund’s governing board a project to pave BR319, a road that cuts through the Amazon forest and connects two major cities in the north of Brazil — Manaus and Porto Velho. 

But environmentalists argue that this is not the kind of project that the fund is supposed to support. 

“The Amazon Fund is meant to keep the forest standing, to maintain its biodiversity, and to fight climate change. I don’t see its resources being used for paving. It would be completely incompatible with its guidelines,” says Sila Mesquita, president of the NGO Amazon Working Group and current representative of civil organisations in the Amazon Fund committee. 

One of the fund’s creators, forest scientist Tasso Azevedo also disagrees with the Ministry of Transportation’s plan. 

“I don’t think it makes any sense. This project does not fit into any of the fund’s planned support lines,” says Azevedo, currently coordinator at MapBiomas, an initiative to monitor land use in Brazil developed by a network of universities, NGOs, and technology companies. 

Created in 2008, the Amazon Fund has over $1.2 billion available for projects that prevent, monitor and combat deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. The fund gets its money mainly from its largest donors — Norway, Germany and state-owned oil company Petrobras.

Controversial comeback

In 2019, the Amazon Fund was virtually paralysed by former president Jair Bolsonaro, who dissolved the committee that sets guidelines on how the money should be spent. 

Because of this political move, the money was frozen for over three years, since new projects could not be analysed. Donor countries Norway and Germany also suspended new contributions during Bolsonaro’s term. 

Revived by president Lula on his first day in the office, new potential investors have lined up.

Last week, Denmark announced a donation of $22 million, joining the UK, USA, Switzerland, and the EU, all of which advertised new contributions since Lula reinstated the fund. 

The initiative had funded 102 projects amounting to over $360 million until it was paralysed by Bolsonaro. 

But none of the supported projects were related to road infrastructure, according to the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES), which manages the fund. 

“So far, the BNDES has not received any requests for financing a road infrastructure project using resources from the Amazon Fund,” BNDES told Climate Home News.

New guidelines

The bank also highlighted that any requests are processed “in accordance with the strategic vision, guidelines and focuses” outlined in the 2023-25 ​​Biennium, a new set of guidelines created by the Amazon Fund’s Guiding Committee. 

The new rules for how the money should be spent in the next two years were set by a committee formed by representatives of NGOs, environmental agencies and governmental institutions such as Brazil’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Environment. 

One of the members of this committee, Sila Mesquita, believes that the guidelines do not align with the project presented by the Ministry of Transportation.

The ministry, however, argues that the paving of BR319 would turn the road into the world’s “most sustainable highway” and would allow easier access for police patrols to monitor and prevent deforestation. 

“Our commitment, in addition to guaranteeing economic and social development by granting citizens the right to come and go, is also to ensure that the BR319 is a model in terms of environmental conservation,” the Ministry of Transportation told Climate Home News. 

Road through the rainforest

The BR319 is a federal highway that serves as the only link between two large states in the North of Brazil: Amazonas and Rondônia. 

Built during the 1970s, the road was delivered completely paved, but was closed a decade later due to lack of maintenance. Since then, only branches of the highway are paved and allow for regular traffic.

According to BR-319 Observatory, a collective of organisations that operate in the highway’s area, re-paving the road without conservation measures and proper consultation to indigenous communities can be prejudicial to the Amazon and encourage deforestation. 

The BR319 cuts through several conservation areas, including indigenous territories. Its indirect impact spans an ever larger perimeter

Several studies show that proximity to transportation networks is a major proximate driver of deforestation in the Amazon. Recent research has pointed out that 95% of the deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon happens within 5.5 km of a legal or illegal road. Considering only the official road network, most of the deforestation happens within 50 km of the nearest road. 

The complete paving of BR319, planned by the current Ministry of Transportation, still depends on several approvals from the Brazilian Institute for the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (Ibama).

“For this road to be sustainable, like the government says, it needs to be beneficial for all those conservation parks and indigenous territories that it cuts through. We have to ask the people who live there what is sustainable for them. It’s not about being for or against the paving of a road: it’s about taking into consideration science, technology and the local communities as well,” says Sila Mesquita.

The post Brazilian government eyes money from Amazon Fund for controversial road appeared first on Climate Home News.

The Overshoot Commission was set up last year to examine ways of reducing risks if and when global heating surpasses 1.5C.

In a report published on Thursday, it called for an acceleration in emission reductions, more resources to adapt to the impact of climate change and scaling up technologies to suck carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

The Commission also called for international discussions and scientific research on solar radiation modification (SRM). The technology aims to reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the planet’s surface. This could be achieved by pumping aerosols into the high atmosphere or by whitening clouds.

The Overshoot Commission is talking about solar geoengineering. Not everyone thinks it should

Its proponents say it could be a relatively cheap and fast way to counter extreme heat. But it would only temporarily mask the impact of rising emissions, not tackle the root cause. The regional effects of manipulating the weather are hard to predict and risk worsening climate impacts in some places.

The report acknowledged the technology’s potential drawbacks, but refused to take the option off the table. “It would be imprudent not to investigate or discuss SRM because present evidence suggests the possibility it could complement other approaches,” the Commission wrote.

During a press conference, its president Pascal Lamy said appeals not to discuss solar geoengineering “feel fickle” and “not the way to go”.

A fractured debate

Scientists Climate Home News were divided on the wisdom of this approach.

“The report creates a sort of parity between acknowledging the need for emission reductions and elevating technologically uncertain or even dangerous management options,” said Ben Sanderson, a climate scientist at CICERO. “By expanding research, the idea of SRM gets increasingly normalised, while distracting from real climate mitigation”.

James Haywood, Professor of Atmospheric Science at the University of Exeter, argued the Commission struck a reasonable balance between risks and opportunities. “Current conventional mitigation efforts are widely acknowledged to be insufficient to maintain global mean climate temperatures below 1.5C,” he said. “It therefore makes a great deal of sense to research whether SRM proposals could be used to reduce the worst impacts of climate change.”

‘No stone unturned’

Hosted by the Paris Peace Forum, the commission comprises 13 global leaders, including former presidents and ministers.

Its president Pascal Lamy said “we have to leave no stone unturned”, as the world is on track to exceed the 1.5C goal set by the Paris Agreement. Temperature rises of up to 2.6C can be expected based on current climate plans, according to the UN’s global stocktake report released last week.

As efforts to reduce emissions fall short, geoengineering options become increasingly tempting. Most are highly speculative and there are no global rules on what countries or companies can do.

A rogue SRM experiment conducted by a US startup in Mexico’s northern state of Baja California led the government to announce a ban on solar geoengineering.

Moratorium calls

The Commission said countries should introduce a moratorium on “the deployment or large-scale experiments” of SRM. The ban should apply to any activity with “risk of significant transboundary harm” and should stay in place until the scientific community gains a better understanding of the technology.

Chukwumerije Okereke, professor of Global Climate Governance and Public Policy at Bristol University, argues the moratorium is poorly defined and calls for a total pause on experiments. “What does large-scale mean? This could lead to rogue researchers making a test at a time when we don’t even know the full effects,” he added. “This is not a position that is ethical, sensible and recognises the dangers.”

G20 leaders strike renewables deal, stall on fossil fuels

Many scientists are concerned SRM could create damage the ozone layer or inequally distribute extreme weather events like droughts or flooding across the world.

There are also questions about how long this technology would be needed and what happens after it is stopped. Ben Sanderson says early modelling indicates that cessation could fast-track severe disruption, with the potential to experience decades’ worth of changes in a year. “We would live in a high-risk world,” he added.

Moral hazard

Central to the geoengineering debate is the so-called moral hazard argument: the idea that researching technologies to remove CO2 or mask its effects undermines support for existing climate policies.

The Commission says the priority is to accelerate emission cuts by replacing fossil fuels and transitioning to clean energy. It also says technologies like SRM and carbon removal should only be seen as additional measures.

Laurence Tubiana, one of the commission’s members, tweeted that “we cannot be fooled by the false promises of simple techno-fix solutions”.

The Climate Overshoot Commission, an independent high-level political group, launched its report on potential approaches to address overshoot
Our main takeaway: climate change impacts the most vulnerable & equitably accelerating deep emissions cuts remains the utmost priority 1/5

— Laurence Tubiana (@LaurenceTubiana) September 14, 2023

But Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, a scientist at Climate Analytics, believes simply putting the option on the table relieves pressure from the obligation to reduce emissions. “Giving it a prominent space on the agenda has a negative effect,” he said.

Carbon removal push

Alongside SRM, the Commission pushed for a faster development of carbon dioxide removal (CDR). The term comprises a vast number of methods to remove CO2 from the atmosphere: from natural activities like tree planting to technological ones such as direct air capture.

The report says governments should promote a rapid expansion of “higher quality CDR at scale” by incentivising innovation, including through subsidies.

UN says more needed ‘on all fronts’ to meet climate goals

The use of CDR is the subject of much debate in the climate policy world. Activities like tree planting need vast swathes of land and carry the risk of releasing pollutants back into the atmosphere in case of a forest fire.

Direct air capture is energy hungry and expensive at the moment.

The International Energy Agency estimates that removing a ton of carbon dioxide costs between $135 and $135 with DAC today – although this could drop to below $100 by 2030.

According to the IPCC scientists, this is far more expensive than reducing emissions with renewable energy or energy efficiency.

The post Overshoot Commission calls for research into solar geoengineering appeared first on Climate Home News.

The Vaca Muerta Sur terminal could bring a surge in Argentina’s oil and gas exports, unlocking the Vaca Muerta field, which holds the world’s second-largest shale gas reserves and the fourth-largest shale oil reserve.

The terminal’s construction site in the San Matías gulf is a hotspot for marine biodiversity and a popular site for whale-watching.

