4
0
COP29, the annual UN Climate Change Conference, has concluded in Baku this week. Azerbaijan hosted delegates from the 11th to the 22nd of November in the hope of building on COP28’s discussions, addressing the urgent need for transformative action in the face of catastrophic climate impacts. Time is of the essence, but is there sufficient political will to turn abundant scientific knowledge into proactive policy? And how likely are these discussions to materialise into actual climate solutions?
Initially, the choice of Azerbaijan as the host nation was controversial due to its status as a major global oil producer and exporter. This controversy continued into the conference as Azerbaijan’s president, Ilham Aliyev, criticised “Western fake news” of spreading disinformation about their country whilst simultaneously declaring oil and gas to be a “gift of God“. The country plans to expand gas production by up to a third over the next decade.
In an attempt to correct this oversight, UN chief António Guterres swiftly informed delegates that doubling down on the use of fossil fuels was “absurd“. COP29 was already off to a difficult start, and this was day one.
To address global climate finance, countries have agreed to more than double global climate finance to $300 billion per year by 2035; this is a significant increase from the previous target of $100 billion. However, this falls short of the estimated $1.3 trillion that developing countries were aiming to achieve.
Whilst most wealthy nations chipped in to the $300 billion climate finance fund, China is not obligated to commit any economic support because of its formal UN designation as a ‘developing country‘. Instead, China has agreed to make voluntary contributions to mitigate the effects of climate change. This was received with great frustration, particularly by nations within the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) who walked out in protest during negotiations. Ironically, China is the single largest carbon emitter globally – a direct cause of climate degradation, impacting vulnerable AOSIS members first.
Regarding transparency, the EU presented their first “Biennial Transparency Report”, declaring a 31.8% reduction in net greenhouse gas emissions since 1990, with preliminary findings suggesting a potential 37% reduction since 1990 by 2023 as well. A step in the right direction.
In addition, an agreement was reached on common standards for the global carbon markets, allowing richer nations to offset their emissions by investing in climate action elsewhere. On the surface this sounds promising, but may just lead to increased incidence of commercial greenwashing to cover large corporations’ backs.
Finally, some proactive climate action? No, not yet – plans for an Intergovernmental Committee on Cooling were announced but are only set to launch during COP30. Will these empty promises ever end?
Next year’s COP30, held in Belém in Brazil, has been framed as the last chance to mitigate irreversible degradation of our climate. This phrase is too commonly thrown around without sufficient impact, so much so that it appears to lose effect. This is not a drill and there is no plan B. As time ticks by, our grip on sustainability weakens. Let us hope that COP29’s progress is brought to light with immediate effect, and effective policy transformation comes from it.
Image: Opening Ceremony of World Leaders Climate Action Summit COP29, President of Azerbaijan, 2024 // CC BY 4.0
Average Rating