Only 415 out of more than 1,500 projects and programmes hoping to move from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) to the new carbon market set up under Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement won the approval of their host governments by the 30 June deadline – a crucial step in transitioning them.

The two Asian giants, home to two-thirds of all applicants, account for the bulk of the exclusions. Brazil, the other heavyweight of the CDM era, took the opposite path, approving nearly all of its projects in a last-minute rush that leaves it with the largest number of activities still in the running to sell credits under the new mechanism.

Carbon market watchers have long regarded the CDM, set up under the Kyoto Protocol which has now been largely replaced by the Paris Agreement, as largely discredited for failing to drive real emission cuts. They also warned that letting its projects live on could dent confidence in the mechanism’s successor.

If all projects seeking transition had been successful, they could have flooded the market with up to more than 900 million credits generated with largely outdated rules, according to UN estimates. One credit is equivalent to one tonne of carbon dioxide (CO2) and 900 million tonnes is similar to Japan’s annual emissions. 

‘New era’

Injy Johnstone, senior research fellow at the Munich-based Max Planck Institute, said the failure of most projects to clear the hurdle sent a significant signal that carbon trading had entered a new era. “The system is trying to remove some of the hot air that had inflated it in the past,” she told Climate Home News.

“The lack of transition is the biggest contribution that Article 6 has made to climate yet,” she added, arguing that leaving “zombie credits” in the market creates confusion, especially for buyers that might not realise these units have lost their value.

Among the schemes that failed to win government approval are nine programmes promoted by fossil fuel companies over a decade ago to subsidise the construction of gas plants in the Global South, which Climate Home News has previously reported on.

Fossil fuel firms seek UN carbon market cash for old gas plants

But one of them, supporting the Ressano Garcia gas plant in Mozambique, could still profit from the new market after the country’s government granted its approval on deadline day itself. 

Brazil leads projects transition

Established in 1997 under the Kyoto Protocol, the CDM allowed rich countries to meet part of their climate obligations by financing emission-cutting projects in poorer ones. It drew widespread criticism over its patchy human rights record and for failing to deliver promised climate benefits. Backers of the Article 6.4 market say it is a higher-integrity successor.

CDM projects were given a route back into the new mechanism under certain conditions at COP26 in Glasgow in November 2021, when governments agreed the rules for the Paris Agreement market. 

Project developers had until the end of 2023 to apply and host governments were originally given until the end of 2025 to grant approval. But, after requests from many developing countries for an extension, at COP30 in Belém countries agreed to push the deadline back six months to the end of June.

Brazil was the single largest beneficiary of the decision, with all of its 92 approvals coming during the extension window. Hydropower plants, landfill gas schemes and wind farms make up the bulk of the South American country’s surviving portfolio, and hydro is the single most common project type in the global transition pipeline.

Peru greenlit the move of nearly a dozen hydropower plants, Thailand backed a batch of biogas and waste-to-energy schemes, and Mexico squeezed all of its approvals – including a controversial industrial gas project – into the final week. African nations including Zambia, Malawi and Ethiopia backed programmes aiming to switch households to cleaner cooking stoves, which have the potential to generate millions of offsets and are set to be the biggest source of credits among the surviving projects.

Long way from selling credits

Securing government support does not mean a scheme can now automatically sell credits under the Article 6 mechanism. Developers are required to submit additional documentation by the end of 2026 demonstrating that their programmes respect the mechanism’s stricter rules on environmental and social safeguards and on the risk of emission cuts being reversed. The Article 6.4 Supervisory Body, the mechanism’s regulator, has the final say on which projects are allowed into the market.

Those that make it through can sell credits for emission reductions achieved between 2021 and 2025 under the old CDM methodologies, with some adjustments aimed at preventing the creation of excess credits not backed by real emission cuts. For reductions achieved from 2026 onwards, projects will need to switch to new methodologies, which the regulator is currently developing.

So far, 30 programmes have completed the process, and only two cookstove projects in Myanmar have been formally approved to issue credits.

Civil society groups have called for an investigation into the activities in Myanmar over its ties to Myanmar’s military junta – which the UN says is guilty of human rights abuses – and allegations of “massively” overstating its climate impact.

The company behind the scheme said its engagement with authorities “should not be interpreted as political endorsement” of the junta, while disputing the calculations underpinning the claim that too many credits had been issued.

The post Most “zombie credits” locked out of new UN carbon market after China and India snub appeared first on Climate Home News.

At London Climate Action Week, electrification moved from the margins of climate policy to the centre of the road to COP31. The launch of the Electrify Now campaign gave fresh momentum to a target floated at the Bonn climate talks: by 2035, electricity should provide 35% of the world’s final energy consumption, up from just over 20% today.

That makes electrification one of the defining tests for this year’s climate summit in Türkiye. If COP31 is to be more than another exercise in negotiating text, it must show how the world can replace fossil fuels in transport, heating, industry and everyday life with clean electricity.

For Africa, this agenda presents both an extraordinary opportunity and an immense challenge.

For decades, the continent has been viewed primarily through the lens of energy poverty. More than 600 million Africans still lack access to electricity. Yet that very deficit also means many African countries are not locked into ageing fossil-fuel infrastructure in the way industrialised economies are. They have the chance to build cleaner energy systems from the outset.

The case for electrification is compelling. Transport, industry and heating account for much of the world’s fossil-fuel consumption. Replacing combustion engines with electric vehicles, diesel generators with renewable power and fossil-fuel heating with electric alternatives is one of the fastest ways to cut emissions while improving energy security. Electric technologies are also far more efficient, and renewable electricity is now the cheapest source of new power across much of the world.

Africa also possesses one of the greatest renewable energy endowments on Earth. The continent possesses some of the world’s best solar resources. Vast wind corridors stretch across North, East and Southern Africa. Geothermal energy is already powering much of Kenya’s electricity system. Hydropower resources remain significant in several regions.

But potential is not the same as progress.

The biggest obstacle is not a lack of sunshine or wind. It is a shortage of investment.

Financial barriers

African countries pay some of the highest borrowing costs in the world despite contributing the least to climate change. Projects that would be commercially viable elsewhere become prohibitively expensive because of high interest rates and perceptions of financial risk. Until the cost of capital falls, many countries will struggle to build the renewable power stations, transmission lines and battery storage needed to electrify their economies.

The electricity itself is another challenge. It is difficult to persuade people to buy electric vehicles or industries to electrify production if power supplies remain unreliable. Many national grids require major investment to expand access, improve reliability and accommodate growing volumes of renewable energy. In rural areas, decentralised solar and battery systems will often provide the quickest route to universal electricity access, but they too require finance and supportive policy frameworks.

Industrial policy matters just as much.

Africa is rich in many of the minerals needed for batteries and clean technologies, yet too often it exports raw materials and imports finished products. If electrification simply creates new markets for imported batteries, electric vehicles and solar equipment, much of the economic opportunity will be lost. The transition should also become a strategy for building African manufacturing, creating skilled jobs and capturing more value from the continent’s own resources.

There are encouraging signs. Ethiopia has pushed aggressively to promote electric mobility while seeking to reduce its dependence on imported oil. Kenya has become a global leader in geothermal electricity and is seeing rapid growth in electric motorcycles. Morocco is building an industrial base around renewable energy and battery supply chains.

Electrification is happening

These examples show that electrification is no longer a distant prospect. But they also remain outliers rather than the norm. For most African countries, unreliable grids, high borrowing costs and limited access to finance still stand in the way of a much broader transformation. That is precisely why the emerging electrification agenda matters.

If the world wants electricity to account for 35% of final energy demand by 2035, then success cannot be measured simply by announcing a global target. It must be measured by whether developing countries have the finance, technology and policy support to make that transition possible.

For Africa, electrification is not only about reducing emissions. It is about determining what kind of development path the world’s youngest and fastest-growing continent will follow.

More than a billion people live in Africa today. By mid-century, that number will be closer to 2.5 billion. This is a continent on the cusp of sweeping economic transformation, with cities expanding, industries growing and hundreds of millions of people rightly demanding the energy, mobility and prosperity long enjoyed elsewhere.

Campaigners oppose Dangote’s planned Kenya refinery over climate and ecological risks

That development will require vast amounts of power. The question is whether it will be delivered through the old fossil-fuel model of imported oil, gas infrastructure and polluting combustion, or through clean electricity generated from Africa’s own renewable resources.

This matters for Africa. But it also matters for the world. A global transition to electrification cannot succeed if a continent of this scale is locked into a new generation of fossil-fuel dependence. Nor can it be just if Africa is told to decarbonise without being given the finance and technology to build something better.

The choice facing COP31 is therefore not simply whether electrification will happen. It is whether Africa is helped to become an electro-state continent, powering its development through clean electricity, or pushed by neglect into repeating the fossil-fuel pathway that has already destabilised the climate.

For the age of electrification to be a success, COP31 needs to ensure Africa is equipped to shape and accelerate it. If Africa is left behind, the global energy transition will fall behind with it.

The post Africa can lead the Age of Electrification appeared first on Climate Home News.

The refinery, which is planned to be situated in Lamu County on Kenya’s northern coast, will be East Africa’s largest refining project and is expected to take up to three years to build. Once finished, it would supply refined petroleum products to Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Rwanda, among others, helping to reduce the region’s dependence on imported fuels.

Campaigners are questioning the viability of such a large refinery at a time when renewable energy and electric transportation are expanding rapidly. 

Mohamed Adow, director of a Kenya-based climate and energy think-tank Power Shift Africa, said the decision to give Dangote the green light for the refinery is “an extraordinary act of environmental recklessness and economic short-sightedness”, arguing it would tie Kenya to “yesterday’s energy system” just as global demand for petroleum products faces increasing uncertainty. 

Campaigners argue the refinery risks coming online just as transport – the largest market for petrol and diesel – is beginning to electrify across the continent.

Kenya launched a National Electric Mobility Policy earlier this year to speed up the uptake of electric vehicles (EVs) and reduce the country’s roughly $5 billion annual fuel import bill. Ethiopia has already banned imports of non-electric vehicles and now has more than 100,000 EVs on its roads, while Rwanda is expanding its electric mobility programme with plans to convert its fleet of around 100,000 motorcycles to electric.

Adow said the project risks billions of dollars in investment in infrastructure that could become obsolete as the world moves away from oil.

“Building a refinery today assumes decades of robust demand for fuels that much of the world is actively trying to phase out,” he said in a statement. 

Ecological concerns

Lamu – the proposed site for the project – is home to the UNESCO World Heritage-listed Lamu Old Town and an archipelago containing extensive mangrove forests, coral reefs and seagrass beds that support fisheries, tourism and coastal livelihoods.

Locating the refinery in Lamu would “place one of Africa’s largest fossil fuel developments in one of the continent’s most ecologically sensitive and culturally significant coastal regions,” Power Shift Africa said.

Major emitting countries knew of climate risks decades earlier than claimed

Sherelee Odayar, oil and gas campaigner at Greenpeace Africa, warned that a refinery of this scale could increase the risk of habitat destruction, marine pollution, oil spills and air pollution in one of East Africa’s most fragile coastal ecosystems.

She said the risks stem not only from the refinery itself – including storage tanks, pipelines and fuel handling facilities – but also from the large volumes of crude oil that would need to be shipped into Lamu and refined products exported by sea. Increased tanker traffic and fuel transfers, she said, would raise the likelihood of accidents in ecologically sensitive coastal waters.

Odayar added that Lamu’s low-lying, flood-prone coastline could compound those risks by damaging infrastructure and carrying contaminants from storage facilities into nearby fishing grounds and marine ecosystems.

“Lamu’s mangroves, coral reefs and seagrass beds are not expendable; they support fisheries, livelihoods and coastal protection,” Odayar added. 

She said Kenyan authorities should suspend any approvals until an independent environmental and social impact assessment is completed, with genuine public participation and transparent scrutiny of the long-term economic, health and ecological risks.

“Any review must assess cumulative impacts on Lamu’s mangroves, coral reefs, seagrass beds and fishing livelihoods, alongside the wider economic risk of locking Kenya into costly fossil fuel infrastructure as the global energy transition accelerates”.

Dangote Group declined to answer questions from Climate Home News when contacted by phone.

Technological change threaten project’s future

The Kenya refinery would replicate Dangote’s 650,000-barrel-per-day refinery in Lagos, currently Africa’s largest, which has plans to more than double capacity to 1.4 million barrels per day by 2028.

Adow of Power Shift Africa said projects like this represent “a breathtaking failure to recognise where the global economy is heading”, pointing out that the East African refinery risks arriving when Africa is experiencing an unprecedented clean energy boom. 

Referencing Africa’s solar boom, global electric vehicles uptake and the International Energy Agency’s projection that global oil demand is set to enter a decline later this decade, the think-tank founder said African governments risk anchoring the continent’s future to an industry facing mounting economic uncertainty.

Loss and damage fund delays first project approvals as needs dwarf resources

The organisation said the project faces a bigger threat aside from environmental opposition and that is technological change. “The danger is not simply that the refinery will pollute, it is that it will become obsolete long before it has paid for itself,” he added.

Kenyan President William Ruto said the project will create about 60,000 jobs for Kenyans and supply refined fuel to eight East and Central African countries.