Relevant authorities in Río Negro province support the project, citing economic benefits. They are holding public hearings to approve the terminal’s environmental studies.

Campaigners held demonstrations against the project, accusing the authorities of a lack of transparency and shutting down critics.

Ahead of elections, Argentina’s leaders wrap fossil fuels in the flag

According to the Argentine Institute of Oil and Gas (IAPG), Vaca Muerta could produce three times more oil and gas than it does today. It is limited mostly by a lack of infrastructure and investments. The Vaca Muerta Sur terminal is a key piece of infrastructure to unlock the field’s potential.

The coalition of climate NGOs Global Gas and Oil Network called Vaca Muerta a “carbon bomb”, citing its potential to release up to 50 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere across its lifetime.

The EU, in particular, has shown interest in the Argentina’s gas supplies. In July, the bloc signed an agreement with the country to work on a “stable delivery” of gas from Vaca Muerta to Europe. Brazil has also contributed funds to unlock Vaca Muerta’s exports.

Push from local government

The export terminal is a key piece of YPF’s plan to develop the Vaca Muerta field, which has received overwhelming support across political factions. Regional decision-makers in particular have been instrumental to advance the project.

Provincial regulations have prohibited hydrocarbon projects in the San Matías gulf since the 90s, but in 2022 regulators reversed the provincial legislation to allow YPF to develop the terminal.

Last week, the Sierra Grande municipality held public hearings where YPF presented environmental impact studies for the terminal and the associated 570 km pipeline. 

Cristian Fernandez, from the legal department at the Argentine Foundation of Natural Resources (FARN), criticised the environmental studies submitted by YPF. He said there is no contingency plan for pipeline leaks and oil spills.

Protesters on the coast of Río Negro during the Second Plurinational Encounter, which took place in March 2023. (Photo: Carolina Blumenkranc)

But local authorities defended the project, and claimed to have risks under control. Sierra Grande’s mayor, Renzo Tamburini, said the project would help develop the region.

Dina Migani, Secretary of the Environment and Climate Change of Río Negro province, also voiced her support for the project and played down concerns, despite the project’s proximity to whale transit routes.

“In the survey of the entire trace there are no indigenous lands, and the oil monobuoy is 7km away, near the route where the right whales (Eubalaena australis) transit, as happens in Chubut below Puerto Madryn,” Migani told Climate Home.

Shutting down opposition

Fabricio DiGiacomo, a resident in the neighbouring Las Grutas community registered at the public hearing, voiced his opposition to the project, but was not allowed to enter the session. 

“Vaca Muerta has had, on average, about five (oil-spilling) accidents per day since it began its operations, so I do not see how they are capable of defending it”, added DiGiacomo, who rejected the public audience for being “fraudulent”.

The Argentine Association of Environmental Lawyers said in a statement they would submit a legal challenge to the process, which they claimed lacked open access to information and left opposers out of the hearings in an “unjustified” way.

They also claimed that, during the hearings, demonstrators received threats and intimidation from police and supporters of the project.

Soy, beef and gold gangsters: Why Bolivia and Venezuela won’t protect the Amazon

Pablo Lada, a local activist from the neighbouring province of Chubut, says that other nearby communities were left out of the conversation on the San Matías gulf, San José gulf and Golfo Nuevo — which all encompass the Valdés Peninsula, a World Heritage Site.

Dina Migani, from Río Negro’s provincial Ministry of the Environment defended the process and said registrations were open to all residents of Sierra Grande.

Fragile site for biodiversity

The Vaca Muerta Sur terminal is meant to connect the Vaca Muerta shale fields through a 570 km pipeline to the sea. This would allow for Argentina to enter the international market as a major oil and gas exporter.

But the export terminal needed for this to happen is located in a fragile site for biodiversity, according to experts. 

Marine species such as right whales, dolphins and killer whales could be affected by oil spills and shipping traffic, said Raúl González, marine biologist from the National University of Comahue.

Southern Right Whale specimens tracked by scientists in the San Matías gulf. Organised by name and colour, they are Aguamarina (red), Zafiro (yellow), Topacio (green), Fluorita (light blue), Coral (blue) and Turquesa (pink). Source: Siguiendo Ballenas.

The impacts to biodiversity, González said, depend on the contingency plans for oil spills and the routes selected for shipping transit.

The Argentine Association of Whaling Guides called for the cessation of the project, citing Argentina’s commitment to the Cop15 biodiversity pact to protect 30% of oceans by 2030.

In a letter sent to provincial legislators, a coalition of environmental NGOs said pushing the terminal “is to condemn the present and future of current and future generations”.

This story was edited on August 31, 2023, to amend Fabricio DiGiacomo’s residence.

The post ‘Carbon bomb’ in Argentina gets push from local government appeared first on Climate Home News.

Since 2013, China has been trying to make cities like Beijing more flood-proof by replacing roads, pavements and rooftops with natural materials like soil that soak up water and by giving more space to water bodies like lakes to absorb stormwater.

But despite these measures, massive amounts of rainfall in recent weeks caused floods which killed at least 33 people, destroyed tens of thousands of homes and shut down the Chinese capital’s second busiest airport.

Experts told Climate Home the flooding shows the limited progress China has made on its plan to invest $1 trillion into sponge cities by 2030 – with the city still largely concrete.

Sponge airport overwhelmed

Even new infrastructure, build with the sponge city concept in mind, could not cope with the rains.

Daxing airport opened a few months before the Covid-19 pandemic. Its builders described it as a “sponge airport” as it was equipped with plants on its roof, a huge wetland and an artificial lake the size of over 1,000 Olympic swimming pools.

Despite these measures, the runways flooded on July 30 and it had to cancel over 50 flights.

Floods engulf Beijing Daxing Airport, halting flightshttps://www.yenisafak.com/en/video-gallery/news/floods-engulf-beijing-daxing-airport-halting-flights-3668129 pic.twitter.com/YabfuQbC9Y

— Yeni Şafak English (@yenisafakEN) August 2, 2023

Waters diverted

The government tried to collect the rain in 155 reservoirs in the Hai River Basin, but the measure proved ineffective in controlling the deluge.

About 50 years ago, the basin –a natural sponge–was locked with embankments and reservoirs to manage the water flow.

In recent years though, these structures have made flooding worse as climate change has increased the frequency and intensity of extreme rainfall. These structures lead to overflow, collapse and the authorities have blown them up to ease flooding.

Indonesia delays $20bn green plan

Reuters reported that flood waters locked in reservoirs were diverted to low-lying populated land in Zhuozhuo, a small city around 80km from Beijing, to flush out the stormwater from the country’s national capital.

Residents of Zhuozhou were angry at the government’s response, Reuters reported. The government reacted by shutting down criticism on social media.

More work needed

Experts argued that these problems show that, rather than abandoning the sponge city project, China and Beijing need to double down and make them better.

Kongjian Yu is the founder of Turenscape, a company involved in the project. He said that just “maybe 1% or 10%” of the city has been converted to a sponge city.

The government’s target is 20% by 2030. “We have a long way to go,” he said.

Yu added that sponge cities are worth doing not just because they control floods but for managing droughts and refilling groundwater supplies too.

US sparks controversy by backing oil company’s carbon-sucking plans

Tony Wong, professor of sustainable development at Monash University, said that progress was always going to be slow as “it takes a long time and a lot of money” to convert a city like Beijing, with lots of people and concrete buildings crammed into a small area, into a sponge city.

More work is needed, says Wong, because Beijing and many other cities lack effective urban planning, and there is no provision for a safe channeling of extreme floodwater.

“What the city needs is the inclusion of green corridors, just like Singapore – another high-density city- has done to transport excess stormwater into low-lying areas to prevent loss of lives and property.”

If China pulls this off it could become an example for many developing countries with high-density cities struggling to control urban flooding, added Wong.

The post Devastating Beijing floods test China’s ‘sponge cities’ appeared first on Climate Home News.

As economic models fail to include tipping points, floods, droughts or indoor work, they hugely underplay the economic damage that global warming will do, the reports argue.

The models are relied upon by investors, politicians, central bank governors and influential bodies like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

An IPCC report last year, which was signed off by all governments, summarised these models to conclude that warming of around four degrees Celsius “may cause a 10-23% decline in global GDP by 2100 relative to global GDP without warming”. Other parts of the same report warned of catastrophic physical impacts at that level of warming.

The professional body for the UK’s actuaries (IFA), whose job is to judge risk for insurance companies and pension funds, published a report last month which argued that influential economic models like this “jar with climate science”.

Amazon nations split on oil and deforestation, ahead of summit

One of the report’s authors, Edinburgh-based actuary Sandy Trust, told Climate Home that underestimating climate change is “extremely dangerous”.

“What economists have done is say that climate change is a cat in the bush, not a tiger,” he said.

‘Fantastical predictions’

University College of London economist Steve Keen published a similar report for Carbon Tracker last month.

He characterised the models of Nobel-prize-winning economist William Nordhaus as  “fantastical predictions” and accused economic journals of accepting “sloppy work” because it fits with economic orthodoxy.

William Nordhaus at a US embassy reception after being awarded the Nobel Prize for economics in 2018 (Photo credit: US Embassy Sweden)

Freedom of information requests carried out for Keen’s report show that British pension funds are using these economic models and advice from investment consultants to tell their members that climate change will only have a minimal impact on their portfolios.

The pension fund for the rural English county of Shropshire estimated that 2C of global warming would boost its returns until 2030. But climate scientists say 2C of warming would cause severe climate disasters such as increasing the number of heatwaves in a decade by six times and destroying crops and almost all of the world’s coral reefs.

The Shropshire pension fund’s claim was based on advice from investment consultants. Keen’s report finds that “just as advisers have taken refereed economic estimates of damages from climate change at face value, so too have financial regulators” like the Financial Stability Board and the USA’s Federal Reserve.

