Climate conference failures and solutions

Following my recent meeting with Azerbaijan’s Energy Minister Parviz Shahbazov, whose country will hold the COP29 Presidency in Baku this November, I have prepared a thought leadership piece for the upcoming intergovernmental discussions. To align countries in achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement, I have defined all global economies into three categories, which I named the 'ENS Economies': 1. Enablers: Actively pursuing net-zero emissions, these economies lead in adopting green technologies, policies, and innovative financing methods that support the green transition. They also make it difficult to finance carbon-producing projects. 2. Slow Movers: Reluctant to accelerate the energy transition due to: • High Capital Costs: Investment needed for a greener economy can lead to “green inflation,” making the status quo more appealing in the short term. • Dependency on Carbon Economy: Economies reliant on carbon income face economic challenges in transitioning, potentially reducing GDP growth and competitive advantage. • Income from Taxation: Governments prefer carbon taxes, which generate revenue, over costly financial subsidies for the green transition. Only affluent nations can offer industry incentives like the US's Inflation Reduction Act, impacting energy transition investments. 3. Non-Movers: Struggling due to poor conditions and low credit ratings, these economies face challenges in: • Accessing capital • Acquiring technology and expertise • Developing infrastructure for the energy transition Aligning these streams is challenging. It requires identifiable benefits for all parties and fairness in the process. One solution is developing an international, globally accepted carbon trading market. The international community has become more protectionist, hindering trade, cooperation, and alignment. Countries should be able to trade carbon credits across borders without barriers. A clear and equitable system is needed to align global efforts on carbon emissions. This system could use a scoring method considering each country's historical emissions since industrialisation. The heavier carbon producing and emitting economies would assume greater economic responsibility by contributing into an international carbon reduction fund. This fund would be managed by multilateral banks. The fund would support poorer economies in achieving net zero with defined targets. Countries providing financial and technical innovation and resources to enable net zero should benefit by receiving discounts on their financial contributions to the international fund. I would advocate COP29 should adopt this framework to reach international alignment. This is an extract of a more detailed article: if you would like to receive the full article please email: contact@stirlinginfrastructure.com #COP29 #EnergyTransition #NetZero

A quick ChatGPT summary of where we stand after the negotiations in Cali at CBD COP16 didn't unfortunately end in the success for which we were all hoping: The conclusion of COP16 in Cali, Colombia, left critical financial issues unresolved, threatening the progress of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). One of the most pressing failures was the inability to establish a comprehensive biodiversity fund, crucial for mobilising the $200 billion needed annually by 2030 to achieve global conservation targets, including protecting 30% of the world’s land and water. This impasse has led NGOs to warn that the goal of halting and reversing nature loss by 2030 is now “in jeopardy" Key Points of Concern and Reactions: ~NGO concerns: Tanya Steele, CEO, WWF UK, underscored the dire consequences of the funding shortfall, stating, “Without adequate funding, there is no chance of reaching the goal of halting and reversing nature loss by 2030.” Other noted a "deafening absence of credible finance pledges from wealthy governments” as major impediments to progress. ~Negotiation gaps: Discussions on the wider biodiversity fund were postponed due to insufficient negotiator attendance in the final plenary session, further stalling financial solutions. This failure significantly undermines efforts to fulfill the COP15 targets and diminishes momentum in biodiversity conservation. ~Progress amid setbacks: Although negotiations stalled on several fronts, there were positive outcomes. Notably, 44 revised National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) were submitted, and 119 parties updated their national targets, showcasing some commitment to advancing the GBF. ~DSI Fund Agreement: COP16 did manage a breakthrough by establishing a global fund for sharing benefits from digital sequence information (DSI) on genetic biodiversity. This “Cali Fund” will enable voluntary contributions from businesses utilizing genetic information for research, with a significant proportion directed toward Indigenous Peoples and local communities. ~Biodiversity and Health: One positive highlight was the adoption of an action plan on biodiversity and health, along with procedures for identifying Ecologically Biologically Significant Areas in oceans, providing momentum for future oceanic conservation efforts. Despite these developments, the overarching issue remains the lack of solid financial commitments from wealthier nations and private sector actors, which continues to hamper effective biodiversity conservation. The stalled biodiversity finance and voluntary nature of DSI contributions indicate that while some progress was made, it may not be enough to meet the ambitious goals set by the GBF for 2030. #CBDCOP16 #Nature #Biodiversity