GreenPeace Africa’s Odayar said the promise of ‘thousands of jobs’ cannot be used to hide the true cost of the investment which is that large fossil fuel projects often create temporary jobs while undermining existing livelihoods in fishing, tourism and small-scale local economies.

“The enormous capital required for a project of this scale could instead help accelerate Kenya’s renewable energy future through solar, wind, geothermal, storage and better energy access,” she added.

The post Campaigners oppose Dangote’s planned Kenya refinery over climate and ecological risks appeared first on Climate Home News.

Much has been written about when fossil fuel companies knew their products cause harm to the climate, public health, and the environment. Less attention has been paid to just how long governments have known, too, and what they did or failed to do with that knowledge. That information is not just a matter of historical record – it’s a matter of legal responsibility. 

A year ago this month, the world’s highest court affirmed that countries have been under an obligation to curb climate change since they knew about the foreseeable risks it posed and to remedy its harms. This historic advisory opinion opened the door for States to be held accountable not only for failing to act on climate change, but also for making it worse by perpetuating its primary cause: fossil fuel production and use.

While the ruling is clear about the content of climate duties under international law, it is silent on when those duties first applied to specific countries or how long they have been breaching them. The earlier governments knew about the drivers and dangers of climate change, the longer they have been under an obligation to prevent it, and the greater their potential liability for the resulting harms.

Once they were informed of the risks fossil fuels posed to the climate, States had a duty to do everything in their power to prevent those risks from materializing – and at a minimum, to refrain from exacerbating them. But, as trends in fossil fuel dependence and climate destruction make clear, they did not.

Early knowledge

A new report from the Center for International Environmental Law shows that the governments of many major emitting countries have known since at least the 1960s that fossil fuel use was warming the planet and, if continued, could lead to dire impacts –  including melting of the polar ice caps, catastrophic sea level rise, and extreme heat.

Yet some of the countries responsible for the largest cumulative shares of carbon emissions have claimed that global awareness of climate change emerged only in the late 1980s, around the time the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established and negotiations of a climate convention began.

Loss and damage fund delays first project approvals as needs dwarf resources

Why? Because admitting that they have known about the chief causes and foreseeable consequences of climate change for the better part of a century would mean they had a duty to prevent it that they’ve been flouting for decades.

Drawing  on a wide range of publicly available government records and scientific studies, CIEL’s research exposes when knowledge of climate change made its way onto policymakers’ desks and into public discourse. The report synthesizes some of the groundbreaking research by scholars such as Naomi Oreskes on the history of American climate science, putting their findings into a legal context and broadening the discussion to other countries.

First findings in 19th century

The origins of the climate harms the world is experiencing today – more extreme storms, deadly heat waves, floods, and sea level rise – stem from around 1850, when industry began burning so much fossil fuel that the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere began to rise.

Scientists figured out quite quickly that the release of these ancient carbon stores could warm Earth. The first paper that modeled the potential warming impact of fossil fuel use, for example, came out in 1896, while the first studies that confirmed global temperatures were rising came out before World War II. 

Government records show international cooperation on climate change research picking up around 1957, when countries worldwide coordinated funding for thousands of research projects as part of the International Geophysical Year (IGY).

The IGY spawned the world’s first program to monitor atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, and the 69 participating governments were apprised of the results. By this time, governmental scientific organizations in most of the world knew that continued fossil fuel use could heat the planet dramatically, with potentially significant adverse impacts. Many countries also became aware of industry research on climate change during this decade through their state-owned oil companies.

Big emitters knew

In the 1960s, the world’s top atmospheric scientists, chemists, and geophysicists concluded that fossil fuel emissions not only could warm the earth, but they were already doing so. They also concluded that continuing to release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere was likely to cause serious harm to food systems, ecosystems, human health, and communities, including through sea level rise and deadly extreme weather events. By the 1960s and 1970s, many governments had ample warning that continued reliance on fossil fuels could have profoundly dangerous global consequences. 

Evidence indicates that this information reached public officials —  in some cases at the highest echelons of government. In the United States –  the largest historic emitter of carbon dioxide –  White House officials exchanged memos over what to do about the “carbon dioxide problem” during the 1960s and a presidential report published in 1965 unequivocally attributed warming to fossil fuels and warned about catastrophic levels of temperature and sea level rise if trends continued. 

In the United Kingdom, the greenhouse effect was first raised in a parliamentary debate in 1969, and in France, a state-owned oil company published a magazine article about the dangers of atmospheric carbon dioxide in 1971, while the Canadian environment ministry regularly published articles about climate change in its employee magazine throughout the 1970s and 80s. 

Even the most generous reading of this information shows that many of the world’s largest contributors to climate change, including the United States, Canada, Germany, and Australia,  knew enough to change course over two decades before the first meeting of the IPCC  in 1988, if not far earlier. 

The story does not end there. As an illustrative compilation of publicly available, English-language evidence, CIEL’s report is not a complete survey of what all major emitters knew.  And facts about what a given country knew are not, on their own, sufficient to secure accountability. But, together with evidence about how that knowledge was subsequently acted upon –  or, as was often the case, denied, dismissed, and distorted – and about how climate impacts have unfolded, they solidify foundations for climate justice and repair. 

The post Major emitting countries knew of climate risks decades earlier than claimed appeared first on Climate Home News.

Speaking at the International Seabed Authority’s (ISA) annual meeting in Kingston on Monday, secretary-general Leticia Carvalho said the regulator’s role “matters more than ever” as governments grapple with growing pressure to exploit the deep seabed for minerals needed for the energy transition.

“The deep seabed belongs to no single country and no corporation; it belongs to all of us,” Carvalho said, describing its resources as “the common heritage of humankind”.

“If we lose sight of this,” she added, “we risk repeating on the ocean floor the same injustices and destruction we still strive to remedy on land.”

The conflict stems from TMC’s attempt to bypass the UN process by applying for US-sponsored ocean mining permits offered last year by the Trump administration. The Canadian firm aims to become the first company to mine the seabed for minerals like nickel, rare earths and manganese used in the production of both clean energy technologies and military equipment.

Several governments, including China, condemned the move as a “violation of international law”. In response, ISA member states agreed to open an inquiry into its licence-holders – among them two of TMC’s subsidiaries – to make sure they have complied with international law. If they are ultimately found to have breached those obligations, their exploration contracts could be revoked.

In June, the two TMC subsidiaries – Tonga Offshore Mining Ltd (TOML) and Nauru Ocean Resources Inc (NORI) – filed claims against the ISA at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), asking the court to suspend the inquiry while the case proceeds. The companies argue they are being targeted “without lawful procedural basis”, “in breach of due process”, and without “good faith”.

Environmental groups have accused The Metals Company of using legal tactics to block the investigation into its subsidiaries.

“We find ourselves in this Orwellian situation where these companies are trying to effectively get an injunction against the ISA from continuing its inquiry,” said Louisa Casson, who leads Greenpeace’s global campaign against deep-sea mining.

“The stakes are so high and that’s why we’re seeing this pretty extraordinary move to try to get an injunction against the ISA,” she added.

Mining the deep ocean floor

The ISA has been negotiating a mining code for the deep ocean floor for over 12 years without success. Nearly 40 governments, including the UK, France and Germany, have called for a moratorium or precautionary pause on deep-sea mining until there is sufficient scientific evidence that it can proceed without causing serious harm to marine ecosystems.

Rather than wait for the UN process, industry frontrunner, The Metals Company, decided to apply for US permits offered by the Trump administration last year. In May, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) certified TMC’s application to explore 120,000 square kilometers of sea floor.

The firm wants to mine an area in the Pacific known as the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, which holds critical minerals inside potato-sized rocks found in the deep ocean floor known as polymetallic nodules. The minerals like manganese, nickel and rare earths are used in clean energy technologies like batteries and wind turbines.

But the area is also a little-understood ecosystem inhabited by thousands of unnamed species. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the world’s largest environmental network, says mining this area would threaten the existence of over half of all molluscs reliant on deep-sea vents.

Governments launch inquiry

Seeking to discourage companies from bypassing the UN process, the ISA’s member states unanimously agreed to open an inquiry into whether holders of its exploration licences complied with their contractual obligations under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

“The stage we’re at now is countries grappling with what they can do about this. What tools do they have to constrain this pathway that would go against international law,” Casson said.

Both NORI and TOML continue to hold ISA exploration contracts in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. NORI’s license, however, expires later this month on July 21st and is up for review.

The inquiry is currently ongoing, but Casson said that if governments decide to cancel NORI’s license, other firms could apply for the ISA permit and compete for mining rights in the area.

“If that happens, it could really put into jeopardy TMC USA’s application (for US permits) because then suddenly that area could be open for a competing claim,” she explained. “At the moment, TMC is trying to kind of play both sides and shore up the area so that there will be no competition.”

Deep-sea mining firms push back

The cases before ITLOS are the first contentious disputes over deep-sea mining to reach the court designed for maritime disputes and the first brought directly by private contractors against the ISA. Among the companies’ legal advisers is former ISA secretary-general Michael Lodge.

Both NORI and TOML claimed that, unless the inquiry is suspended, there is a “real
and imminent risk of prejudice” that “may have significant legal and practical consequences” for
their activities.

The claim was backed by the Pacific island nation of Nauru, which has sponsored TMC’s push to mine the Clarion-Clipperton Zone and would benefit from the economic activity. The country raised “concerns on the adherence of due process with respect to the treatment of NORI”.

The mining companies allege that the ISA has singled them out among other applicants by requesting additional documentation, and that the UN auditors did not give them an opportunity to “meaningfully respond” to their concerns.

The ISA rejected those allegations as “wholly unsupported assertions”. It added that, given TMC’s application for US mining permits, it had done “what any reasonable regulator would do”: with the unanimous support of member states, it opened an inquiry simply to establish the facts.

Delay tactics

A decision from the maritime court is now expected by July 18, which has added to a “climate of significant regulatory uncertainty”, according to global law firm HSF Kramer.

As ISA countries meet in Kingston this week, the court’s president asked them “not to act in any way that could hinder any order” the court may make.

At the hearing representing the ISA, renowned human rights lawyer Philippe Sands said the deep-sea mining firms were engaging in “strategic litigation” meant to delay the inquiry and send the ISA into a years-long legal process.

“It’s a delaying tactic, and nothing would make them happier than for you to kick this into the long grass for two years while you sort out the merits. That is what they want this Tribunal, the Chamber, to do. You are being instrumentalized in this process,” Sands told the judges.

The post UN seabed regulator defends authority as mining firms seek to halt inquiry appeared first on Climate Home News.

The Philippines is caught in an extreme weather trap. Here, forecasts for a strong El Niño in the months ahead do not just indicate a period of drought – they also point to torrential rain and flooding.

It could hardly come at a worse time, threatening communities that are still struggling to recover from previous typhoons, such as last year’s Typhoon Tino, as well as two strong earthquakes – in Cebu in September 2025 and last month’s 7.8-magnitude quake in Mindanao.

Forecasts point to the arrival of one of the most intense El Niños in recent history this year and into 2027, with the United Nations warning that it could be the strongest in decades around the world.

The peak of the El Niño is expected towards the end of the year, but the weather phenomenon is already estimated to have caused agricultural losses of nearly €30 million (£25.9 million), potentially affecting the livelihoods of 4 million farmers.

On the climate frontline

For many, El Niño is a figure in a report or a distant headline, but for those of us who live and work on the ground, it is a reality that is already hitting the most vulnerable families.

When I travel through the communities of the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region – in the south – or speak with families on the island of Siargao or in the Zamboanga region, I do not see data or graphs.

I see a father looking at his cracked rice field, wondering how he will pay off the debts from a harvest that is already lost before it has even begun. I see a mother walking under a relentless sun because her village’s well has dried up, carrying the water that sustains the health of her children and her entire community.

And what we are seeing today – 26 provinces experiencing drought and millions of dollars in agricultural losses – is only the beginning.

Loss and damage fund delays first project approvals as needs dwarf resources

Many Filipino families are still trying to rebuild and recover after last year’s typhoons and the two earthquakes. In Mindanao, where the recent magnitude 7.8 earthquake displaced more than 90,000 people and destroyed over 19,000 houses, uncertainty remains about when the people will be able to fully recover and return home. 

Today, they are trying to protect the meagre possessions they have and, if they are lucky enough to have their home unscathed by typhoons and earthquakes, their homes from flooding; tomorrow, they will have to survive the hardship and impact of drought.

The effects of El Niño threaten to exacerbate their troubles.

Struggle for basic needs

Many low-income Filipino families already face significant challenges to meet their basic needs.

In our daily visits, we see how life is becoming increasingly difficult for millions of people. Rising fuel and transport costs are driving up the price of basic foodstuffs, making them unaffordable for many families. At the same time, crop failures and income losses are leaving households without livelihoods, while disasters contribute to further suffering.

But we are not just talking about hunger. We are talking about health, safety and dignity. Water shortages are forcing many people to resort to unsafe sources, increasing the risk of disease. And, as is the case in so many crises, it is the most vulnerable who bear the heaviest burden: walking long distances every day to fetch water or food, enduring enormous physical strain and facing risks of violence and insecurity.