The Federal Reserve Board governor Christopher Waller said this year that “risks posed by climate change [to banks and US financial stability] are not sufficiently unique or material to merit special treatment”.

Tipping points

Both reports find that many economic models have assumed the economic damage caused by climate change will increase in a linear way. If it gets twice as hot, the damage will be twice as bad.

But this ignores the role of tipping points, where events like the loss of an ice sheet or rainforest trigger irreversible changes at a certain degree of global warming.

Gas lock-in: Debt-laden Ghana gambles on LNG imports

Trust said there had been a “disconnect” between economists and climate scientists on tipping points. “As we get closer to 1.5C, we’re much closer to triggering these tipping points which individually either increase the pace of climate change by releasing greenhouse gases or increase the rate of climate change”, he said.

Vanessa Hodge advises investors like pension funds as part of the Mercer consultancy. She said that she is clear to her clients that “we know for a fact that [economic models] are understating the tipping points”. She said they are “incredibly difficult to model”.

No pain from rain

According to Keen’s report, economic models of climate change impacts often only take into account temperature changes and ignore changes in levels of rainfall.

This means that the economic impact of floods, droughts and fires is not taken into account, contributing to the underestimating of climate’s economic harm.

This underestimation is particularly severe in the colder countries which make up most of the global north.

UK government bets on ‘pragmatic’ climate inaction ahead of election

That’s because temperature changes mainly affect hotter countries whereas the impact of floods, fires and droughts are more widely spread.

A 2000 study led by Yale economist Robert Mendelsohn claimed there would be economic benefits in North America, Russia and Western Europe because “they are currently cool” so “warming is helpful”. Mendelsohn has links to climate-sceptic think tanks and continues to downplay the risks of climate change.

Bad assumptions

Keen’s report says that influential economists have made the “strikingly invalid assumption” that work conducted indoors will not be affected by climate change.

In a 1991 study, Nordhaus claimed that “for the bulk of the [US] economy – manufacturing, [underground] mining, utilities, finance, trade and most service industries – it is difficult to find major direct impact of the projected climate changes over the next 50 to 75 years.” Nordhaus did not respond to a request for comment.

Deep-sea mining ban draws closer despite China’s opposition

But rising temperatures can have a direct impact on the productivity of indoor jobs. For example, carmaking giant Stellantis had to temporarily shut down its main manufacturing plant in Italy last month as a heatwave created unsustainable working conditions.

Another flaw, Keen and Trust say, is that economics central estimates have been based on what has happened in the past when the climate has got hotter.

“By definition,” Trust says, “that excludes all of the risks of climate change – sea level rise, heat stress, involuntary mass migration, water shortages – because they haven’t happened yet”.

“Guess what,” he continues, “the answer to this is there is nothing to worry about – 3C of global warming equates to a 2% GDP impact. So yes, economists have unequivocally understated risk”.

Groupthink

While Hodge says that flaws in models are inevitable because they are intrinsically difficult and require a lot of computing power, Keen says that they are a result of groupthink.

He said economic journals are edited by economists who accept “shoddy standards” when articles “confirm what economists wish to believe”.

These articles are often peer-reviewed, he says, only by other mainstream economists who are “defending the faith” and not by climate scientists.

The IPCC appoints economists who have been published in these journals to edit the economic chapters of its reports, he says, which therefore reflect the flawed economics.

Court says renewable firms can seize Spain’s property after subsidy cuts

One solution, Keen says, is to get climate scientists to referee the relevant economic papers alongside economists. Another is to inform decision-makers and the public about the economic risks of climate change, especially to the value of pensions.

The IFA report recommends improving models by making better assumptions, such as that 100% of GDP will be lost at 6C of global warming, and then working back from there to estimate the economic impact of less warming.

“Rather than trying to be precise, [it would be better] to be roughly right in that there will be severe impacts”, Trust said.

Minsky moment

Keen fears that if investors’ expectations don’t catch up with the physical climate science in an orderly manner, then they will do it in an “unpleasant, abrupt and wealth-destroying” way.

He warns of a so-called Minsky moment when the market suddenly realises that its assets aren’t worth as much as people thought they were.

Keen warns that, if that happens, pensioners will either lose money or taxpayers will have to step in to bail them out.be

The post Mainstream economists accused of playing down climate threat appeared first on Climate Home News.

The stalemate is dragging on as attempts to formally discuss a precautionary suspension of mining activities have been thwarted by nations in favour of exploiting the ocean’s mineral resources.

Over a dozen countries spearheaded by Chile, Costa Rica and France want to officially debate for the first time in history the possibility to halt deep-sea mining until its full impact on the ocean’s biodiversity is understood.

Hervè Berville, the French Minister for Marine Affairs, told the Assembly on Wednesday that the world “must not and cannot embark on a new industrial activity without measuring the consequences and taking the risk of irreversible damage”.

For the past decade, the mining industry has proposed to extract minerals from the deep seabed that can later be used to make batteries for electric vehicles.

However, the potential impacts of mining the ocean floor are largely unknown, putting biodiversity at risk. More than 750 marine scientists signed an open letter calling for a ban on the practice until robust scientific evidence can back it up.

High Seas Treaty exempts deep-sea mining from stricter environmental rules

Mining industry pushback

China and the island-state of Nauru have so far blocked the motion for a moratorium discussion, preventing agreement over the agenda. Both countries sponsor companies pushing for the exploitation of seabed minerals. Mexico also initially opposed but then retracted.

Gina Guillén, head of the Costa Rican delegation and one of the leaders of the coalition calling for a pause on mining, said one sole country was fiercely blocking the agenda item, even after offering a lighter discussion than expected.

“Just one country is opposing (the agenda item on the discussion). We hope it does happen. One country can’t hijack the most important body of the (ISA) just for being a big economy. That goes against all principles of multilateralism,” Guillén said.

‘We are not ready’: Divisions deepen over rush to finalise deep sea mining rules

Calls for a so-called moratorium have been gathering pace during the annual meeting of the ISA, the little-known UN body tasked with regulating the vast ocean floor in international waters.

This year’s week-long summit, set to end on Friday, comes at a pivotal time. Any member state could theoretically apply for a full-blown mining contract on behalf of a company, after a deadline triggered by Nauru lapsed earlier in July.

So far the ISA has only handed out ‘exploration’ permits which do not allow commercial exploitation of the minerals.

Mining code delayed

But several operators have already been exploring an area of the Pacific Ocean floor known as the Clarion Clipperton Zone. The region is rich in polymetallic nodules containing nickel, cobalt, copper and manganese, which are critical for manufacturing electric vehicles.

Among the most active is Canada-based start-up The Metals Company, whose license is sponsored by Nauru. After the island nation triggered an obscure provision two years ago, the ISA accelerated the pace of its negotiations to establish mining rules before a July 9th, 2023.

The Metals Company, and its partner Nauru, hoped to begin industrial-scale mining as early as 2024, following the expected approval of a mining code.

But their ambitions were cut back last week after the ISA delayed timeline for the regulations. The 36 members of the body’s council gave until 2025 to adopt the mining code.

It is now a question of when — rather than if — commercial scale nodule collection will begin. https://t.co/oWI8AOZPBR

— gerard barron (@gtbgtb) July 24, 2023

Blow to industry

Nauru’s president Russ Joseph Kun expressed disappointment on Wednesday that the ISA did not complete the process within the two-year deadline.

Member states in fact could still apply for a mining licence despite the rules not being in place. This would push the body into uncharted territory without clear guidelines on how such a request would be examined.

The Metals Company said it reserves the right to submit an application in the absence of a mining code. “It is now a question of when — rather than if — commercial-scale nodule collection will begin”, its CEO Gerard Barron said in a statement.

But the listed company’s stock tumbled by over 20% this week, hinting at investors’ diminishing confidence in its mining prospects.

Guillén from Costa Rica said approving the new 2025 deadline was “critical”. “They wanted a 2024 deadline, but we said no way,” she said.

Moratorium discussion

Campaigners opposed to deep-sea mining viewed the new 2025 deadline for the mining code with optimism but repeated their pleas for a moratorium, which would block any attempt to start commercial operations.

“This unprecedented agenda fight comes as a coalition of nations from Latin America, the Pacific and Europe try and wrangle the debate away from serving narrow corporate interests towards the public good”, said Louisa Casson from Greenpeace, who is attending the talks in Jamaica.

If the agenda is approved, it would mark the first time countries hold a formal discussion on suspending deep sea mining, although this discussion would not necessarily lead to a moratorium.

Still, Gillén said this is an important precedent, and said “we cannot destroy the seabed by taking a rushed decision”.

Last year, countries agreed to a treaty for the high seas, which creates international marine protected areas. However, this milestone could be undermined if deep sea talks end up with a bad deal, the Costa Rican negotiator added.

“Even after having agreed to the (high seas) treaty, if we don’t have strong safeguards for the seabed in those same areas, then we won’t have achieved anything,” Guillén said.

The post UN deep-sea mining talks deadlocked over agenda clash appeared first on Climate Home News.

The journey is equal parts dramatic and harrowing—with canyon-like views of the Atlas Mountains via treacherous switchbacks, and a vast landscape of desert beyond Ouarzazate.

Along the way—some 330 kilometers from Marrakech—the commune of Imider sits nestled on Morocco’s National Route 10 (N10). Hardly registering to passing tourists, Imider is one of the poorest and most-water stressed communities in Morocco. The climate is semi-arid—it rains only a few times a year—and poverty levels are nearly triple the national average.

Indigenous adaptation

Despite general disregard from passersby and neglect from Morocco’s central government in the northwest, Imider’s residents are proud members of the indigenous Amazigh Ait-Atta tribal confederation (otherwise known as “Berber” to western audiences).