🌍 𝐂𝐎𝐏𝟐𝟗: 𝐌𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐬, 𝐌𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐎𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐨𝐚𝐝 𝐀𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐂𝐎𝐏𝟑𝟎 🌱⁣ ⁣ ✅ 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐝𝐢𝐝 𝐂𝐎𝐏𝟐𝟗 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐡?⁣ 💰 𝐀 𝐍𝐞𝐰 𝐆𝐥𝐨𝐛𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐅𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐓𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐭⁣ Delegates established a "New Collective Quantified Goal for climate finance" to support developing countries, comprising two components:⁣ ⁣ 💸 $𝟏.𝟑 𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐩𝐞𝐫 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐞 "𝐞𝐧𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐝" 𝐛𝐲 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐬.⁣ 🌍 $𝟑𝟎𝟎 𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐝𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐝 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠.⁣ While these targets represent a significant increase from previous commitments, they fall short of the estimated $1.3 trillion per year needed to keep global warming under 1.5°C.⁣ ⁣ 🌐 𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐂𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐨𝐧 𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐤𝐞𝐭𝐬 (𝐀𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐥𝐞 𝟔)⁣ Progress was made in establishing a global framework for carbon markets:⁣ 🔄 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐓𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐌𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐎𝐮𝐭𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐬 (𝐀𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐥𝐞 𝟔.𝟐): Clarified procedures for countries to authorize carbon credit transactions and manage tracking registries, ensuring environmental integrity through transparent technical reviews.⁣ 🛡️ 𝐂𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐝 𝐂𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐨𝐧 𝐂𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐌𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐦 (𝐀𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐥𝐞 𝟔.𝟒): Introduced mandatory safeguards to protect the environment and human rights, including obtaining informed consent from Indigenous Peoples.⁣ ❌ 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐝?⁣ ⁣ ⛽ 𝐅𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐥 𝐅𝐮𝐞𝐥 𝐏𝐡𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐨𝐮𝐭⁣ Despite discussions, COP29 did not achieve a consensus on phasing out fossil fuels. The host nation's economic reliance on oil and gas, coupled with geopolitical complexities, contributed to the lack of concrete commitments in this area.⁣ ⁣ 💵 𝐀𝐝𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐂𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐅𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞⁣ The agreed-upon $300 billion annual climate finance pledge by 2035 was criticized as insufficient, with many developing nations advocating for a minimum target of $500 billion. This shortfall highlights the ongoing challenge of mobilizing adequate resources to support vulnerable countries in their climate efforts.⁣ ⁣ 🔜 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭’𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐱𝐭? 𝐋𝐨𝐨𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐂𝐎𝐏𝟑𝟎⁣ 💡 𝐄𝐧𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐂𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐅𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞: Developed nations need to fulfill and exceed current pledges, ensuring financial support aligns with the actual needs of developing countries to combat climate change effectively.⁣ 📉 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐅𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐥 𝐅𝐮𝐞𝐥 𝐏𝐡𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐨𝐮𝐭: Achieving a global consensus on reducing fossil fuel dependency is critical to meet the Paris Agreement targets.⁣ 📈 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐃𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐛𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 (𝐍𝐃𝐂𝐬): Countries should submit more ambitious NDCs by 2025, emphasizing renewable energy adoption and comprehensive climate adaptation strategies.⁣ Sustainability Switch Consultancy