Building resilience

Faced with this reality, our response is based on a simple idea: to be there before the crisis reaches its most critical point. At Action Against Hunger, we work alongside communities to anticipate the situation, assessing the impact of the drought and activating early response mechanisms to protect their livelihoods and access to water.

We translate climate forecasts into concrete action plans: from support for farmers to programmes ensuring safe water. All of this is done in coordination with local authorities and international partners, because we know that what we do today will make the difference tomorrow.

A supercharged El Niño is coming – are we ready?

The hardest months are yet to come. But the question is not just what will happen, but what we are doing now to prevent it. How many tables will remain empty and how many children will see their health compromised will depend on our ability to act in time.

We cannot stop El Niño. But we can prevent it from becoming a crisis of human dignity. We cannot afford to look the other way whilst the earth cracks and opportunities disappear. Because behind every statistic, there is a family struggling to get by. And that is a reality we cannot ignore.

The post A strong El Niño spells more climate pain for the Philippines appeared first on Climate Home News.

The fund faces a substantial dilemma about how to select projects to receive its limited resources after its first call for proposals saw nearly 180 submissions requiring around $2.8 billion. It currently has only $250 million available to allocate, although the board agreed on Friday to release $100 million more in the face of overwhelming demand.

Much of the three-day board meeting in Manila was held behind closed doors, making it difficult for civil society experts present to know what was happening. Draft decisions were projected on a screen and finalised at the end of the meeting before being adopted on Friday.

During the closing session, government board members and observers alike expressed frustration at the huge gap between the growing needs of communities struggling with worsening climate change disasters and the paltry amounts on offer to help them recover.

At an initial pledging session at COP28 in 2023, wealthy governments offered around $820 million to the fund, of which only 55% has been delivered into its coffers.

“Every proposal represents real people,” who are expecting in good faith to receive resources from the fund, said Milagro Matus from Belize, calling for its ambition to be strengthened.

Mismatch between needs and contributions

Several other board members, especially from developing countries, as well as climate justice advocates expressed disappointment over the fact that the fund has so little to spend and called for efforts to increase contributions from rich nations. 

The fund will consider how to mobilise more resources in the short term, as well as a longer-term replenishment process, at its December meeting. 

Richard Sherman of South Africa, the board’s former co-chair and now a board member, had proposed a high-level pledging session for the FRLD to take place before the COP31 climate summit in November but this now seems unlikely to happen as it was not included in Friday’s decisions.

Adao Soares Barbosa of Timor-Leste said this week’s board meeting – its ninth – should show the world that more financial contributions are required as collective needs to tackle loss and damage are far higher. 

Iran war fuel shocks threaten Africa’s clean cooking push, IEA says

He called for enough extra money to be found so that at least one project can be approved for each least-developed country and small island developing state, which have so far submitted 72 proposals between them. Half of the fund’s resources are meant to be reserved for those two groups of especially vulnerable nations.

Brandon Wu, ActionAid USA’s director of policy and campaigns, said the board’s decision not to opt for quick approval of the first four projects presented “is the most obvious example of how developed countries’ failure to adequately resource the FRLD is constraining a fund that was meant to be the central flagship institution responding to climate impacts across the Global South”.

More time to consider proposals

Other board members spoke about the uncomfortable situation the fund faces in having to select projects from such a huge number, introducing “unhelpful competition” into the process. Isaac Glassie-Ryan of the Cook Islands said he was concerned that the approval process pits “the vulnerable against the vulnerable” and argued that each project should have “a fair shot at equal treatment”.

The FRLD’s secretariat checks project documentation and ensures they qualify for funding, but it remains unclear exactly how projects will then be chosen for the board to approve and in what order. The next meeting has been postponed from October to mid-December to allow more time for a first set of proposals to be prepared for the board to examine.

The extent of FRLD resources available means that only around 15-20 projects are likely to be approved at that meeting, as there is a limit of $20 million per proposal.

Friday’s decision noted the “need for the fair and equal treatment of all funding requests” under review by the secretariat and requested that the initial set of projects backed by the FRLD should test diverse approaches and ways of providing its money.

Civil society frustration

At the end of the Manila meeting, civil society observers said they were dissatisfied with both the slow speed of approvals and their exclusion from a large part of the discussions. Harjeet Singh, global convenor of the Fill the Fund campaign and founding director of India’s Satat Sampada Climate Foundation, called the meeting “deeply disappointing and frustrating”, saying it had been non-transparent and non-inclusive. 

A number of board members supported that complaint, saying the issue needed to be addressed and a policy for civil society participation in board meetings agreed.

As blue economy gathers pace, communities must benefit from ocean boom, activists say

Board co-chair Camila Rodríguez Tavárez said the issue would be considered. She described the meeting as “productive” yet “challenging”, adding that a lot of progress had been made and the board had been able to arrive at “a balanced set of decisions”.

Singh nonetheless lamented that the FRLD has not yet “been able to provide a single penny to people who are suffering right now”.

The post Loss and damage fund delays first project approvals as needs dwarf resources appeared first on Climate Home News.

Although a fossil fuel, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) stoves are generally regarded as a cleaner and healthier alternative to using smoky wood or charcoal, which about 1 billion people in sub-Saharan Africa still rely on, according to IEA estimates. Cooking with these inefficient biofuels generates annual carbon emissions comparable to those from the aviation and shipping sectors combined.

Speaking on Thursday at a high-level online event on clean cooking in Africa, Fatih Birol, the IEA’s executive director, said LPG supply had been “disproportionately affected” by the Strait of Hormuz crisis.

“Our numbers show that 3.4 billion people around the world, most of them in Africa, have been negatively affected as a result of the LPG crisis,” Birol said.

With around 30% of global seaborne trade in LPG passing through the key shipping route off the coast of Iran, supply disruptions and price shocks led to fuel rationing and sharp price hikes in Asia and Africa this year, putting LPG beyond the reach of many households, according to an IEA progress report released at the event.

The report found that most emerging nations have thin fuel reserves to buffer the impacts of the crisis. “Many countries now have less than 15 days of fuel storage,” Birol said, adding that several countries, including Uganda and Bangladesh, had approached the IEA for support to deal with the crisis.

Prioritise LPG security

In response, the agency is developing a new clean cooking security programme aimed at expanding LPG storage, strengthening supply chains, and improving cooperation between producing and consuming countries.

Birol said the IEA’s energy security strategy has spanned oil, natural gas and electricity, “but we think LPG security is also very important”. He added that the agency is working closely with LPG companies around the world to find ways to keep supplies stable.

Speaking at the event, US Energy Secretary Chris Wright highlighted the US’s position as the biggest producer and exporter of LPG, and said that expanding access to clean cooking fuels had become the Trump administration’s top international energy priority.

He called for greater collaboration to build global supply chains, including gas distribution networks, LPG storage capacity and, “most critically”, fuel delivery systems to reduce costs for the 2 billion people worldwide who still lack access to clean cooking.

The loss and damage fund needs far more finance to deliver climate justice

Funding grows but still falls short

Alongside its new fuel security programme, the IEA announced $900 million in new commitments for clean cooking in Africa, adding to the $2.2 billion pledged at the inaugural Africa Clean Cooking Summit in Paris in 2024.

Around $750 million of those earlier commitments have already been deployed across 22 African countries, supporting projects ranging from LPG storage in Tanzania and electric cooking in Kenya to new stove factories in Nigeria and stove distribution in Senegal.

The IEA said clean cooking access in sub-Saharan Africa is now expanding three times faster than in 2010, reaching nearly 12 million people in 2024. But population growth continues to outpace progress, with the number of people still cooking with more polluting fuels rising by around 14 million last year.

Kenyan President William Ruto said financing remains the biggest hurdle, noting that Kenya alone requires around $1 billion to achieve its clean cooking goals.

“Closing the continent’s clean cooking access gap will require scaled-up investment, yet annual financing remains far below what is needed,” he said.

In 2024, the IEA said investments of $4 billion a year would be needed for the rest of this decade to close the clean cooking gap in Africa, but levels remain far below what is needed to provide universal access.

Paris summit unlocks cash for clean cooking in Africa, side-stepping concerns over gas

Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre described clean cooking as “one of the most underfunded opportunities in global development and climate policy”, despite causing around 850,000 premature deaths across Africa every year, mostly among women and children.

He called on governments, international partners and the private sector to work together to ensure rapid progress on what he described as “one of the most cost-effective climate mitigation strategies available to us”, adding that “carbon finance, climate finance and development finance must align”.

Localising the supply chain

Clean cooking in Africa is not only about energy access, said Lerato Mataboge, the African Union (AU) Commissioner for Infrastructure and Energy, explaining that it has the power to reshape livelihoods and markets across the continent.

But this will only be possible if the clean cooking value chain is localised, she said, adding that the AU aims “to avoid Africa remaining a consumer and not a producer of transformation interventions that are required by our people”.

Mataboge said the recent LPG supply disruptions underscore the need for Africa to build more resilient clean cooking supply chains, warning that the roughly 13 million people who gained access to clean cooking annually in the past five years could revert to traditional fuels if LPG prices continue to surge.

She called for greater investment in manufacturing, distribution and infrastructure, saying Africa must “create local value chains” and strengthen private-sector participation.

Moving the value chain for clean cooking closer to the people that need it most and improving infrastructure, she said, would not only support a just energy transition but also “insulate communities from external shocks, thereby guaranteeing security of supply”.

The post Iran war fuel shocks threaten Africa’s clean cooking push, IEA says appeared first on Climate Home News.

This week, the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD) faces a significant decision that will determine its ability to address the harms being done by climate change.

Discussions on the Fund’s Resource Mobilisation Strategy must get the scale and accessibility of the Fund right. Failure to do so would risk undermining its role to channel finance to countries ex­periencing loss and damage, and undermine obligations to climate justice and human rights.

This discussion could not come at a more pressing time. As loss and damage (L&D) continues to escalate globally, and as the world teeters perilously close to the Paris Agreement’s critical 1.5C warming limit, the FRLD also faces the very real danger of running out of funding in 2027.

As Nigeria rails at loss and damage “mirage”, fund boss assures money is coming

Experts calculate that in 2025, L&D finance needs for climate-vulnerable countries may have reached USD$937 billion. Last year’s major impacts included a series of extremely destructive cyclones that hit the Philippines, estimated to have caused over $5 billion in losses, while in Jamaica, the losses and damage caused by Hurricane Melissa were estimated at $12.2 billion.

The bill for just one of these disasters would exhaust the Fund’s existing resources many times over. While the costs and human rights violations rack up, almost four years after being agreed at COP27, the FRLD remains critically underfunded.

Pledges to the Fund ($822 million) are just a fraction of 1% of annual loss and damage needs, and only around half of those pledges ($448 million) have been paid into the Fund so far.

Meanwhile, those who have done nothing to cause the climate crisis are facing its worst – and intensifying – impacts and are being left to foot the bill for the damages already incurred, not to mention the severe non-economic costs to communities. It is therefore crucial that the FRLD’s Resource Mobilisation Strategy urgently brings in far more L&D finance.

Contributor conundrum

Many developed states will claim that additional countries should provide L&D finance. This, however, is a distraction – particularly considering the deep abyss between the contributions of developed states that are obligated to pay and their fair share as calculated according to their wealth and historical emissions. Furthermore, some states and regions that are currently not obligated to contribute are already doing so. 

Analysis reveals that, even in the highly inequitable scenario where all states including those who have contributed nothing to causing the climate crisis were to pay towards L&D finance, wealthy countries would still be responsible for the vast majority of L&D finance.

New loss and damage fund could run out of money next year

The Fund’s Resource Mobilisation Strategy must focus political discussions on the ability of rich and highly polluting states to raise public, grant-based L&D finance that is new and additional to existing climate finance obligations and overseas development assistance.

Developed states have the means to pay and the FRLD should introduce mandatory and progressive mechanisms to make the biggest polluters, including the ultra-rich and fossil fuel corporations, pay for their climate harms. 

African impacts

Increasingly unpredictable seasons and more frequent and extreme events are driving food insecurity, malnutrition, displacement and other human rights risks in climate-vulnerable countries, and communities facing these escalating and compounding impacts must be centred in FRLD policies.

In Ethiopia, 2023 saw 24 million people affected by five back-to-back failed rains leading to severe food and water shortages, including a 90% crop loss in drought-affected areas. Eleven million people required food assistance, and over 500,000 people were displaced. Meanwhile, the 2023–24 floods and the 2024 Gofa landslide disrupted or destroyed health facilities, displaced thousands, and led to outbreaks of cholera, malaria, and measles.

Comment: Let’s tax luxury air travel to fund climate adaptation and loss and damage

Today, Somalia is facing one of its most severe drought emergencies in recent history driven by climate extremes. Malnutrition rates continue to exceed projections and previous devastating records, with 1.9 million children in Somalia acutely malnourished.

In Malawi, child stunting had significantly reduced, but climate impacts are now affecting children’s growth and development. Tropical Cyclone Freddy in 2023 was one of the worst on record, causing over 1,200 deaths, displacing half a million people, and causing damages exceeding $500 million. Recovery needs for four major disasters between 2015 and 2023 are estimated at $1.7 billion, equivalent to more than a quarter of Malawi’s 2026-2027 budget. 

Funding for communities

Access to community grants in the southern African country, however, has catalysed local responses to L&D that coordinate around immediate and long-term needs and restoring livelihoods.