Senegal shows African countries are not passive beneficiaries of climate finance

For centuries, Amazigh communities have populated much of the country’s southeast, adapting to the harsh and semi-arid climate that comes with being east of the mountains and isolated from the seaside. Despite the unforgiving landscape, these groups are agropastoral—herding sheep and goats and farming a variety of crops like olives, almonds dates, and vegetables. In Imider, most people live on less than a dollar a day.

In a region where annual precipitation can range from a few inches to less than an inch, water is life—or “aman iman,” as residents say.

Drought-affected fields in the Tinghir province. Photo: Rachel Santarsiero

To adapt to such low rainfall levels, Amazigh groups have long depended on a traditional system of water storage and distribution, known as ‘khettara’. This system relies on a series of underground canals to source water for farming fields and is incredibly efficient in arid and semi-arid climates. To the Amazigh, the khettara is sacred.

But as higher temperatures and drought conditions become the norm in Morocco, and as privatized companies continue to mine the south and southeast for phosphate and silver—as has been done in Imider—the centuries-old irrigation system is under threat.

The khettara irrigation

Among those affected is Mohammed Boumnir, a farmer in Imider who maintains his family’s plot of land, and harvests olives, dates, figs, grass, buckthorn, pomegranates, and radishes. The hand-dug canals of the khettara separate each set of crops like a lattice, but today they are bone dry. “This drought, the mining, it’s all affecting the farm. It’s cut off more than 80% of our water”, he told me.

In place of the dried-out khettara system, Boumnir has had to install irrigation pipes to help source water. Other farmers on adjacent plots have installed solar panels and mechanized wells to pump water from deeper beneath the ground. Those are costly endeavors that not all farmers in the area can afford.

Even with these advancements, the results of these new technologies are mixed. “The figs, almonds, olives—they’re all getting smaller, and they taste different than they used to”, Boumnir said.

With the onslaught of climate change, the Kingdom of Morocco has sought to position itself as a leader in the green technology economy—both within Africa and on the world stage with its western partners.

Mining dependence

Despite its sustainable agenda, phosphate and silver mining contributes to over 10% of the country’s GDP – just behind agriculture and tourism. But Morocco’s dependence on mining gets overshadowed by its flashy renewable energy projects, most notably the Noor Solar Power Station in Ouarzazate.

Latin America leads resistance to global shipping emission tax

Extractive capitalist projects in the southeast, like the Noor Solar Plant, or the deleterious silver mining in Imider, only exacerbate the harsh conditions that vulnerable Amazigh communities are struggling with. And while the Kingdom of Morocco continues to uphold its “green” façade to the international community, Amazigh locals in the southeast—battling land grabs, groundwater depletion, and resource extraction—are being left behind.

Hope for the future is hard to come by in Imider. Many locals are unemployed, and others are moving away. But there is one phrase that’s continually shared amongst residents, in native Tamazight: “You can pluck all the flowers, but you can’t stop the march of spring.”

Rachel Santarsiero is a climate researcher at the National Security Archive in Washington, D.C. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own.

The post Morocco’s centuries-old irrigation system under threat from climate change appeared first on Climate Home News.

The fraught negotiations in Germany centered on the framework for the global goal on adaptation, an initiative aimed at enhancing nations’ resilience to extreme weather events, flooding, droughts and sea level rise.

Nations reached a compromise on the outcome of the two-week-long discussions, averting the real possibility of having to start all again from scratch at Cop28.

In that scenario – negotiators and observers told Climate Home – it would have been virtually impossible to find an agreement on adaptation goals at the summit in Dubai.

“That would have been a real catastrophe”, a negotiator from a country at the forefront of the climate crisis told Climate Home.

Contrasting expectations

Argentine negotiator Pilar Bueno Rubial said from the beginning it was clear the two factions had entered the talks with diverging expectations.

“Developed countries just wanted to start the conversation, while developing nations wanted to focus on the substance”, she told Climate Home.

World Bank set to take on risk of insuring carbon credits amid market upheaval

A coalition of 135 developing countries, called G77+China, wanted to agree on an eight page draft text that included a list of options for specific adaptation targets.

These included measures to preserve land and water, to protect all humanity with early warning systems for hazardous events by 2027, and to enhance the global population’s resilience to the effects of climate change by at least 50% by 2030

“For us, this captured the conversation fairly and laid the foundation for an ambitious agreement in Dubai”, a negotiator from a developing country told Climate Home.

But rich nations, led by the US, EU and the UK, pushed instead for a one-page text focussing only on the main structure of a future decision without outlining detailed measures, according to four people in the negotiating room.

This option delegated the development of specific targets to future workshops. In their own submissions, the EU and the US specifically pushed for the inclusion of no specific targets.

UN head Guterres contradicts Cop28 host on fossil fuel phaseout

To complicate matters further, Bueno Rubial claimed that adaptation negotiations had been “taken hostage” as part of broader divisions between the two blocks over whether emission reductions talks and climate finance should be on the official agenda in Bonn.

The contrasting positions were clearly reflected in the options put forward by the two sides for a final decision to be adopted at the end of the Bonn talks.

Adaptation struggle

Defining what adaptation is and how to measure it has always been a complicated task. Unlike efforts to cut the amount of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, less clear metrics are available to track the many diverse activities that can be called adaptation.

Measures can include seawalls, air conditioning, early warning systems, improved mobile phone and internet coverage and changes to farming methods.

A session of the Global Goal on Adaptation body. Photo: IISD/ENB – Kiara Worth

The Paris Agreement established a global goal on adaptation, but stopped short of defining its content. Six years later, at Cop26 countries agreed to launch a two-year long work program to solve this problem and turn a vague commitment into concrete actions.

Small islands “disappointed” as talking about emissions cuts proves too controversial for climate negotiators

The body is due to end its work in Dubai, where developing countries are keen to achieve ambitious targets. This – they hope – will in turn lead to more money being invested in measures to boost resilience to climate change.

The United Nations Environment Programme (Unep) estimates that rich countries should will need to provide developing ones with $71 billion a year every year until 2030 to cover their adaptation needs. But, in 2020, they only provided $29 billion.

Less engaged

A negotiator from a developing country group claimed adaptation is less of a problem for rich nations so they appear to be less engaged in the talks.

In Bonn, the rift reached boiling point in the final meeting of the body tasked with sketching out the framework. In what observers described as a heated exchange, countries were unable to reach an agreement and stared at the possibility of ending the talks without any formal resolution.

On Thursday, just hours before the end of the talks, the body’s chairs offered a compromise text in what negotiators described as a “take it or leave it” situation. The document is more similar to the option developed nations fought for but includes – as a footnote – a link to an informal note on the specific targets. Developing nations have hailed that as a victory.

All eyes on Dubai

Mokoena France, the lead negotiator for the least developed countries, said the group is pleased to see a proper outcome, but it is concerning that it took until the very last minute. “Nevertheless we hope to see more progress and successful adoption of the framework at Cop28”, she added.

The Overshoot Commission is talking about solar geoengineering. Not everyone thinks it should

A negotiator from a developing country said he was seriously worried the same dynamic will play out in Dubai.

David Waskow, International Climate Director at the World Resources Institute, said the failure to make progress on the global goal on adaptation leaves much to deliberate ahead of Cop28.

“It is critical that countries agree on an ambitious set of targets for adaptation action and finance must be made much more accessible”, he added.

The EU and the US have not responded to requests for comment at the time of publication.

The post Last-minute compromise avoids break down on adaptation goals appeared first on Climate Home News.

So far, global efforts on adaptation have been reactive and incremental for two key reasons. One is a significant shortfall in finance for adaptation and the second is these issues being sidelined in multilateral climate agendas.

Climate adaptation is an immediate, intergenerational problem – one with disproportionate existing impacts on vulnerable communities in the Global South. The African continent is a revealing example, as countries battle one extreme weather event after another.

“Green” finance bankrolls forest destruction in Indonesia

Despite having contributed less than 4 per cent to global emissions, the continent is already facing disproportionate climate impacts. Climate models predict that the impacts in Africa will only become more severe and frequent with large parts of the continent warming at twice the global rate, leading to more extreme weather events.

Every degree of warming will have ramifications for food production and food security, livelihoods, access to water, health, poverty and inequality, conflict, and more. In 2022 alone, extreme weather events killed roughly 4,000 people and affected a further 19 million people across Africa.

Earlier this year, Cyclone Freddy left behind a wave of devastation in Malawi, Mozambique, and Madagascar, while the latest series of flash floods left hundreds of people dead and thousands displaced in Eastern Uganda, Rwanda, and Congo. These deadly weather events send a clear message – scaling up climate adaptation and resilience in Africa is urgent.

Investing in transformative community-led measures is the first step to scaling up climate adaptation. These measures are unique in that they are often context-specific solutions geared toward local realities that help protect people, communities, and ecosystems by building social and ecological resilience to extreme weather events.

Climate movement must switch on to UAE threat

In the African continent, community led adaptive solutions like agroecology, food sovereignty, forest restoration, and more already exist, particularly at the grassroots and community level.

Agroecology is considered transformative in that it drives system change by challenging power dynamics underpinning the food system, placing power and control back in the hands of the farmer.

As a set of practices, agroecology has numerous co-benefits ranging from enabling farmers to strengthen their farm’s resilience to extreme weather events, to protecting biodiversity, bolstering food production and food sovereignty, and restoring soil fertility.

Equally, boosting finance and investments for locally led adaptation to climate change not only builds resilience, it’s also far more cost effective than reactively paying for and responding to severe crises. Studies estimate that climate adaptation action in African agriculture and food systems will likely cost less than one tenth of inaction – in other words, the cost of action is $15 billion versus $201 billion per annum if no action is taken.

A major stumbling block to African countries and communities developing adaptive capacities and becoming more resilient is the significant gap in adaptation finance.  As it stands, Africa will face a $265 billion shortfall in climate finance for adaptation by 2030.  To address and close the existing debt for climate adaptation, those most responsible for the climate crisis have a moral responsibility to drastically increase adaptation finance to African countries.

Amazon gateway city Belém will host Cop30 climate talks

If they fail to do so, vulnerable and frontline communities across Africa, and the Global South at large, will continue to bear the brunt of the climate crisis – a crisis they did not cause.

As the recent report spotlights, we need a political response at Cop28 that fast tracks global climate action efforts and places us back on track to meet the Paris Agreement goals.

As one of four pillars, the report calls for higher priority to be given to adaptation that is people-centred and sustains livelihoods.

For climate adaptation support to be truly transformative for the African context, access to decision making platforms, resources, investments, and finances must involve and reach local African communities most affected by the climate crisis. A people centred, rights based approach that protects communities and biodiversity must be at heart of these upcoming climate negotiations and decisions.

The post Bonn talks offer opportunity to bridge the adaptation gap appeared first on Climate Home News.

In the 2015 Paris Agreement, countries agreed to set a global goal on adjusting, which is known as adaptation. But it is still very difficult to track and demonstrate progress towards this target because of a lack of rigour in how these projects are officially reported and evaluated.

Two years ago, we at the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) set out to create a synthesis of evidence on the effectiveness of adaptation action and support. But the UK government cut its aid budget and our project was one of those to be scrapped as a result.

Despite Taiwan and spy balloon tensions, China invites US for climate talks

Beyond funding, however, our analysis was hindered by a widespread and pervasive lack of rigour in adaptation project reporting and evaluation.

Evaluation of adaptation efforts has long faced difficulties. For six years, climate negotiators tried to assess progress towards the Paris Agreement’s imprecisely worded global goal on adaptation.

But, as governments recognised at Cop26 in 2021, they faced “methodological, empirical, conceptual and political challenges”.

In 2021, the two-year Glasgow–Sharm el-Sheikh work programme on the global goal on adaptation aimed to address these.

US solar boom on hold as industry awaits subsidy rules

Lots of adaptation action takes place in the form of discrete project interventions financed by public sources, including directly from governments and from funds that rich countries put money into.

By assessing these interventions in ways similar to those used in development finance, we hoped to obtain a picture of the effectiveness of adaptation action and support, and thus of progress towards the global goal on adaptation.

But we found that data on project outputs and outcomes is not easily accessible or publicly available.

If information is available, it is scattered across multiple sources and fragmented across databases. Moreover, most of this information is only entered into databases at the time the project is approved.

US pledges $1 billion to Green Climate Fund amid call to keep 1.5C in reach

Information about how the project is going is even harder to find, as it is often not made public or remains scattered across multiple locations, from project websites to academic publications.

The lack of a uniform system of adaptation indicators also leads to inconsistencies in how funders monitor, evaluate and report outputs and outcomes of adaptation interventions.

Moreover, baseline data is commonly missing and outcomes are often confused with outputs. Outputs are the tangible and measure results that can be observed in the short term while outcomes are the longer term effects that are expected to be achieved as a result.

Evaluations of adaptation interventions are rare. A recent systematic review of global adaptation research revealed that only 58 out of 1682 articles reported change in climate risk reduction outcomes after implementation.

UN: World set to blow through 1.5C carbon budget in 10 years

This suggests that, for now, the UN’s new global stocktake on adaptation must rely chiefly on fragmented and scattered project documentation.

When evaluations are conducted, they tend to emphasise implementation processes rather than outcomes.

A recent assessment of the Least Developed Countries Fund considers mainly how its projects are aligned to reducing vulnerability and increasing resilience, rather than if these objectives have actually been achieved.

Meanwhile, an evaluation of the adaptation portfolio of the Green Climate Fund counted the number of beneficiaries but was unable to assess impact.

UN’s Green Climate Fund too scared of risk, finds official review

Here are four ways to fix this.

1. Create a global adaptation database: A free, comprehensive and easy-to-use global database of adaptation interventions must be established to analyse and synthesise the effectiveness of these interventions. It should include sources of funding, project duration, alternative project names, intervention design, adaptation outcomes and all evaluations. Such a database would complement existing efforts that include some of these elements, such as IATI’s d-portal, SEI’s AidAtlas and Unep’s Adaptation Gap Report.

2. Standardise and improve reporting of adaptation outcomes: The Sharm-El-Sheikh Adaptation Agenda proposes a set of 30 outcomes to report on adaptation progress. These should be used to develop a set of common indicators to be adopted under the new framework for the global goal on adaptation. These indicators should then be used consistently when evaluating and reporting project-level outcomes. For the global stocktake, these indicators must also allow for global aggregation of evaluation results.

3. Invest in rigorous adaptation evaluations: Funders must require and invest in rigorous monitoring and evaluation of and learning from the interventions they support. Project evaluations should be transparent about whether it is possible to attribute an outcome to a specific intervention. Evaluation guidance must include procedures to inform funders and other stakeholders of both intervention successes and failures. Initiatives in this direction include the new evaluation policy of the Adaptation Fund, which includes long-term evaluation.

4. Learn from the development community: Adaptation evaluators should take advantage of existing knowledge of and experience with impact evaluation in development when assessing progress in adaptation. The development community has put forward tried-and-tested methodologies for impact evaluation, and established organisations such as 3ie and the Campbell Collaboration already support, produce and synthesise rigorous evaluation evidence on development effectiveness.

Richard Klein and Biljana Macura are Senior Research Fellows and Nella Canales is a Research Fellow at the Stockholm Environment Institute. Richard Klein leads the team “International Climate Risk and Adaptation”.

The post Reporting on climate adaptation is a mess – here’s how to fix it appeared first on Climate Home News.

Joe Biden made the commitment as he hosted a virtual meeting of world leaders on Thursday to spur high-level leadership to limit global warming to 1.5C.

This is the first time since 2017 the US has pledged cash to the Green Climate Fund (GCF), which supports developing countries to cut emissions and adapt to climate impacts.

The move was part of a broad call to action to the Major Economies Forum on energy and climate, a group of more than 20 high-emitting developed and developing countries which account for around 80% of global greenhouse gases.

US brings cash

Biden promised to ask Congress to approve an additional $500m over five years for the Amazon Fund to end deforestation by 2030.

He pledged to raise $200m from public, private and philanthropy sources for cutting methane emissions in developing countries and urged nations to scale up carbon capture and removal technologies.

The US president called on leaders to join a collective pledge for half of all car sales and at least 30% of medium and heavy-duty vehicles to be zero emissions by 2030.

UN’s Green Climate Fund too scared of risk, finds official review

“It’s a really big deal,” Joe Thwaites, a climate finance campaigner at the Natural Resources Defense Council, told Climate Home News of Biden’s pledge to the GCF.

“Over the last few years, the fund has been right up against the limits of its resources. It has been approving money to projects as soon as it is receiving it from donors and has had to hold back projects because of a lack of money,” Thwaites explained.

“This $1bn is significant because it will allow the GCF to unlock more money for communities in need,” he added.

The move, he said, will boost US credibility at the fund, after its ability to provide climate finance had been put into doubt.

As I address the Major Economies Forum on our climate challenges, let me make a few things clear:

We are committed to following the science.
We are determined to strengthen our actions.
We will do what it takes to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

— President Biden (@POTUS) April 20, 2023

Climate finance laggard

However, as the GCF is calling on countries for a third round of funding pledges to replenish the fund, the US is yet to deliver on its first commitment.

The $1bn announcement only accounts for half of the $2bn the US owes the fund after Donald Trump reneged on a $3bn pledge made under Barack Obama almost a decade ago. Since then, European and other donors have doubled their pledges to the fund.

“The question is: can the US clear another billion dollars and finally deliver on the pledge?” Thwaites said. Other donor countries will closely watch what the US will bring to a GCF pledging conference in October, he added.

Keeping 1.5C within reach

The leaders’ meeting was framed by the findings of a report by the International Energy Agency which outlined steps to take to keep the 1.5C goal within reach.

It highlights four key pillars: decarbonising the energy sector, ending deforestation, tackling non-CO2 emissions such as methane, and accelerating the deployment of carbon capture and storage and removal technologies.

UN: World set to blow through 1.5C carbon budget in 10 years

Alden Meyer, senior associate at think tank E3G, told Climate Home that the US was seeking to create more coalitions of the willing to advance action in key sectors – a model which has proved successful in galvanising support to cut methane emissions under the Methane Pledge.

“There are some good pieces,” said Meyer, “but it’s not comprehensive,” citing the lack of initiatives to decarbonise the energy sector.

That’s a gap the EU intends to fill. EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen proposed to launch an initiative for setting global targets for energy efficiency and renewable energy by Cop28. “These targets would complement other goals,” she said.

Betting on carbon capture

Biden called on countries to speed up the deployment of carbon capture and removal technologies by joining the ‘Carbon Management Challenge’.

This includes capturing carbon from specific polluting plants or directly from the atmosphere and storing it in geological formations, in the oceans or in products.

The White House said the initiative will develop a suite of announcements and goals that will be unveiled at Cop28.

US bets big on carbon-sucking machines

Meyer said US officials are considering setting a collective target for the amount of carbon being stored annually. The EU Commission has already proposed a binding target for the union to store 50 million tonnes of CO2 per year by 2030.

Scientists say carbon capture and removal technologies are needed to limit global warming to 1.5C by counter-balancing residual emissions from hard-to-abate sectors. How much of it is needed depends on how quickly countries reduce emissions and reach net zero.

The IEA estimates that projects are needed to capture around 1.2 billion tonnes of CO2 by 2030 to meet global climate goals – a 30 fold increase on 2021 levels.