Direct access to the FRLD for climate-vulnerable countries and communities, with community-centric planning, is essential to ensure that the Fund can respond to the needs of people experiencing the worst impacts of climate change, through prompt and flexible mechanisms that do not hinder recovery options.

Stepping up to fill the FRLD through an ambitious and needs-based Resource Mobilisation Strategy is the bare minimum that wealthy states can and must do. It is, after all, an obligation that flows from the international duties of cooperation and prevention of harm, and from the obligation to provide reparation when harm occurs. Failure to do so would further erode climate justice and human rights for communities on the frontline of loss and damage.

The post The loss and damage fund needs far more finance to deliver climate justice appeared first on Climate Home News.

“The youth in our village migrate to cities for work. What’s better than to have jobs near home?” Gollo Doni, a farmer and secretary of the local youth association, told Climate Home News as he and other members in their 20s discussed the latest meetings between locals and representatives of Oil India Limited (OIL), a state company exploring graphite and vanadium reserves in Arunachal Pradesh.

The mining plans in the state, which is home to more than one-third of India’s graphite reserves and the subject of a sovereignty dispute with China, reflect a push by the Indian government to position itself as a leading producer of battery-grade graphite as the mass rollout of batteries for electric vehicles (EVs) and power storage drives demand for the mineral.

An average electric car contains about 60 kg of graphite anode materials, according to the International Energy Agency, and the graphite supply chain is heavily dominated by China, which produces about 80% of the world’s natural graphite and controls more than 90% of global refining.

As Western countries seek to reduce their dependency on China, India’s reserves of graphite and other minerals vital for the switch to clean energy have caught governments’ attention, with Germany signing a critical minerals partnership agreement in January.

Ambitious plans

But hurdles remain to India’s ambitious plans to ramp up critical minerals output, both to position itself as an alternative to China and to meet its own fast-growing needs.

India has a target for 30% of new vehicle sales to be electric by 2030, and demand for EV lithium batteries looks set to surge close to 35-fold between 2023 and 2035, according to S&P Global Mobility, driven by growth in two- and three-wheelers in the country of 1.4 billion people.

Although domestic manufacturing of EV batteries is expanding, the sector remains at an early stage and India depends heavily on imports from China, South Korea and Japan.

At the same time, it wants to get graphite processing off the ground, aiming to turn its reserves of the mineral – which rank among the world’s 10 biggest – into higher value battery-grade supplies.

The energy transition has a rare earth problem: These startups are solving it

With exploration already underway, the next step should be starting discussions about developing processing facilities – including support from foreign partners, said Kaira Rakheja, South Asia energy analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA).

“These exploration and extraction projects have a long gestation period. So even if discussions on processing start now, it will still take a while,” she said, noting India’s simultaneous push to create “rare earth corridors” encompassing every step of production.

Hurdles ahead

India’s graphite reserves are mainly of a lower grade, however, making processing for use in battery anodes more complex, while the country is a late entrant.

“We are not a big player in the market and have missed the bus,” said Aditya Ramji, director of the Global South Clean Transportation Centre at the University of California, Davis.

While exploration work is already underway at several sites in Arunachal Pradesh, and at some places in eastern and southern India, production will take at least two years to start, said Tana Tage, director at the Centre for the Earth Sciences and Himalayan Studies, OIL’s local partner and holder of a 10% stake in the Phop project. 

A mine would create about 300 jobs and the project’s partners are discussing options for processing the site’s medium- to high-grade graphite locally, Tage added, despite voicing concern about a lack of technological know-how. 

“India does not have the large-scale, advanced processing capabilities to achieve the ultra-high purity levels required for EV batteries and clean technologies,” he told Climate Home News.

Diversification drive

Despite such challenges, industry experts say India could benefit from the push to find sources of battery graphite other than China.

“We can’t beat China in this space, but we can still create a space for ourselves in buying and selling, as everyone is looking for a space to diversify,” said Rishabh Jain, fellow at the Council on Energy, Environment  and Water, a New Delhi-based think-tank.

India’s government hopes the bilateral memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed with Germany could help.

As well as pledging cooperation on critical minerals exploration, the declaration envisions the exchange of know-how to add value through processing and recycling, facilitating investment and building the supply chain resilience of both countries. That could include identifying joint research projects and facilitating cooperation between industry players.

“India and Germany will work together to mutually strengthen supply chains in the field of critical minerals,” a spokesperson for the German government’s energy strategy said. “We will encourage companies to build strong ties in terms of knowledge sharing, offtake agreements and investments.”

Germany is already supporting several domestic projects focused on converting graphite into battery anode material – valuable experience that could potentially be shared with India, said Rakheja. In return for shared technical expertise, India offers a strong pool of workforce talent and a big market.

“This way, both partners can look beyond China,” she said.

India sets achievable green electricity and emissions intensity targets

The MoU, which is non-binding, is “a good start”, said Svenja Schöneich, a senior advisor at the NGO Germanwatch, adding that it was thin on details, including on how to add value to India’s critical mineral resources.

“The partnership document should figure out the problem of local value creation. It should also consider that it can’t really skip processing through China,” Schöneich said.

An official at India’s Mining Ministry did not respond to requests for comment.

Trade deals and tax breaks

Beyond the five-year German accord, India has implemented numerous policy measures aimed at securing its own supplies of critical minerals and adding value to its mineral exports, for example by signing favourable trade deals. Last year, India’s graphite was granted zero-duty access to the US, just as the tariffs on Chinese graphite imports climbed to a high 160%. 

When the government announced the national budget in February, it included a raft of financial measures aimed at kickstarting a plan to process minerals domestically – the details of which are expected to be announced in the coming months.

They included zero customs duty on critical mineral inputs and enhanced tax deductions for exploration, while the government’s production-linked incentive (PLI) scheme allocated the equivalent of $1.87 billion to build domestic battery cell manufacturing.

Before that can happen, progress on new mining – such as the Arunachal Pradesh graphite projects – is vital, Jain said.

“We are in 2026, and looking to move towards a cleaner world. This is the future,” he said.

The state government in Arunachal Pradesh agrees. It called last year for fast-tracked environmental permitting for graphite projects, new infrastructure around mine sites and reforms to avoid legal disputes that could hold the sector back. 

Back in the village of Phop, youth association secretary Doni said that while reluctant residents did not raise an objection to OIL’s preliminary exploration licence, he fears a bigger fight ahead.

Tage said up to 3,000 people could ultimately be displaced if the project proceeds, raising questions about whether economic benefits would outweigh the social and environmental costs.

“It has been difficult to make the elders agree to actual mining,” Doni said, as he and other young villagers sipped on sweet tea in a thatched mountain house. “We are trying to convince our elders that mining will not only bring resources for the nation, but bring us jobs here.”

This article was produced as part of the India-Germany Climate and Energy Journalism Programme organised by Clean Energy Wire, supported by Heinrich Böll Stiftung.

The post India looks to untapped graphite riches for slice of critical minerals boom appeared first on Climate Home News.

But civil society groups warn that the push to expand the “blue economy” may reproduce familiar inequalities unless coastal communities have a greater say in how projects are designed, financed and governed. 

Neville van Rooy from The Green Connection in South Africa, which works with coastal communities who rely directly on the ocean for their livelihoods, said local people were frequently unaware of proposed developments until civil society groups alerted them. 

“Communities need to be taken seriously,” van Rooy told delegates at the Mombasa conference held on the shores of the Indian Ocean. 

“Just because they are often struggling does not mean they do not have a vision of development. Inclusivity needs to be at the centre and development pathways must build on communities’ own experience, including indigenous knowledge systems rooted in harmony with nature.” 

Ocean investment flowing in

The value of the blue economy—the sustainable use and protection of marine resources—doubled from $1.3 trillion in 1995 to $2.6 trillion in 2020 and is projected to quadruple by 2050, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

The scale of ambition in Mombasa was clear, with governments, institutions, companies and civil society groups announcing 320 commitments worth $6.4 billion.

The largest share went to sustainable blue economy projects, with 86 commitments worth $2.86 billion, followed by sustainable fisheries with $1.75 billion and ocean-climate action with $1.18 billion.  

The pledges included support for ocean startups in Africa, coastal ecosystem restoration across the Indian Ocean, marine research and policy, recycling discarded fishing nets, sustainable livelihoods in Timor-Leste and planning tools for offshore wind.  

Cynthia Barzuna, global deputy director of the Ocean Program at the World Resources Institute, said there are signs that blue finance and ocean planning are moving closer to coastal communities, particularly through the development of sustainable ocean plans.  

In 2020, a group of 14 countries – co-led by Australia and Chile – pledged to manage their oceans sustainably, by jointly drawing up plans with coastal communities to shape how marine resources are managed and where investments should go.

“Once communities are involved in the planning, bring in their knowledge, and participate in designing, developing and implementing a sustainable ocean plan, it puts us on the right path,” Barzuna told Climate Home News on the sidelines of the conference. 

Yet some of those countries – including Kenya, Australia and Mexico – have embarked on a new wave of offshore oil and gas projects, threatening key biodiversity hotspots, according to a recent report by a group of environmental NGOs.

When projects go wrong

Civil society groups say lessons need to be learnt from failed blue economy projects too. 

In Kenya, a proposed coal-fired power plant at Lamu Port – a fragile coastal ecosystem and a UNESCO World Heritage site – was challenged by residents and campaigners who cited little consultation and threats to fishing, tourism, culture and public health. 

In 2019, Kenya’s National Environment Tribunal revoked its environmental licence, citing inadequate public participation and flaws in the environmental assessment – a decision later upheld by the courts.  

“It is not enough to say that whatever you are doing is in the name of the communities, their livelihoods and whatever else you want to improve”, but that they should be directly involved in projects from the start, said Omar Elmawi, a Kenyan climate activist and Convenor of the Africa Movement of Movements. 

He said another lesson learnt was that environmental impact assessments must not only be completed, but “must be done rigorously” and that the process has to be transparent so that people feel involved and that their views are being counted. 

Blue transition

Blue carbon schemes can also attract finance, but campaigners said communities that have long protected mangroves, seagrasses and salt marshes must be treated as rights-holders, not just beneficiaries. In some past projects, they said, communities were asked to provide labour, attend consultations or receive small payments, while outside developers retained control over carbon revenues and decisions over how ecosystems were managed.

Similarly, offshore wind and marine protected areas can bring climate and conservation gains, but if poorly planned, they can disrupt fishing grounds, marine species and small-scale fishers’ access to the sea, added campaigners. 

Farida Aliwa, executive director of Natural Justice, said the answer was not to halt ocean-based development, but to put in place stronger safeguards before projects are approved, financed and expanded. 

Aliwa said legal frameworks across Africa were evolving, with strategic litigation increasingly being used to hold governments accountable for environmental, climate and human rights impacts related to new projects.  

But she warned that communities and coastal defenders still face shrinking civic space, and said any shift to renewable energy must be designed responsibly. 

“As we work on alternatives, we need to ensure that renewable projects benefit communities,” she said. 

The post As blue economy gathers pace, communities must benefit from ocean boom, activists say appeared first on Climate Home News.

Not only has nature been absent from discussions on the environmental impacts of AI data centres, which focus mainly on carbon emissions and water use, there has also been no consideration of how AI deployment by industry could gobble up more natural resources, activists warned.

Brian O’Donnell, director of the Campaign for Nature, said that while AI can help protect wildlife and forests, the broader boost it will give to economic growth poses a far bigger threat than expected benefits.

“We’ve seen over $250 billion of private capital go into AI in 2024 alone – and almost all of that is seeking an economic return, and the money follows commercial value,” he told journalists. “Extraction, industrial farming, resource logistics, and the engines that drive ever more consumption are all activities that contribute to biodiversity loss.”

The leading conservationist added that the policy documents produced by leading AI companies do not address the downstream effects of their technology for nature and biodiversity, focusing more on employment and other social issues.

Some have firms have put small sums towards projects that support conservation, he noted, but none are addressing the issue in a serious way or have included nature in the safety rules for their models.

“The living world that all of this rests upon – nature being the foundation of our economies, our societies, all life on earth – is not a primary concern in the governance of AI, as proposed by the corporates of AI,” O’Donnell said.

Positive uses steal the show

Last month, UN chief António Guterres launched an initiative to hold major AI firms accountable for their exploding environmental impacts, including carbon emissions, the amount of water and land used for data centres, and the energy they consume.

The UN boss also wants big players to commit to power all data centres with renewable energy by 2030. On Monday in Geneva, in a wide-ranging speech, he again raised his proposed “AI Environmental Transparency Initiative”. But nature has not featured in his comments on the issue.

UN asks AI companies to reveal full environmental impacts

In addition, the preliminary report of the newly formed Independent International Scientific Panel on AI – which assesses the opportunities, risks and impacts of AI – mentions environmental concerns only briefly.

The report, which examines available scientific evidence and was presented to governments at the Geneva dialogue, does not highlight any threats to nature and biodiversity but cites a study showing how AI has been used to track and reduce conflict between humans and wildlife.

O’Donnell pointed to “some really important technological uses of AI for biodiversity” such as monitoring species, forest damage and tree cover and using camera traps to see what kind of wildlife migrates in a particular area. But, he added, these get a disproportionate amount of attention compared with the threat from more rapacious resource extraction which he perceives as far greater.