However, such technologies remain underdeveloped and face technological, economic and environmental barriers. There’s also uncertainty on the risks of deploying carbon dioxide removal at large scale.

Saudi Arabia, Russia push for more World Bank money into carbon capture

Campaigners have warned that focusing on techno-fixes risks distracting from pressing carbon-cutting action and impede the transition to clean energy sources.

Steven Feit, a senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law, told Climate Home it was “very concerning” that carbon capture was increasingly being used “to justify the construction and expansion of the fossil economy” ahead of Cop28 hosted by oil and gas producer UAE.

Feit cited a major scientific report showing that carbon capture was one of the most expensive technologies with little mitigation potential.

The post US pledges $1 billion to Green Climate Fund amid call to keep 1.5C in reach appeared first on Climate Home News.

Twitter recently announced it would limit the number of automated tweets that non-paying users can post to 50 in a 24-hour period. To post more will cost each account $100 a month from April 29.

A spokesperson for the NWS said that, since 2014, it has auto-posted the latest warnings for tornadoes, severe thunderstorms and flash floods on Twitter.

These warnings are seen by emergency managers, the media and people in the path of dangerous weather, they said.

Twitter announced on 3/29/23 that it will begin limiting automated tweets. Should this implementation occur, the automated watch/warning/advisory graphics shared on this account may not be posted. Have multiple ways to receive weather information and alerts.

— NWS Austin/San Antonio (@NWSSanAntonio) March 31, 2023

“Without this automated process,” the spokesperson added “it would take minutes for forecasters to manually prepare warning information into a tweet. For every warning issued, seconds could make the difference between life and death”.

“Twitter informed NWS there are no plans for exemptions,” they said.

Climate Home asked Twitter to confirm this and received an emoji of a human faeces with a face on it. Twitter’s new billionaire owner Elon Musk made this the automatic response to all press enquiries last month.

press@twitter.com now auto responds with

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 19, 2023

Last year, the US was hit by tornadoes across the south and south-east, a winter storm across the centre and east of the country and flooding in Missouri and Kentucky.

Twitter’s changes will be rolled out globally and affect any weather service which uses automated tweets.

Khan Rahaman is an assistant professor at Saint Mary’s University in Canada and has studied how social media is used during of cyclones in Bangladesh.

He told Climate Home: “The limit will not do any good for early warning.”

Migrant workers face risks building Europe’s new gas supplies in the UAE

Scientists have highlighted the importance of social media, and Twitter in particular, in disseminating warnings about climate disasters and saving lives.

An IPCC scientific report found that “timely access” to early warnings through social media, radio and text messages “can be crucial to respond and mitigate the impacts of emergencies such as floods and drought”.

“Among the various forms of social media, Twitter is widely used as a social sensor to detect what is happening in a disaster event” it added.

A 2020 study found that two-thirds of survey recipients in eastern India had seen warnings about Cyclone Amphan on social media including Twitter, Facebook and Whatsapp.

Moves to crystallise right to a healthy environment spark tension at UN

“Social media played an important role in disseminating pre-cyclone warnings and information on post-cyclone relief work” during cyclone Amphan, the IPCC report found.

NWS has advised people to check their website, listen to the radio, watch television and look for alerts from local or county emergency management agency.

Asked why they are not paying for automated tweets, an NWS spokesperson declined to answer, saying: “Our statement and pinned tweets on our forecast office twitter accounts speak to the way forward on our part”.

Last month, Axios reported that US White House officials will not pay for Twitter’s previously free blue tick, which is supposed to verify a user is who they say they are. A source familiar with plans told Axios that the White House may send guidance to some agencies and departments in the future.

The post “Life or death”: Weather-watchers warn against Elon Musk’s Twitter changes appeared first on Climate Home News.

As governments met in Switzerland to approve the report, a group led by Saudi Arabia pushed for an emphasis on sucking carbon out of the atmosphere through carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology.

But a group of mainly European nations pushed for the report to emphasise the role of wind and solar power in fighting climate change and note how much cheaper it has got recently.

Government influence

The IPCC synthesis report summarises the latest scientific knowledge on climate change.

Alongside the full report, the IPCC publishes a shorter document called the “summary for policy-makers” which is approved by governments at a week-long session in the Swiss city of Interlaken.

Nations fight to be called climate vulnerable in IPCC report

Although the scientists who wrote the report are in the room to push back, government negotiators regularly try to lobby for the inclusion of their priorities in the text. The report needs to be approved line-by-line.

Cost-effectiveness

A think tank called IISD is the only organisation allowed to report on the talks.

According to their summary, a group of European nations wanted the report to say that solar and wind electricity “is now cheaper than energy from fossil fuels in many regions”.

Germany said this sentence was of “paramount” importance but, according to IISD, Saudi Arabia “strongly opposed inclusion of the sentence”.

IPCC highlights rich nations’ failure to help developing world adapt to climate change

The Bahamas’ representative called for the report to say specifically that CCS technology, unlike wind and solar, is not getting cheaper.

But Saudi Arabia pushed back, saying that CCS and CDR are “in fact unavoidable”.

The paragraph they were debating ended up referring to “sustained decreases” in the cost of solar, wind and batteries without mentioning CCS or CDR.

Carbon capture

While CDR sucks carbon out of the general atmosphere, CCS sucks it out of a polluting source like a power plant’s smoke-stack.

Lili Fuhr, from the Center for International Environmental Law, told Climate Home that CCS was the “first line of defence” for the fossil fuel economy.

Saudi Arabia has a history of promoting CCS in IPCC reports and in UN climate talks.

In April 2022, it successfully lobbied for a stronger emphasis on CCS in the IPCC’s report on solutions to climate change.

Loss and damage committee ready to start talks following Asian nominations

When Germany tried to reduce the emphasis on CCS in one paragraph and called for the inclusion of more information on the limits of the technology, Saudi Arabia pushed back.

According to IISD, the oil-reliant nation said “any additional context on CCS should include benefits”.

In an extensive footnote, the final report notes that implementation of CCS currently faces “technological, economic, institutional, ecological-environmental and socio-cultural barriers”.

It describes CCS as a “mature technology” for gas processing and enhanced oil recovery, but less so in the power, cement and chemicals sectors “where it is a critical mitigation option”.

The report says CCS deployment should be sped up to help the world limit global warming to 1.5-2C.

Carbon removal role

CDR, which is less linked to high-carbon industry and fossil fuels than CCS, was supported by a broader range of countries.

IISD reports that France and Germany “cautioned that CDR deployment at scale is unproven and risky” and “asked for more detail on their limits and risks”. Mexico, Kenya and Bolivia also raised concerns about CDR’s role.

UN tells governments to ‘fast forward’ net zero targets

But Saudi Arabia and China fought to have the document describe the technology as necessary to remove more carbon from the atmosphere than humans are emitting.

Switzerland, which hosts CDR company Climeworks, argued that CDR may be required “for hard to reduce emissions”.

Japan, New Zealand and the Netherlands also defended the report’s emphasis on the role of CDR technology.

The final report says “CDR will be necessary to achieve net-negative Co2 emissions”.

Green Climate Fund credibility hangs over response to violence in Nicaragua project

Duncan Mclaren is a climate intervention fellow at University College Los Angeles who has criticised previous reports for skirting over the limitations of CDR.

He said this report treats it better. But he said it still gives too great a sense of possibility of the future role of CDR, “even as it very clearly calls for accelerated, immediate emissions cuts”.

The post Governments battle over carbon removal and renewables in IPCC report appeared first on Climate Home News.

Representatives of countries from an array of different regions, including Africa, Asia, Latin America and small island states, pushed to be singled out as particularly vulnerable.

Tanzania and Timor-Leste asked that the world’s poorest countries, known as least developed countries (LDCs), be added to a list of impacted communities, according to a report of the meeting by think-tank IISD.

Africa and small island developing states (Sids) were nearly cut out of one section on vulnerabilities, the IISD report says, and replaced by a reference to “developing and least developed countries”.

UN tells governments to ‘fast forward’ net zero targets

But there was a strong push from many delegates to retain them, particularly as most of those regions’ representatives had already left the talks to approve the report, as they had to catch flights home from Switzerland.

Mexico and Chile wanted to add Latin America to the list of regions that are particularly vulnerable while India wanted Asia included, according to IISD’s report.

The final document lists Africa, Sids, LDCs, Central and South America, Asia and the Arctic as particularly vulnerable.

The benefits of vulnerability

What makes some communities more vulnerable than others is not just physical factors like sea level rise but also social factors like poverty, governance, building standards and infrastructure.

This makes naming specific parts of the world as vulnerable a politically sensitive topic.

The inclusion of the Arctic as one of the most climate vulnerable places in the world, for example, was significant because it came just days after the US approved the hugely controversial Willow oil drilling project on Alaska’s north slope.

There are various reasons for wanting to be named as vulnerable, including global recognition and better access to climate finance.

Last year’s Cop27 climate talks agreed that a new fund for climate victims should be targeted at countries who are “particularly vulnerable” to climate change.

Loss and damage committee ready to start talks following Asian nominations

Samoan ambassador Fatumanava-o-Upolu III Dr. Pa’olelei Luteru, who chairs the alliance of small island states (Aosis), said making specific note of the risks to these islands was “imperative in the context of climate justice”.

“The fact is that we are already facing devastating losses and damages of great magnitude, and funds we should be investing into sustainable development initiatives must be diverted to help us cope with climate change impacts,” he said.

IPCC highlights rich nations’ failure to help developing world adapt to climate change

But recognising growing impacts also gives states the responsibility of acting on them.

Jörn Birkmann researches climate vulnerability at the University of Stuttgart in Germany and was coordinating lead author of one of the underlying IPCC reports.