By making commercial operations cheaper, quicker and more efficient, and opening access to untapped areas of land and sea, AI could drive biodiversity loss through increased over-exploitation of fish, wildlife and timber, worsening pollution and spreading invasive species on faster trade networks, he added.

Indigenous concerns

Indigenous peoples are also worried that their lands, critical mineral reserves and knowledge will be appropriated by AI and the accelerated economic development it fuels, said Hindou Oumarou Ibrahim, a leading global environmental activist and Indigenous leader from Chad.

Ibrahim, who produced a report on Indigenous peoples and AI for the UN in April, told journalists that before Indigenous peoples share their know-how on managing forests and stewarding nature, companies and governments must put in place principles to ensure this can happen in a fair way that prevents it being abused by bad actors.

Warning against ‘consumer club’ as G7 forms critical minerals alliance

Her report also points to positive ways that AI can support Indigenous culture and rights, such as tackling their lack of access to digital tools, preserving their languages and knowledge and mapping their territories to detect threats and better protect biodiversity.

Efforts such as those by the UN to shape the future of AI governance should look not only at what AI can do, but also ask who benefits and how it safeguards the planet, Ibrahim said.

“If we answer those questions together with Indigenous peoples as equal partners, we can build AI that serves humanity, protects biodiversity and help restore the balance between peoples and planet in an equitable and just way,” she added.

Policy processes lag AI development

Both O’Donnell and Ibrahim said they would lobby countries, the UN and AI firms themselves to put nature and biodiversity on the political agenda, including at the UN biodiversity summit in Armenia in October.

O’Donnell told Climate Home News that when the Global Biodiversity Framework, the world’s main treaty to protect nature, was agreed in 2022, AI was still nascent but has since exploded in terms of investment and its influence on economies.

The vote that stopped a data center: US communities query resource-hungry AI

He pointed to the mismatch between the timeline of the UN’s efforts to develop governance guidelines and the speed with which AI is being developed in the real world.

“Nature can’t be sidelined in these discussions,” he said, calling for a faster and more comprehensive response from policymakers, business and the environmental community.

“We have a very short window to embed nature both into the governance constitutions of the companies themselves and into the formal regulatory [system] going forward,” he added.

The post AI governance debate silent on risks to nature, campaigners warn appeared first on Climate Home News.

The controversial 1,443-kilometre (897-mile) pipeline, majority-owned by French energy company ​TotalEnergies, aims to carry crude from Ugandan fields for export through neighbouring Tanzania. About 80% has been built so far, according to its developers.

The pipeline’s first oil exports are expected as soon as October, according to its developers, and the campaign group Avaaz, which is backing the farmers’ crowdfunded lawsuit, called it “one final chance to stop one of the worst oil pipelines on the planet”.

The claim, filed by London law firm Leigh Day, argues that EACOP Ltd’s role in developing and operating the pipeline breaches Ugandan laws that protect citizens’ right to a clean and healthy environment.

One of the claimants, Racheal Tugume, told a press conference she had been displaced from her land due to the pipeline’s construction, which she said had damaged local rivers, wildlife and ecosystems that communities depend on for their livelihoods just as erratic weather linked to climate change takes an increasing toll. 

“I am very happy that there are people in countries like the UK who are listening to us, who are behind us and who have come to support us,” Tugume said, adding that she hoped the case would bring justice to communities affected by the pipeline.

Ugandan law in UK court

While the pipeline is a joint venture led by TotalEnergies, with smaller stakes owned by Ugandan, Tanzanian and Chinese national oil firms, it is operated by EACOP Ltd, a company registered to an office in London’s Canary Wharf financial district.  

EACOP Ltd did not respond to a request for comment. 

The claim appears to be the first attempt to have Uganda’s climate and environmental protections enforced in a foreign court, partly reflecting concerns over whether cases challenging the multibillion-dollar pipeline would get a fair trial in Uganda.

Ugandans living near new oil pipeline let down by compensation programmes

Concerns about access to a fair hearing are among the issues the court will consider when deciding if it should take on the case, said Matthew Renshaw, partner at Leigh Day.

Renshaw said that precedents including the Nigerian oil pollution case against Shell have shown that claims against British-registered companies for harms overseas can be successfully fought in UK courts. 

“We are proud to represent the four brave principled individuals,” Renshaw said.

Constitutional protections

The pipeline project has already been subject to repeated lawsuits in several countries, none of which have succeeded. A climate lawsuit filed in Uganda more than a decade ago by a group of young people has yet to conclude. Another at the East African Court of Justice, brought by campaign groups against Uganda and Tanzania, was rejected on procedural grounds last November. 

A separate ongoing lawsuit in TotalEnergies’ home country of France – a refiled version of an earlier failed claim – cannot stop EACOP going ahead, but it does seek damages from TotalEnergies for affected communities.

With the newly launched case, Leigh Day’s legal adviser Marc Willers said the claim draws on specific Ugandan laws in a bid to stop EACOP’s operations. 

Uganda may see lower oil revenues than expected as costs rise and demand falls

These include the Ugandan constitution, a 2019 environmental law and the National Climate Change Act 2021, which gives Ugandans the right to bring a case before a court in circumstances where anyone or any entity threatens the country’s ability to mitigate climate change.  

In response to the legal case in Britain, the African Energy Chamber – which represents and promotes the continent’s oil and gas industry – said Ugandans should decide the energy future of their country rather than the UK courts.

“This is colonialism 2.0,” said the chamber’s executive chairman NJ Ayuk. “For generations, Africa was told what resources it could exploit and how it should develop. Today, some of those same pressures are being repackaged through foreign-funded litigation and ideological campaigns that seek to dictate Africa’s energy choices from thousands of kilometres away.”

Stopping a “carbon bomb”

The pipeline, which will link Uganda’s Lake Albert oil fields to Africa’s east coast in Tanzania, has already displaced thousands of people and cuts through the Lake Victoria basin, one of East Africa’s major freshwater systems and a critical water source for around 40 million people. 

According to the BankTrack non-profit, when the pipeline is at peak production, it will carry 216,000 barrels of crude oil per day and release over 33 million tonnes of carbon emissions each year. Over its full lifetime of 25 years, it is estimated to release about 379 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions across its value chain including construction, refining and product use.

A May 2026 report from Earth Insight also warns that the pipeline and related infrastructure could affect 158 wetlands in Uganda, 11 rivers, 44 protected areas and seven key biodiversity areas while disrupting about 2,000 square km of protected wildlife habitats. 

This is why the primary focus of the UK court case is to stop the operation of the pipeline in its tracks, Leigh Day’s Willers said, calling it a “carbon bomb” that would worsen the world’s climate crisis.

Long wait for first hearing 

While the purpose of the case is to stop the pipeline from launching operations, Renshaw said it could take about 12 months before the case gets a first hearing and about 18 months before it goes to trial. 

Billions unlocked as Green Climate Fund agrees to spend more and save less

The farmers are, however, seeking an injunction to stop EACOP Ltd from proceeding with operations. In the event that shipments begin, the lawsuit will still seek to stop the pipeline from then on, Renshaw said.

“We will be doing what we can to expedite matters but it is possible that EACOP will have started operating the pipeline before the claim is heard. If that is the case, the claim would intend to halt operations from that point. For example, the pipeline may operate for just one year rather than 30-plus, resulting in far less harm,” he said.

This story was updated after publication to include comment from the African Energy Chamber, an oil and gas lobby group.

The post Ugandan farmers launch UK court case against East African oil pipeline appeared first on Climate Home News.

“Adapt or perish, now as ever, is nature’s inexorable imperative.” A century later, H.G. Wells’s warning reads less like philosophy and more like a prediction for the near future.

Last week, the World Meteorological Organization forecast that a powerful El Niño – a naturally occurring climate pattern marked by unusually warm ocean temperatures in the Pacific – will develop in 2026, becoming potentially one of the strongest on record, capable of triggering floods, droughts and extreme heat across the globe.

This warning should make one thing crystal clear: we need to move faster to adapt to the rapidly changing climate.

Scientists warn El Niño could intensify climate extremes in 2026

What does it mean to take climate change adaptation seriously? It means recognising that building resilience to increasing hazards must inform planning and policy-making efforts that go beyond trying to reduce climate emissions.

Rising climate risks like extended heatwaves or massive bursts of rainfall should guide decisions about where homes are built, which crops are grown, and how natural resources are managed. We need to invest in systems that withstand and recover from climate-driven shocks rather than collapse under them.

Impacts arriving ahead of schedule

For decades, climate action has been anchored in mitigation – reducing emissions to prevent future harm. That work remains essential. But it is operating on a slower timeline than the impacts we are now experiencing in real time and ahead of schedule. The strengthening 2026 El Niño makes that mismatch impossible to ignore.

In the first few months of 2026 more than 600 thousand square miles of forest land burned globally – the equivalent of 81 million football fields – the highest on record for this point in the year. Ocean surface temperatures are at historic highs, Arctic sea ice has hit record lows, and multiple regions have experienced extreme, out-of-season heat.

The strengthening of El Niño later this year could push these conditions even further, potentially making 2026 one of the hottest years ever recorded.

El Niño expected to bring next record-hot year as soon as 2027

The climate today is fundamentally different than the one that shaped past El Niño events. Heatwaves run hotter. Droughts last longer. Rainfall increasingly comes in destructive bursts. Even historically cooler periods no longer offer relief.

El Niño’s counterpart, La Niña, now occurs in a warmer world with ocean temperatures during cooler La Niña phases exceeding those seen during past “super” El Niño events like 1998 and 2016. Yesterday’s extremes have become today’s baselines, and this new level of turbulence will test the limits of preparedness across the country.

Pragmatic preparations to build resilience

When it comes to policy-making, the focus should be on strengthening the health and resilience of communities facing growing climate risks. Across the United States, communities are already feeling the impacts of the quickly changing climate. Preparing for and withstanding what’s ahead is not ideological; it’s pragmatic.

WHO issues new guidance on heat-health action plans, as El Niño sets in

Planning that prioritises resilience, modernises infrastructure and invests in adaptation helps safeguard food systems, protect homes and supply chains, and reinforce critical infrastructure. Keeping the strength and stability of local communities at the centre of decision-making is essential to building a more secure and resilient future.

Conservation organisations have long emphasised that adapting to climate change is not just about reacting to disasters, but about building resilience in ways that support people and nature. That means working with communities, governments and businesses to reduce vulnerability to natural hazards, strengthen local capacity, and deploy solutions that improve nature’s ability to protect us.

Adaptation rooted in nature

In coastal regions, for example, mangrove forests act as natural defences – absorbing storm surge, stabilising shorelines and protecting nearby communities.

In Mexico, World Wildlife Fund and its partners are using networks of sensors, drones and artificial intelligence to monitor mangrove health and weather in real time. The project analyses how these ecosystems respond to storms, heat and changing water conditions, helping communities and policymakers adapt their conservation strategies accordingly. It is a glimpse of what climate change adaptation looks like at its best: locally grounded, data-driven and rooted in nature.

Climate risk is not a single problem to solve but a system to manage. Addressing it requires rethinking and integrating conservation, economic development and disaster risk reduction into a single, yet multi-dimensional, agenda focused on resilience.

It will also expose vulnerabilities in infrastructure, stress-test disaster response systems and challenge assumptions about what constitutes a “normal” climate year. And it will remind us that even the best forecasts cannot reduce impacts – only preparation can.

The problem is not that we have ignored climate change. It is that we have misjudged its timeline. These hazards are no longer a future risk to be avoided; they are a present reality to be managed. H.G. Wells’ warning remains. We need to adapt or perish, now as ever.

The post A supercharged El Niño is coming – are we ready? appeared first on Climate Home News.

The numbers are stark. According to the 2026 Global Report on Food Crises, 266 million people across 47 countries experienced high levels of acute food insecurity last year, nearly double the figure recorded a decade ago. 

Meanwhile, disruptions to oil, gas and fertiliser flows through the Strait of Hormuz drove a 46% month-on-month spike in urea prices early this year, sending agricultural price indices up 8% and raising the spectre of a global affordability crisis.

This is not a blip. It is a new baseline. The EAT-Lancet Commission concluded that food systems now account for roughly 30% of total greenhouse gas emissions and are the largest single contributor to the climate crisis. The science has been clear for years. 

Now some of the solutions to the problem are becoming socially acceptable too. 

Earlier this year, people from more than 60 countries and territories, selected not by vested interest, but by lottery, spent seven weeks examining the evidence on food and climate for the latest Global Citizens’ Assembly. They heard from scientists, farmers and industry. They worked through 42 hours of structured deliberation, engaging with some difficult trade-offs. 

They were not asked to endorse a predetermined conclusion. They were asked an open question: what changes, if any, should we make to how we grow, share and eat food, so that everyone has enough to nourish themselves while tackling the causes and impacts of climate change?

Phase down industrial animal farming

Their answer was unambiguous. They voted to protect forests. They voted to phase down industrial animal food production. They voted for supply chain reform and corporate accountability, explicitly rejecting the idea that the burden of change should fall on individual consumers. All 22 of their Calls to Action passed with over 85% support, a super-majority of randomly selected people from every region of the world, in agreement. 