He told Climate Home: “It seems like governments fear that if their country is not mentioned, they could receive less support (e.g. global adaptation funds),”

He added: “Or vice versa; if they are mentioned it might lead to a stigmatisation or might raise questions about the role of governance.”

Measuring vulnerability

Birkmann said studies on human vulnerability all point to the same global hotspots, particularly Africa.

But even though many governments acknowledge this, there are significant tensions when measuring and mapping human vulnerability.

“It is still difficult in [a summary for policymakers report] to name specific global regions that are more vulnerable than others,” he said.

“The synthesis report is mentioning some regions, but it seems to be much easier for governments to agree on general sentences, rather than pointing to areas or countries where such deficits are evident.”

Green Climate Fund credibility hangs over response to violence in Nicaragua project

Although it misses a lot of nuance about who is vulnerable, Birkmann welcomes the fact that the report recognises global hotspots, “since the success of adaptation and resilience building also depends on the starting point communities and countries have”.

He believes adaptation strategies should not just focus on physical phenomena and climatic hazards such as storms, but also on structures and interventions that reduce human vulnerability, such as poverty reduction, education or fighting corruption – the latter being “a very controversial topic in the political arena”.

Furthermore, when new financial mechanisms for loss and damage agreed at Cop27 are being put into practice, he said it would be helpful to define adaptation goals, not just those on emission reduction.

“These goals should also take into account the very different starting points of regions/countries/communities to build resilience,” he said.” The level of human vulnerability might be such a benchmark of the different starting points.”

The post Nations fight to be called climate vulnerable in IPCC report appeared first on Climate Home News.

The report states that “attention to equity and broad and meaningful participation” can build “social trust” and so “deepen and widen support for transformative changes.”

To put that in non-IPCC language; in climate policy, people matter. The kind of radical social changes supported – demanded – by this report simply won’t happen without the consent and participation of citizens around the world.

But reports, however brilliant, however terrifying, don’t inspire action. That falls to us, as citizens, led by our governments around the world.

For many years, this critical part of the climate change response has been strangely ignored. Socially marginalised and economically vulnerable citizens, and those who are more impacted by changing temperatures, remain excluded from the conversation.

UN tells governments to ‘fast forward’ net zero targets

Rebellions against climate policies emerge as a result. Governments pay lip-service to the idea of communicating with and engaging citizens. But as the Committee on Climate Change has recognised in the UK, there’s rarely a plan for how to do it.

Governments around the world actually have a formal duty – embedded in article 6 of the UNFCCC – to educate their citizens on climate change, involve them in policymaking and ensure they have all the necessary information.

The UNFCCC’s Action for Climate Empowerment (ACE) is made up of six elements: education, training, public awareness, public participation, public access to information and international cooperation. These six principles are all core to public engagement, and most importantly to holding governments accountable.

States are legally obliged to implement many of elements of ACE, but many are not aware of it yet. It is vital that we continue to make the case to them about the importance of public engagement if we are to avert climate breakdown.

IPCC highlights rich nations’ failure to help developing world adapt to climate change

Governments are important not just as policymakers, but educators. Today’s report specifically flags the importance of “education including capacity building, climate literacy, and information provided through climate services and community approaches” to “heighten risk perception and accelerate behavioural changes and planning”.

What does that mean in practice? Providing more and more frightening information about the coming impacts of climate change can just as easily be overwhelming and despair-inducing as helpful.

So what we need instead are bold, positive campaigns that support feelings of ‘efficacy’ – giving people that feeling that it’s possible to do something on climate change, and that that something has the potential to make a difference. This applies, for example, to campaigns around getting football fans talking about and pledging action on climate change, changing travel behaviours, or getting involved with Fridays for Future.

Climate change communications shows that people take action when they see their values, identities and concerns reflected in the story being told, and are able to observe and hear about their peers taking action.

Green Climate Fund credibility hangs over response to violence in Nicaragua project

Citizens who are going to change their lives need to be supported to do so in communities of collective action, whether that’s with communities in big cities boosting access to green spaces or social housing tenants leading the conversation on housing retrofit.

Achieving this isn’t easy. At the government level, doing this right means bringing together social science, communication and policy experts alongside businesses and citizens involved in tackling climate change in their lives and communities. It means making public engagement a core function of government, and funding it properly. It means introducing climate policy that treats everyone as they should be treated.

It’s a big challenge. But attitudes towards – and concern about – climate change is changing rapidly. Climate Outreach’s research shows that people are hungry for change and aware of the need for profound social transformation, but in many cases desperately seeking support and information about how they can be involved. Turbo-charging public engagement means pushing at an open door.

I’ll end with some more words from IPCC: “Climate resilient development is advanced when actors work in equitable, just and inclusive ways to reconcile divergent interests, values and worldviews, toward equitable and just outcomes.”

Pulling people together to take action on climate change requires a true bottom up, listening, participatory approach to working with different people across societies. Achieving this isn’t the job of the scientists. They’ve done their job. Now governments and all of us need to do ours.

Robin Webster leads on advocacy communications for UK-based NGO Climate Outreach, a team of social scientists and communications specialists which aims to build a social mandate for climate action

The post The IPCC’s climate scientists have done their job – now we must do ours appeared first on Climate Home News.

“Current global financial flows for adaptation are insufficient for, and constrain implementation of, adaptation options, especially in developing countries”, the scientists report says.

Wealthy governments have failed to provide $100 billion of climate finance a year they promised to developing countries by 2020, with the US responsible for the vast majority of the shortfall.

Finance for adapting to climate change – rather than cutting emissions – has been particularly low.

At Cop26 in 2021, all countries agreed that developed nations would double their adaptation finance by 2025 on 2019 levels and a group of self-proclaimed “champions” has been set up to try to implement this.

Adaptation becomes harder

The IPCC’s scientists warned time for adaptation action is rapidly running out because measures will increasingly become ‘constrained and less effective’ as temperatures rise.

When countries can no longer adapt to climate change, they will suffer devastating loss and damage as a consequence of escalating climate-related hazards like heatwaves, droughts and storms.

The United Nations Environment Programme (Unep) estimates $340 billion will be needed every year for adaptation, but only about 7% of climate finance flows are currently spent in that direction.

‘A huge injustice’

Aditi Mukherji, one of the authors of the report, told Climate Home that the lack of funding forces low-income countries into further debt.

Seventy-one percent of public climate finance was provided through loans in 2020, with grants having much smaller role, according to the latest assessment by the OECD.

IMF approves first batch of climate resilience loans

“It is a huge injustice”, Mukherji said. “Least developed countries and coastal communities who have not caused the problem are now having to take loans to solve the problem. It makes hardly any sense.”

The IPCC report summarises the state of knowledge of climate change science, its impacts and risks and the progress made on mitigation and adaptation. The text was approved by all member governments after a week-long session in Switzerland.

Insufficient climate action

Scientists say the pace and scale of what has been done so far, and current plans, are insufficient to tackle climate change.

While highlighting the lack of money for adaptation, the report also says climate finance also needs to increase ‘many-fold’ for emissions-cutting measures in order to achieve climate goals.

World Bank proposes freeing up $4bn by loosening lending rules

Despite absorbing the overwhelming majority of the money pot, funding for measures to cut emissions still falls short of the levels needed to limit warming to 1.5°C across all sectors and regions.

“Adaptation and mitigation are closely interlinked,” Mukherji said. “Unless we reduce our emissions now we are locked in a cycle of irreversible impacts”.

“We cannot think we can continue to emit, make the planet warmer and those who are affected will continue to adapt. That is not going to happen. Adaptation will always have some limits.”

Adaptation limits reached

The report says some tropical, coastal, polar and mountain ecosystems have already reached hard adaptation limits. That means any action becomes unfeasible to avoid risks. An example is when a small island becomes uninhabitable due to sea level rises and lack of freshwater.

The IPCC has also found ‘increased evidence’ of maladaption, which occurs when measures backfire and increase vulnerabilities.

Mukherji says there is a need for a less technocratic approach. “The most appropriate actions need to be decided by those who are most affected. You cannot go from outside and impose views on the communities,” she said.

The post IPCC highlights rich nations’ failure to help developing world adapt to climate change appeared first on Climate Home News.

Concerns were raised because Beijing rapidly accelerated plans for new coal power plants in the second half of last year in a bid to increase its energy security.

According to a report by think-tank E3G, published today, China’s coal project pipeline grew by nearly 50% in the last six months of 2022 taking the total to 250GW. It says developments in China diverge sharply from the rest of the world, where combined coal power plans shrank to 97GW over the same period – the lowest level in modern history.

China is still a global leader in the rollout of renewable energy. The country is adding clean energy projects to the grid almost as fast as the rest of the world combined.

But Leo Roberts from E3G’s coal transition programme believes China’s coal expansion is a “direct threat” to the Paris Agreement goal.

Increasing scale of the challenge

In 2015, nations agreed to pursue efforts to limit global temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Crossing that threshold would make climate impacts increasingly harmful to people and the entire planet.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) says no new unabated coal-fired power stations can be built if the world wants to reach that goal.

“Every new coal power station that comes online increases the scale of the challenge to decarbonise the global economy,” Roberts told Climate Home News. “China’s coal boom is actually undermining significant progress away from coal in all other parts of the world.”

The rapid expansion of China’s coal power plans comes as Beijing seeks to strengthen its energy security. Geopolitical tensions affecting global energy prices and domestic supply issues have made policymakers reconsider previous intentions.

After blackouts, China’s green goals take back seat to energy security

At a climate summit in April 2021, China’s president Xi Jinping vowed the country would “strictly control coal-fired power generation projects, and strictly limit the increase in coal consumption”.

At the time his words mirrored the central government’s successful attempts to curb new coal projects. E3G analysis shows that new coal power proposals in China collapsed by 75% between 2015 and July 2022.