Consider what the assembly was actually being asked to decide. Industrial animal food production is the primary driver of tropical deforestation. Protecting more land as forest and ecosystem means less land available for the expansion of industrial production. That is a real trade-off, with real consequences for real livelihoods. Politicians have spent years avoiding it. 

Food systems are the missing ingredient from the COP30 menu 

These randomly selected people looked at the evidence, deliberated across time zones and cultures, and chose the forests, with 64% in strong support and a further 20% in favour. People from livestock farming communities voted for change. Not because they were told to. Because deliberation led them there.

We estimate there have now been more than 7,000 citizen participation initiatives worldwide in the last decade. They have been organised because, as our 2025 report: People in the Lead demonstrated, people are now consistently and significantly ahead of politicians on issues ranging from climate to AI governance.

The people know best

What the research consistently shows is that ordinary people, given proper evidence and time, produce recommendations that are more effective and more aligned with public values than what emerges from elected legislatures. The gap in global governance is no longer primarily between science and the public. It is between citizens and their political leaders.

That gap matters for more than procedural reasons. When policy treats people as passive recipients rather than active participants, it leaves out the very actors whose behaviour, trust and consent the transition depends on. Institutions that speak only to other institutions, and negotiate only with state actors and industry lobbies, are missing out on the trust and energy of the people they are supposed to serve.

Governments, left to their own devices, are not moving fast enough to prove that argument wrong. At COP30 in Belém last November, countries failed to agree on a fossil fuel phaseout roadmap, and even full implementation of every submitted national climate plan still leaves the world on course for 2.3 to 2.8C of warming. 

Citizens’ track at COP

But the Brazilian presidency grasped something important. Among the conference’s more significant outcomes was the formal launch of a Citizens’ Track within the UNFCCC process, a mechanism for connecting the global participation field to intergovernmental climate negotiations. Türkiye and Australia, who together hold the COP31 presidency in Antalya this November, now have the opportunity to strengthen and institutionalise what Brazil began.

In Guatemala, Indigenous women build climate resilience with old and new farming methods

The question before us is no longer whether citizens can contribute to solving these problems. Across the world, in local food networks, in community assemblies and in participatory planning processes, they already are, quietly generating more ambitious and more legitimate solutions than those emerging from formal diplomatic channels.

What is required now is the political courage to connect people to power. Not to consult citizens and file the results. Not to invite them to observe while the real decisions are made elsewhere. But to recognise the public as partners in perhaps the most consequential governance challenge of our time.

The post As food shocks spread, citizens are showing more leadership than governments  appeared first on Climate Home News.

At a meeting in Tajikistan this week, the government representatives who make up the fund’s board endorsed the proposal to revise its financial rules so that it no longer has to set aside one dollar for every dollar it spends.

Instead, the buffer amount will be decided based on a new, looser methodology. The GCF’s chief financial officer, Darren Tan, told board members that the old rules had led to too much cash building up in the fund’s reserves and “constrained the resources that we could deploy”.

The fund has a portfolio of 360 projects to which it has allocated $20.5 billion, but it has struggled to collect all the pledges made by donors as the US has failed to deliver billions and other wealthy nations are now making cuts to their funding for climate work in developing countries.

The new system has been independently validated and is supported by the GCF’s trustee, the World Bank. Tan said the approach is still prudent enough that the fund will remain “financially resilient even under adverse conditions”.

The change “allows the fund to do more with the same resources”, Tan concluded, adding that “this translates directly into greater climate impact”. The shift leaves the fund with $5.65 billion to put into projects instead of around $1 billion under the previous rules.

The reforms follow wider moves to get funders of climate action to do more with their money. In 2023 and 2024, the World Bank lowered its equity-to-loans ratio from 20% to 19% and then 18%, freeing up around $7 billion a year for it to invest.

At their meeting in Dushanbe, GCF board members broadly welcomed the proposal, although several complained they had not been given enough time to consider reforms of such importance.

“No brainer”

While developed countries were all supportive, developing nations’ responses were more mixed. Some called for the new system to be implemented immediately but others urged a slower roll-out and raised concerns that the changes would lead the fund to give out more loans and fewer grants.

Canada’s representative said the approach is “considered standard practice across the climate finance architecture”, the UK said it “seems sensible”, France called it a “no-brainer” and New Zealand said it would “grow the funding pie”.

Germany’s Annette Windmeisser said it “responds to the COP29 decision to triple outflows from the mutilateral climate funds”. This goal was agreed after a push from small island and least developed countries but – with funding from wealthy governments faltering – the GCF is looking at controversial options like borrowing from banks to meet it.

Japan’s Kazuho Taguchi hinted at similar motivations for supporting these reforms. “Efficient use of limited public resources” is essential, he said, because “it is unrealistic to expect public finance from developed countries alone to meet the full scale of need”.

Bigger share for loans?

Some developing countries strongly supported the reforms too, including Gambia representing the least developed nations, Costa Rica and Uruguay.

Others urged caution. Georgia’s Nino Tandilashvili said the “outside world… want more projects from us” but also “financial sustainability of this fund”.

Botswana’s Balisi Gopolang echoed this and Ghana’s Antwi Boasiako-Amoah said the fund’s models should be tested against performance and the changes should be implemented slowly and piloted first.

Boasiako-Amoah also said he was concerned that the new methodology would be used to increase the proportion of the fund’s money that is loaned out to developing countries rather than distributed as grants. As the money is intended to be returned, loans are less financially risky to the GCF than grants.

The board’s decision approving the reform incorporated this concern by noting that the “risk appetite or financial instrument mix” of board spending decisions should not be influenced by the new policy.

Liane Schalatek, who monitored the meeting for the Heinrich Böll Foundation, told Climate Home News that the reforms give the GCF “some breathing room” for the next year or two, after the Trump administration reneged on US pledges and the UK halved the contribution it had promised for 2024-2027.

But, Schalatek added, “it does not solve the fundamental question of whether developed countries are willing to stick to their obligations under the Paris Agreement and the [UN climate regime] that still requires them to provide substantial inputs into the GCF for the next replenishment period from 2028-2031.”

The post Billions unlocked as Green Climate Fund agrees to spend more and save less appeared first on Climate Home News.

The Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF) was launched on the sidelines of last November’s UN climate summit as an innovative mechanism to fund rainforest protection. Instead of relying on grants, it seeks to raise public and private money, invest it in financial markets, and then pay rainforest countries a share of the returns.

The facility has so far raised $6.8 billion but needs to mobilise at least $10 billion by the end of 2026, under conditions set by Norway to unlock its pledge. If the fund falls short of this goal, the Norwegian contribution of up to $3 billion in loans over 10 years will not be disbursed.

At a gathering of ministers from rainforest-rich countries at London’s Kew Botanic Gardens last Tuesday in searing heat, UK climate minister Katie White praised the TFFF and said she had held a “robust conversation in government over the last few weeks” about the importance of forests and climate action.

She had argued, she said, that “this is not a nice to have – this is absolutely vital for our security and our prosperity”. She told the small crowd of visiting ministers, officials and forest campaigners at Kew that the TFFF was an “innovative and impactful development”.

But despite climate campaigners’ hopes, the British minister did not follow Norway, Germany, France, Brazil, Indonesia and Luxembourg in pledging to the fund, whose aim is to use returns on the capital it invests in bond markets to financially reward countries who keep their tropical forests standing.

Ed Davey, UK lead for the World Resources Institute who was in the room for White’s speech, told Climate Home News afterwards that as the UK was involved in inventing the idea and the British public care about rainforests, it is “incredibly important” that the government invests in the TFFF “as soon as possible”.

“The TFFF is at a very important stage of its gestation, and if a few other critically important sovereign governments don’t come on board quite soon, there is a risk that the idea will lose momentum,” he said.

Anders Haug Larsen, advocacy director for the Rainforest Foundation Norway, was also disappointed at the lack of a British pledge during London Climate Action Week (LCAW).

The UK government’s money and its power to mobilise private sector investment are crucial to the TFFF’s success, he said, adding that “saving tropical rainforest is a key component in solving climate change and preserving life on this planet”.

Political divisions?

British newspaper The Times later reported that White’s boss – energy and climate minister Ed Miliband – had been poised to announce a £400-million ($528m) investment pledge to the TFFF but had been opposed by UK finance minister Rachel Reeves.

According to The Times, Reeves was concerned an announcement would be unpopular, as the government was being criticised by its former defence minister for not spending enough on the military, and had pushed for the announcement to be shelved.

Climate Home News understands, however, that the UK Treasury had given the climate ministry approval to tell Brazil and Norway it would invest in the TFFF, but the administrative procedures needed to make the pledge had not been completed in time to announce a contribution during LCAW.

The UK has been cutting the amount it spends on foreign aid, including on climate projects, in order to deliver what its foreign minister called “the biggest increase in defence spending since the Cold War”.

Projects affected include rainforest protection schemes like the Congo Basin Forest Action Programme, which has had its budget slashed by nearly 80%.

Despite these moves to shrink overseas assistance, defence secretary John Healey resigned a few weeks ago, calling for even more spending for his department.

Last Monday, the first day of LCAW, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced he would soon resign following bad local election results, with his fellow Labour parliamentarian Andy Burnham highly likely to replace him by the end of July. Reeves is looks set to be replaced as finance minister, with Miliband reportedly a leading candidate to succeed her.

Norwegian test looms

If the UK does not invest in the TFFF by the end of the year, along with other government donors, the initiative’s chances of reversing the destruction of tropical forests will be diminished, experts say.

With the US under Donald Trump unlikely to pledge and the two biggest European Union nations France and Germany already having done so, forest campaigners were hoping that the UK could fill some of the roughly $3.2 billion in new pledges needed to meet the minimum goal set by Norway.

Asked by Climate Home News if France would increase its $0.6 billion pledge, its minister for international partnerships Eleonore Caroit said last week, “I don’t have any specific information of any increase.” She added that France supports the TFFF but is also “focusing on other similar projects to achieve the same results”.

The Brazilian finance ministry has courted investments into the fund from Japan, South Korea and China. Last Friday, Brazilian finance minister Dario Durigan met Chinese finance minister Lan Fo’an and afterwards told Valor Econômico that he had raised the possibility of an investment in the TFFF.

“I think today, for the first time, China gave a stronger, firmer indication that it understands the TFFF model and is comfortable with it,” Durigan was quoted as saying. “There has been a positive signal,” he added. “Now we will work with his team to turn that into concrete commitments.”

Larsen of the Rainforest Foundation Norway said there is also hope that Middle Eastern countries, more European nations and the European Union could contribute. The UAE has expressed interest in the fund, and has provided technical assistance for its development.

Consolidating the fund

João Paulo de Resende, TFFF leader at Brazil’s Ministry of Finance, told Climate Home News that Brazil’s priority for 2026, as co-chairs of the fund with Norway, is to consolidate its governing structure. This includes developing an operations manual, a Facility charter and a secretariat hosted at the World Bank.

“The transition from a Brazil-led proposal to a shared international platform is already well underway and is reflected in the initiative’s governance structure and growing coalition of supporters,” he said, adding that the focus is now on building “collective leadership” that can last in the long term.

One the financing side, he said Brazil will “continue engaging bilaterally with sponsor countries” to help reach the $10 billion target by the end of 2026.

Following a recent investor retreat in Rotterdam attended by government officials and private investors, a group of 12 financial institutions – including UK-based Ashmore Group and Dutch firm Robeco – endorsed the fund as an “opportunity to support the protection of up to a billion hectares of tropical forests”.

They added that the fund’s seed capital from governments is “building momentum” and that the TFFF has put in place a “robust institutional governance” that can deliver results in the long term.

Economic value for standing forests

Details of how the TFFF will work are being finalised in an attempt to encourage investment.

Earlier this month, it was announced that its investment arm (the Tropical Forest Investment Fund – TFIF) would be based in Luxembourg. The European financial hub said it will provide €50 million ($57m) to the TFIF through its Climate and Energy Fund between 2026 and 2030, after which it will “maintain a long-term annual contribution”.

The Norwegian government has tasked a veteran of its sovereign wealth fund, Knut N. Kjaer, with reviewing the TFFF’s financial model.

At Kew Gardens last week, the head of the Brazilian forest service Garo Batmanian said the TFFF and other measures are needed so that standing forests are economically valued and therefore protected.

“There is no chainsaw-wielding maniac out there cutting down trees out of pleasure,” he said. “He’s cutting down trees because he thinks he can get more money using the land for something else, so it’s not only about stopping deforestation but also promoting that the standing forest has value.”

This story was edited to add comments by João Paulo de Resende

The post Tropical forest protection fund at risk after UK stalls on pledge appeared first on Climate Home News.

Lake Atitlán is one of Central America’s most critical local sources of drinking water, and is surrounded by volcanoes, a thriving tourism industry and an ancient Mayan culture. The Sololá region has long been home to Indigenous communities who have been attracted to its fertile land and pristine natural resources. 

But in recent years, this site of natural beauty in Guatemala’s highlands has had to contend with the growing impacts of the climate and nature crises. Climate change is disrupting the rain cycle and significant areas of land show signs of erosion and loss of soil fertility. These changes are threatening crop production and pushing local people into food insecurity. 

Elena Wason, co-executive director at Natün, a local non-profit supporting Indigenous people, told Climate Home News that community leaders have “identified deforestation and the effects of climate change in their communities as among their greatest concerns”. Forest cover declined by an estimated 12% in the past two years alone.

Women are often the social group most exposed to these changes and Natün has focused its efforts on reviving Indigenous agriculture techniques in a bid to improve climate resilience and empower female farmers.

How to fight drought

The impacts of climate change on Indigenous communities can often lead to further environmental damage as farmers are forced to rely on unsustainable practices, such as cutting down trees to clear more land. This can accelerate water scarcity, soil erosion and ultimately food insecurity. 

Giving nature breathing room builds climate resilience

An ongoing adaptation project led by Natün has sought to reverse these impacts, working with local people to combine modern climate-smart agriculture and ancestral knowledge. The approach involves the use of drought-resistant crops, organic pest management and soil conservation techniques. This is increasingly recognised as an effective way to strengthen climate resilience. 

“Our approach is based on soil analysis and the use of locally resilient, endemic tree species, significantly increasing survival rates and ensuring sustainable water availability despite changing rainfall patterns,” Wason explained.

A US$170,000 grant from the Adaptation Fund-UNDP innovation platform (through the AFCIA programme) also allowed it to scale. For example, Natün established over 300 family food gardens – small spaces with shared resources that focus on growing nutrient-rich crops.

The project was built for the long-term by embedding innovation within Indigenous knowledge systems, organic farming and Mayan land stewardship rather than imposing external solutions. In this way, it ensures that communities remain the architects of their own resilience. Diversified revenue streams, including carbon credits and replicable learning kits, further support its longevity.

Nearly all of the typical Mayan gardens are managed by women, with the project training up to 30 women in climate-resilient practices, such as seed bank management. The approach has paid dividends by bolstering local food security and providing almost 19,000 people with sustainable food sources.

Young South Africans take up sustainable agriculture for food security

“The project uses locally led innovation by helping to restore sustainable Indigenous Mayan practices, while empowering vulnerable communities and women to build resilience and adapt to climate change and bolster food security,” said Mikko Ollikainen, head of the Adaptation Fund. 

“Community-led approaches like these can have profound positive impacts on the directly affected communities and beyond by creating practical scalable solutions,” he added.

Growing incomes

The programme was expanded in 2025 with the creation of over 260 small poultry farms, further diversifying family incomes. The early results have been positive: two-thirds of families with both a garden and poultry now have surplus produce and incomes that have grown by an estimated $61 per month.

“These impacts especially benefit women, who not only make up 75% of programme participants and have taken leadership roles in managing community gardens, but also generally take on the responsibility of providing nutritious food for their families,” said Wason. 

The project follows an earlier $5.4 million activity in Guatemala, also funded by the Adaptation Fund, that focused on honey bee production, forest conservation and ancestral knowledge across Suchitepéquez and Sololá. The aim was to empower vulnerable communities and Indigenous populations to adapt to floods and landslides, while enhancing diverse production landscapes and livelihoods. 

Advancing women’s rights and empowerment in climate adaptation

That project resulted in 6,093 hectares under forest management and conservation, nearly 1,500 beehives in operation, and 328 family gardens with the purpose of helping women adapt. Utilising such ancestral practices have helped to increase agricultural resilience in the Nahualate River basin, benefiting some 1,125 people.

Enduring benefits

The long-term benefits of the Lake Atitlán project will be in providing communities, especially women, with practical tools to respond to the environmental challenges of drought, storms and deforestation in the Sololá region. These challenges are becoming more pronounced as the climate becomes more extreme and unpredictable.

Guatemala is ranked among the most exposed countries to climate risk. The World Bank estimates that up to 83% of its GDP is generated in areas prone to disasters. As such, it is not only the people around Lake Atitlán who stand to benefit from sustainable farming techniques.

The Natün project is easily replicable by harnessing local knowledge and offering a practical model that can be adapted across Indigenous communities facing similar climate pressures. In a country with an Indigenous population of over 6 million people, this approach will be of importance to many other communities as they face similar existential crises in a warming world.

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

The post In Guatemala, Indigenous women build climate resilience with old and new farming methods appeared first on Climate Home News.

Following tense negotiations between its government shareholders, the global lender announced this week it would extend its Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) while “retiring” its commitment to direct 45% of its financing to projects with climate benefits – a target it has already met.

“It could have been a lot worse,” said Danny Scull, a senior policy advisor at think-tank E3G. “I would have loved to see the most ambitious outcome possible, but it is far less likely we’ll see a scenario where the bank all of a sudden reverses its current trajectory and starts delivering less on climate,” he added. 

Introduced in 2021, the CCAP has been credited with overhauling the World Bank’s approach to climate finance after years of criticism over the development finance institution’s lukewarm support for cutting planet-heating emissions and building resilience to extreme weather and rising seas.

Since the CCAP began, the World Bank’s climate finance nearly doubled to $39.2 billion in 2025, with 48% of its financing showing climate “co-benefits” and exceeding the target first set at COP28. 

US attack partially rebuffed

With the CCAP due to lapse at the end of June, the US – the World Bank’s largest shareholder – mounted a campaign for the lender to axe the programme entirely. Last April, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent publicly welcomed the plan’s upcoming expiration, urging the bank to “shift its myopic focus on climate” and abandon its “distortionary” 45% climate finance target. 

But Washington was left increasingly isolated during protracted negotiations in recent months as both European governments and a wide-ranging coalition of developing countries held firm on the plan’s extension, sources with knowledge of the discussions told Climate Home News.

In May, executive directors representing a bloc of nearly 100 countries, including China, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Russia, sent a letter to the World Bank’s board requesting the CCAP be extended and calling for an independent review of the programme.

While the US had previously seemed unwilling to compromise with its European counterparts, that intervention got it to “back off from its most extreme positions”, E3G’s Scull said.

Focus on “outcomes”

In its statement on Monday, the World Bank Group said it would place less weight on the amount of money flowing into projects with climate benefits and shift its focus to “outcomes”, including indicators such as greenhouse gas emissions avoided and the number of people better shielded from climate risks.

The UK’s international development minister, Jenny Chapman, said in a post on LinkedIn this week that the extension of the CCAP is “a critical step forward”, adding that the stronger emphasis on results “is essential to ensure maximum impact, and the UK will hold the Bank to account to ensure delivery”.

Despite ditching its headline goal, the international lender is still expected to keep counting the volumes of climate finance for the vast majority of its activities. That’s because the individual entities belonging to the group continue to have their own climate targets embedded in their current mandates. 

World Bank climate funding greens African hotels while fishermen sink

For example, the International Development Association (IDA), which supports the world’s poorest nations, has committed to providing 45% of its funding to climate-related activities until 2028. And its larger lending arm, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), should keep aiming for 30% of its financing to have climate benefits. 

Joe Thwaites, a climate finance expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), said these targets “can be a backstop against the bottom falling out”. “Client countries are emphasising that they want to see more investments in clean energy and resilience,” he added. 

No major change expected

The World Bank’s provision of climate finance is also crucial for wealthy countries’ efforts to meet a commitment to provide $300 billion a year for developing countries by 2035 under the new UN climate goal agreed at COP29 in 2024. 

That year, multilateral development banks (MDBs) accounted for around half of all climate finance provided by developed countries under the previous $100-billion-a-year goal, according to calculations by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 

UK development minister Chapman said this week that the bank “must continue to meet the expectations of the wider international community, including those set out at COP29”. There, MDBs said that by 2030, their annual joint climate financing for low- and middle-income countries would reach an estimated $120 billion.

Fractious COP29 lands $300bn climate finance goal, dashing hopes of the poorest

Rajneesh Bhuee, just transition lead at campaign group Recourse, said it was a “blow” that the World Bank’s headline target had been dropped, but she doesn’t expect to see climate financing reducing – at least in the short term. 

“This is the [bank] management’s way of alleviating pressure from the US and ensuring they can have some sort of calm internally,” she told Climate Home News.

Thwaites said shareholder countries should hold the bank’s leadership accountable for delivering what countries have “agreed and need” on climate action.

“If World Bank climate finance does start to fall, donors should focus their support on other international financial institutions that continue to prioritise climate,” he added.

IMF also steps back from climate focus

Regional development banks outside of the Americas may be under less pressure to water down their climate mission. But the World Bank’s sister institution – the International Monetary Fund (IMF) – has seen its enthusiasm for climate action ebb, according to a report released in June by its official watchdog, the Independent Evaluation Office.

The report said that in 2021, the fund placed great emphasis on tackling climate change, as shown by its flagship climate strategy published that year and the establishment of the Resilience and Security Trust in 2022.

But in the last year or so, it found “decreasing emphasis on climate-related issues” which coincided with IMF cost-cutting, “emerging geopolitical challenges” and reduced support for climate action from some unnamed IMF member countries.

Last year, US finance minister Bessent accused the IMF of “mission creep”, accusing it of spending too much time on climate action, gender and social issues. 

As Nigeria rails at loss and damage “mirage”, fund boss assures money is coming

The evaluation report found that the focus on climate change among the IMF’s management and executive board has weakened, and its flagship reports have not included any climate-related chapters since 2023. IMF head Kristalina Georgieva and other managers mentioned climate-related terms in speeches and statements to the board far less in 2025 than the preceding years, it noted. 

While most of the nearly 700 IMF’s staff surveyed welcomed the swing away from climate work, others bemoaned it and felt “self censored” when working to promote awareness of the risks of climate change to the global economy – which the IMF is tasked with protecting.

The post World Bank’s climate work can endure without finance target, experts say appeared first on Climate Home News.

Even before the storm, Malawi’s power supply – generated mostly from renewables including solar and hydro – had been unreliable for many years, suffering from persistent outages.

The Malawian government is now hoping to improve the stability of its grid power with the construction of a battery energy storage system (BESS) in its capital that will charge up with surplus electricity generated when the sun is shining and hydropower dams are running, and release it when needed.

More than 80% of Malawi’s electricity comes from renewables and the country has been expanding capacity by adding more solar power while decommissioning 78 megawatts (MW) of diesel generation. But climatic impacts such as cyclones disrupt the grid and threaten to reverse energy transition gains.

West Africa’s first lithium mine awaits go-ahead as Ghana seeks better deal 

To ensure a more stable supply, Malawi is building the 20 MW/30 megawatt hour (MWh) battery storage system in Lilongwe with support from the Global Energy Alliance (GEA), under Mission 300 – an initiative led by development banks and their partners to connect 300 million Africans to electricity by 2030.

The project in Malawi aims to stabilise the country’s grid, smooth its intermittent power supply, and reduce its reliance on diesel generators, as well as averting about 10,000 tonnes of carbon emissions per year.

Battery energy storage systems act like giant power banks, absorbing clean electricity during periods of lower demand and releasing it for use when demand is high or generation drops. A typical BESS includes battery packs, inverters that allow electricity to flow between the batteries and the grid, transformers, and cooling and safety systems.

Damola Omole, director of the ‘Grids of the Future, Africa’ programme at the GEA, a philanthropic organisation, said BESS offers the “flexibility needed to smoothly integrate high levels of variable renewables” into the power grid. In doing so, it can reduce reliance on expensive diesel generation and protect consumers and industries from rising energy costs, he added.

Can BESS drive Africa’s industrialisation?

As calls to develop local green industries grow louder in Africa, Omole said there is a need to prioritise upgrading national grids with BESS so they can “transmit reliable, cost-reflective power directly to commercial clusters”.

While financiers previously doubted that intermittent solar and wind could meet the needs of industrial production, utility-scale BESS has demonstrated that renewables can deliver “predictable, steady output just like traditional fossil-fuel baseload power”, he added.

In recent years, African leaders, including William Ruto of Kenya, Felix Tshisekedi of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Emmerson Mnangagwa of Zimbabwe, have called for the continent to use the energy transition to drive green industrialisation and create value from its resources at home.

At a mining investment conference in Nairobi in April, Ruto said Africa had stayed at the bottom of the value chain for too long but would now collaborate to process its minerals within the continent. “We will refine them here and we will manufacture them here,” he told African ministers and business executives.

Kenya seeks regional coordination to build African mineral value chains

However, deploying energy at scale to advance this industrial ambition has long been a problem, while about 600 million Africans still lack access to electricity. BESS could therefore become a critical technology in the continent’s development drive, experts say.

Michael Iwu, West Africa business development manager at Empower New Energy, which finances and co-develops renewable energy, said BESS is challenging the narrative that solar and wind power alone cannot provide enough reliable electricity to run factories and other energy-intensive industries. Modern battery systems can now support business operations for several hours, helping maintain production during grid outages, he added.

For GEA’s Omole, the key question has shifted to how quickly countries can build the battery storage, grid infrastructure and market frameworks needed to unlock the potential of renewables.

BESS to help renewables displace fossil fuels

While BESS is still in its initial stages of deployment in Africa, interest is growing as countries look for ways to make renewable energy more reliable.

South Africa is leading with the largest and first of its kind utility-scale BESS on the continent. With the capacity to discharge up to five uninterrupted hours of power, the system is keeping homes and businesses running in Worcester, a southwestern town of more than 100,000 people.