China’s rapid U-turn

The recent coal boom has reversed this trend and China is now a clear international outlier. It currently accounts for 72% of total global planned coal capacity, with India, Turkey and Indonesia following far behind.

The aim of China’s coal push is to prevent a repeat of the power outages that affected homes and industries last year. Heatwaves increased electricity demand for cooling, while drying up water reservoirs necessary for hydropower generation in the country’s southwestern provinces.

Meteorological agencies predict another round of record high temperatures and more droughts this year.

Preventing power outages

Many of the new coal-fired power plants are expected to meet peak summer demand driven by energy-hungry air conditioners, which last year resulted in the highest recorded momentary load.

Lauri Myllyvirta, a lead analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), says solar energy is able to tackle daytime power needs, but meeting night-time peak demand requires a more nuanced approach.

Still, he believes betting on coal is a suboptimal and costly strategy. “Building coal power capacity to cover peak demand just some days or weeks per year is very expensive. There is still a lot of potential to deal with peak loads with better grid management."

E3G’s Roberts said it looks as if the Chinese government’s claim that it is new building coal capacity to support peak demand is being used as a cover to push through projects. “The reality is that most of the permits handed to new coal power stations would allow them to provide baseload power, which slows down the transition from coal-to-clean."

The post Chinese coal boom a ‘direct threat’ to 1.5C goal, analysts warn appeared first on Climate Home News.

The study published in the journal Nature found that a typical 1.5C energy transition model expects nations like China, India and South Africa to get off coal faster than any country has ever got off any energy source before.

But these models ask for much slower reductions in oil and gas – fuels that tend to be produced and used more in wealthy countries.

The study’s lead author Greg Muttitt told Climate Home that these models are amplified by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) scientific reports and guide decision-makers’ policies across the world.

UAE’s Cop28 boss calls for “course correction” on climate change

“The models currently are asking so much more of India and South Africa than they are of Canada and France and that’s a problem”, he said.

What are these models?

To work out how to limit global warming to 1.5C, academics make integrated assessment models (Iams). They use formulas and spreadsheets to model factors like how much forest must be saved, how quickly cars must become electric and how fast use of different fossil fuels must drop.

The IPCC takes these models and puts them in its regular reports, which are then signed-off by governments. With this stamp of approval from governments and scientists, the findings of these reports become benchmarks for decision-makers across the world.

Muttitt, who worked with University College London-based modellers on the study, said that estimates tend to be based in rich nations and to therefore have subconscious biases.

UN budget cuts hindered response to Pakistan’s extreme floods

Modellers based in the UK, he said, will be aware of the factors limiting how fast polluting vehicles can be replaced with electric ones. “You will be more sensitised to that than you will the difficulties of closing down a coal power plant in India,” he adds.

What do the models say about coal?

Last year, the IPCC published a report based on the models, concluding that to limit global warming to 1.5C coal use should fall by nearly three-quarters between 2020 and 2030 while oil and gas use goes down by around a tenth.

The modelled transition away from coal is even faster in the power system. The IPCC says coal use for electricity should fall 88% between 2020 and 2030.

Muttitt’s study compared this scenario with previous rapid energy transitions like South Korea’s move away from oil after the 1973 Opec crisis and the USA’s transition away from coal during its 2010s boom in home-grown fracked gas, but results were not realistic.

Biden promises to “work with Congress” to fund Amazon protection

He found that, to reach an 88% fall, coal-reliant nations like China, India and South Africa would have to move off the fossil fuel twice as fast as the previous world records, relative to the size of their energy systems.

“This raises questions about socio-political feasibility,” the study says. It adds that coal phase-out dates of 2030 for wealthy countries and 2050 for developing ones are better targets as they are “difficult but possible”.

What limits the speed of coal phase-out?

Coal tends to be dug up and burned for power in geographically concentrated areas, where the fuel happens to be abundant. The communities in these areas come to rely on coal for their local economy.

Environmentalists in South Africa’s coal heartland told Climate Home recently that coal “is the backbone of our economy” and so, despite their concern for climate change, they were wary of a rushed, unfair transition away from the fuel.

Avantika Goswami, the climate change lead at Indian think-tank the Centre for Science and Environment, said renewables must be paired with grid-scale battery storage and that “currently grid-scale battery storage can’t compete yet with coal-based power in terms of cost”.

She added that, for developing countries, borrowing money to invest in renewables is more expensive than for richer nations.

Want climate news in your inbox? Sign up for free to get our weekly newsletter and occasional extra bulletins

But Pieter de Pous, head of E3G’s fossil fuel transition programme, said that emerging economies could break previous records. “Lets not rule out the [Global] South being able to go faster than anyone thinks is conceivable”, he said.

He said that Europe’s experience is there is no trade-off between a fast transition away from coal and a fair one. Spain and Portugal had phased coal out fast while looking after coal communities, he said.

IPCC author Joeri Rogelj agreed that the transition could happen faster than previous examples “because there is a fundamental difference dynamic between accidental emissions reductions in the past that happened as a side effect of societal disaster and disruption, and targeted policy driven emissions reductions that set out a positive development path over multiple decades”.

He added: “The same differences exist for the pace of technology phase-outs and therefore require careful consideration.”

What do models say about oil and gas?

If coal is phased out slower than the IPCC envisions then oil and gas will have to be phased out faster to meet the 1.5C target. Muttitt suggests oil and gas should be phased out 50% faster than the IPCC’s figures propose.

This would place more responsibility on rich nations like the US and Europe. In particular, the use of oil to power cars, trucks and ships would have to fall particularly fast.

Missed deadline raises risk of delays to loss and damage fund

“The pace of oil and gas phase out is very gentle in these models,” said Muttitt, “and it’s very gentle because a lot of the work of emissions reduction is done by phasing out coal”.

Only a handful of nations have promised to stop producing oil and gas. At Cop27, a group of producers including Saudi Arabia, Iran and Russia blocked a commitment to phase out all fossil fuels.

Why are models important?

It’s hard to prove a link between these models and real-world decisions but climate policy, particulary in rich countries, has prioritised global reductions in coal use over oil and gas.

In climate talks, coal has been singled out. As Cop26 hosts, the UK said the summit was about “coal, cars, cash and trees”. At the summit, governments committed to phasing down coal use but did not mention oil or gas.

Denmark to put CO2 in seabed in step towards carbon negativity

Many big and wealthy nations, multilateral development banks and private banks ended finance for overseas coal before they ended it for oil and gas. China, Japan and South Korea all announced in 2021 they would end support for overseas coal but have yet to extend this to oil and gas.

Only a handful of nations have joined an initative, led by Denmark and Costa Rica, to end oil and gas production.

This article was updated on 20th February to include Joeri Rogelj’s comments.

The post Study: IPCC asks emerging countries to drop coal faster than rich nations did appeared first on Climate Home News.

As part of the package, Brazil’s new leader reinstated the Amazon Fund, a $1.2 billion fund to protect of the world’s largest rainforest, after a three-year period of inactivity.  

Donors Germany and Norway suspended transfers to the fund in 2019, under the previous government of Jair Bolsonaro, after the former president unilaterally suspended the board of directors and the technical committee of the fund.

On Monday, Lula reinstated the fund’s governing body, which Norwegian environment minister Espen Barth Eide said “allows for an immediate reactivation of the fund”.  The UK’s environment minister Therese Coffey said the UK was “seriously looking at” joining the fund.

Destruction of Brazil’s Cerrado savanna soars for third year in a row

The fund, which was established during Lula’s second term in 2008, supports 102 conservation projects in the Amazon, among them forests managed by indigenous people and small-scale farms. 

Among the first executive mandates, Brazil’s new president also moved the Rural Environmental Registry —which tracks all rural land-ownership— from the agriculture to the environment ministry, extinguished the possibility of conciliating environmental fines and reactivated a plan to prevent and control deforestation in the Amazon. 

“There is still a long way to go, but what we’ve seen at the beginning of this mandate is a right start and demonstrates the importance that the issue has gained on Lula’s agenda,” said Marcio Astrini, executive secretary of the Brazilian NGO Climate Observatory. 

Green promises 

Lula was sworn into office for a third term on Sunday, after defeating rightwing incumbent Bolsonaro by a thin margin in October’s general election. Bolsonaro’s policies led to a 60% increase in deforestation in the Amazon.

Brazil’s new president promised to achieve zero deforestation in the Amazon and 100% renewable electricity during his inaugural speech, adding “Brazil does not need to cut down forests to keep and expand its strategic agricultural frontier”.

“The world expects Brazil to once again become a leader in tackling the climate crisis and an example of a socially and environmentally responsible country, capable of promoting economic growth with income distribution,” he said.

Lula will update Brazil’s ‘insufficient’ climate plans if elected: advisor

Lula appointed former environment minister and activist Marina Silva to once again lead the country’s green efforts. He also created the Ministry of Indigenous Peoples, to be led by the influential Amazonian leader Sônia Guajajara.

The new government’s environment team is promising, said Astrini, but he also warned that Lula will have to negotiate without a majority in Congress, which is dominated by legislators linked to Bolsonaro’s party and to the “ruralist” movement defending agribusiness in the Amazon.

A package of three Bolsonaro-era bills being discussed in Congress could trump Lula’s efforts to control deforestation in the Amazon. These projects would respectively allow for the relaxed use of pesticides, land-grabbing in public forests and weaker regulations for environmental permits.

“Our current Congress is extremely hostile to indigenous and environmental affairs. We have grown used to that. We need a government that defends the environment and that can face that Congress,” said Astrini.

This article was updated on 4 January to add that the UK is considering joining the fund

The post Lula revives $1 billion Amazon Fund and environmental protections appeared first on Climate Home News.