Egypt is also investing heavily in battery storage. In 2025, the country launched its first utility-scale BESS, a 300-MWh facility integrated with a 500 MW solar plant in the southern city of Aswan. It has also committed more than $1 billion to strengthen its electricity grid and update regulation to support battery storage projects.

Africa needs more than export bans to cash in on critical minerals, experts say

Falling battery prices are helping drive the rapid deployment of energy storage. According to BloombergNEF, battery packs for stationary storage (used in BESS) cost an average of $70 per kilowatt-hour in 2025, down 45% from 2024.

Soon the role of BESS in supporting the grid integration of wind and solar could reduce reliance on fossil fuels and help the world meet ambitious climate goals, according to a GEA report released in April.

Stephen Nicholls, director of South-Africa based energy think-tank African Energy Futures, said the rapid pace of technological development and the falling costs of BESS are attracting growing attention.

He said improvements in storage duration could further strengthen the role of renewables in industrial power systems. While most commercial and utility-scale battery systems currently provide around four to eight hours of storage, Nicholls said researchers are developing units capable of storing electricity for extended periods. 

“The cheaper the storage and the longer the storage, the more [BESS] will replace fossil fuels like gas,” he added.

Limited awareness and data

However, significant obstacles to BESS deployment still stand in the way of its massive potential. Iwu of Empower New Energy said limited awareness of utility-scale BESS, as well as concerns about financing and a lack of long-term performance data continue to slow investment across Africa. 

Governments and developers need to build more pilot projects and demonstration sites to generate evidence of the technology’s value and benefits and boost confidence among investors and policymakers, he added. To scale BESS, we need to “keep amassing this [evidence] data and keep talking about it and exploring it,” Iwu said.

Two to tango: How governments can unlock private investment for national climate goals

To help address those barriers, Omole said a BESS Consortium under the Global Energy Alliance is working with governments, development banks and other technical partners to de-risk the sector for private financiers by generating evidence from early projects, mobilising public finance to attract private capital, and introducing policies that make battery storage commercially viable.

“This coordinated action helps African nations bypass legacy infrastructure constraints, integrate massive volumes of clean energy, and secure the reliable power required for large-scale industrialisation,” Omole explained.

The post Can giant batteries unlock Africa’s green industrial future? appeared first on Climate Home News.

As thousands gathered in London for one of the year’s largest climate gatherings last week, Western Europe faced its most severe heatwave ever recorded. The irony was not lost.

Across Europe, over a dozen countries issued urgent heat warnings and the World Health Organization recorded over 1,300 excess deaths. In London, where air conditioning is rare in buildings and on trains and buses, temperatures soared past 36 degrees Celsius (97F) and schools closed early. The mayor announced the city’s first heat action plan – an important step.

Extreme heat is now a public health crisis for many of the world’s cities, as the urban heat island effect intensifies dangerous temperatures – and it’s growing worse. Around 500,000 people die from extreme heat every year. As global temperatures rise, and with a severe El Niño getting underway, even more people will die and be hospitalised unless cities act soon.

But most cities are still taking a far too one-sized-fits-all approach to tackling heat, looking only at temperatures and not its local effects on people and their health.

People experience heat differently

How extreme heat affects people’s health can vary widely across a country and city, depending on their environment and demographics. Cities can save far more lives and prevent more hospitalisations by taking a tailored approach, using data to understand who’s most vulnerable and directing solutions toward them.

The good news: better data now exists that enable cities to pinpoint who’s most at risk. And that data can inform customised adaptation strategies to save lives. Indeed, the future of cities will hinge on their ability to deliver solutions to extreme heat tailored to at-risk people and neighborhoods.

Comment: Climate adaptation in Africa needs investment, not imported solutions

First, cities should start by measuring heat’s risks to people’s health locally. Our work in Brazil and across Latin America shows big differences in what temperatures are dangerous and how quickly risks escalate at higher temperatures. These variations exist between cities, between demographic groups and between neighbourhoods.

But it’s not as simple as finding the hottest places. In temperate Porto Alegre, in southern Brazil, a person’s risk of death increases by 25% at temperatures of 27 degrees Celsius (81F). In tropical Teresina, in northern Brazil, which is hot year-round, the same temperature does not elevate the risk of death. At 32 degrees Celsius (90F), a person’s risk of death increases by a milder 10%.

These differences also exist within cities where the climate is the same. Elderly people, the very young, lower-income communities and those without air-conditioning and shaded green spaces are all more likely to get sick, be hospitalised, or die from heat. Areas with more trees and green spaces usually have lower temperatures, and therefore lower impacts of heat.

Targeted heat alerts

Second, cities can use this data to develop early warning systems and outreach campaigns that give people more targeted heat alerts. Research in the UK found that the elderly, despite being among the most at-risk, often were unable to heed warnings during the 2022 heatwave. Well-designed heat warning systems and city responses strengthen people’s trust in health services. They can change people’s behaviours and better prepare municipal services, helping reduce illness, hospital visits and deaths.

Rio de Janeiro adopted a heat alert system in 2024 with five alert levels based on past heatwaves’ impacts on health and forecasts of when temperature and humidity will hit those dangerous levels again. The alert levels activate services like cooling centres, extra public drinking water, and changes to outdoor events. When a heatwave struck during Carnival in 2025, the city was able to deploy resources to protect and warn people while still allowing events to go on.

WHO issues new guidance on heat-health action plans, as El Niño sets in

Finally, cities should use local heat data to target cooling solutions to where they can help people the most. Solutions like tree cover, shade structures and cool roofs lower temperatures and can provide targeted relief for the most vulnerable people, like outdoor workers and those who travel by foot, bike or public transit.

In Florianópolis, Brazil, we helped the local government use heat impact modeling to design a green corridor and urban forestry project that will reduce pedestrians’ heat stress up to 7 degrees C. In Hermosillo, Mexico, our researchers worked with the city and found that certain neighbourhoods could feel up to 14 degrees C hotter than the shaded city center. A park is now under construction that will bring better shade and heat relief to one of the city’s most at-risk areas.

Connecting health and climate planning

Momentum to address extreme heat in cities is growing, from both national and local governments. At last year’s UN climate summit in Brazil, the Belém Health Action Plan saw 30 national health ministries commit to build climate-resilient health systems based on local data and evidence-based policies.

And over 160 local governments joined the Beat the Heat initiative, committing to develop urban heat action plans and deliver passive cooling projects to reduce health risks.

But there’s still a disconnect between health, urban and climate officials. Only 23% of World Meteorological Organization member countries integrate weather information into health surveillance systems. Heat-health impact models, though increasingly easy to scale, are not yet built for every city. Some cities still need to collect local data for specific demographics and neighbourhoods – and many need support.

National and local governments will need to partner on this tailored approach. It will require integrating local heat and health data into public health systems, city planning, infrastructure, and disaster preparedness.

We have the data to know who will be most impacted by extreme heat when – and the solutions to keep people alive and out of the hospital. It’s time for governments to use them.

The post With extreme heat now a public health crisis, local data can save lives appeared first on Climate Home News.

From Norway, Brazil and Guyana to South Africa, Angola and Kenya, countries are pushing ahead with offshore oil and gas projects even as they promise to protect marine ecosystems and tackle the climate change that is heating the ocean, raising sea levels and damaging coastal livelihoods. 

Governments argue that offshore oil and gas production is needed for energy security, public revenues and economic growth, but environmental groups say new drilling risks locking countries into decades of fossil fuel production just as they are promising to build a sustainable blue economy. 

Inia Seruiratu, Fijian parliamentarian and the Pacific COP31 Envoy for the Ocean, said the contradiction is becoming harder to ignore. 

“For too long, two conversations – climate mitigation and ocean protection – have run on separate tracks, in separate rooms, with separate experts,” Seruiratu told delegates at a side event during the Mombasa conference held on the shores on the Indian Ocean. 

“We talk about emissions reductions in one hall, and coral bleaching in the other, as if they were unrelated phenomena rather than cause and effect. As we commit to new marine protected areas, new ocean financing and fisheries action, we cannot continue to treat the symptoms while funding the disease,” he added. 

In Mombasa, only one side event out of the dozens of panels was dedicated to the threats posed by the expansion of offshore oil and gas. That event was organised by civil society rather than governments.

New wave of offshore projects

One-third of the world’s global production of oil and gas comes from offshore projects. They harm oceans in part through the greenhouse gas emissions generated by the fuels they produce, with climate change already driving record sea temperatures, coral bleaching and sea-level rise. 

Offshore exploration and production also affect marine life through seismic surveys, underwater noise, vessel traffic and the risk of oil spills, threatening sensitive habitats such as coral reefs, mangroves and seagrass meadows that support fisheries, biodiversity and coastal protection. 

Now, as onshore reserves mature, a new wave of offshore oil and gas development is advancing across the world. 

Offshore oil and gas expansion threatens key marine ecosystems, report warns

A May report by Earth Insight found that 85% of all hydrocarbon discoveries made in 2024 were offshore, with new projects advancing from Norway and Brazil to Guyana, Namibia and East Africa. 

In Africa, countries such as Namibia, Tanzania and Kenya say exploiting fossil fuel resources could help finance development, support economic growth and lift millions out of poverty, particularly at a time when many face high debt levels and limited access to climate finance. 

Kenya’s conundrum

The debate was on display at the Mombasa conference, where host Kenya announced it was joining the Global Offshore Wind Alliance (GOWA), while also defending plans to explore for oil and gas in the Lamu Basin, a biodiverse coastal region. 

“The energy transition is a journey. It is not a one-stop shop,” Alex Wachira, principal secretary for Kenya’s Department of Energy, told Climate Home News. “Therefore, we must explore the transition and bring on as many options as possible while exploiting the resources we have. At some point, the entire sector will transition to 100% renewable,” he added. 

Wachira said Kenya’s low contribution to global emissions and its continued development needs justify pursuing offshore oil and gas alongside renewables, adding that the country still has “the industrial revolution” to achieve.

“Kenya needs to have a piece of the pie … our emissions today are the least, but we have suffered the most,” said Wachira. 

How Shell is still benefiting from offloaded Niger Delta oil assets

The East African nation is seen as a world leader in renewable energy, with about 90% of its electricity generated from geothermal, hydropower, wind and solar. 

Omar Elmawi, a Kenyan climate activist and member of the Fossil Free Ocean Initiative, said Kenya should focus on expanding renewable energy, adding that new fossil fuel projects could result in financial losses as countries move to cut planet-heating emissions and shift to cleaner energy. 

“We know we cannot have a future dependent on fossil fuels. The rest of the world is talking about how to move beyond them,” Elmawi told Climate Home News. 

“If we invest heavily in fossil fuels within our oceans, we’ll end up with stranded assets and a huge debt that taxpayers will have to pay,” he added. 

Offshore wind as a solution

Many environmental groups argue that offshore wind is a promising alternative, as it can deliver similar economic benefits from energy production without worsening climate change. 

A study unveiled at the Mombasa conference by Zero Carbon Analytics, Ocean Conservancy and GOWA found that Africa’s offshore wind potential is vast, yet largely untapped. 

The continent could install around 6,750 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity – roughly 28 times its current power generation capacity. 

Developing just 5% of that potential could create an estimated 5.9 million jobs and generate more than $1 trillion in economic benefits, while producing enough electricity to meet all projected growth in power demand through 2040, the study found. 

Campaigners say this could strengthen energy security, reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels and help build new industries around ports, manufacturing and maritime services. 

According to a 2025 World Bank report, every $1 million invested in offshore wind creates around 25 jobs – five times more than fossil fuels. 

Robust marine protection needed

Bruna Campos, senior campaigner for the Climate and Energy Program at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), said offshore wind offers a cleaner alternative to offshore oil and gas, but warned that poorly planned projects can also cause harm. 

She called for robust marine spatial planning, environmental assessments and early community involvement to ensure the industry does not repeat mistakes associated with fossil fuel development. 

“You need to understand what are the impacts that offshore wind will have on sensitive ecosystems and communities,” Campos told Climate Home News. 

West African nations target Eastern Atlantic for early high seas protection

A 2024 UN study found that offshore wind farms can disturb whales, seals, porpoises and migratory fish, particularly during construction, when underwater noise and seabed disruption are greatest. At the same time, turbine foundations can act as artificial reefs, creating habitat for some species and boosting local fish populations. 

Pacific COP31 Envoy for the Ocean Seruiratu said that while investing in renewables is crucial, it is also important to keep pushing for fossil fuels to be phased out. 

He said his own country, Fiji, is among a growing block of nations calling for “a binding international mechanism for an orderly and equitable phase-out of fossil fuels”. 

“Every offshore drilling decision, every new exploration site, every delayed phase-out is a decision made against the common good,” he added. 

The post Ocean summit stays silent on new wave of offshore oil and gas expansion appeared first on Climate Home News.

Diplomats are meeting in person in Nairobi for the first time since negotiations were suspended in chaos nearly a year ago, stymied by a long-running deadlock that pits petrostates against more ambitious nations over the reach of the UN pact.

Because nearly all plastic is made from planet-heating oil, gas and coal, the sector’s trajectory will have a major influence on global efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

The four-day informal gathering, which begins on Tuesday, has been billed by the chair of the talks, Chilean ambassador Julio Cordano, as a “brainstorming” session in which countries are invited to put forward possible solutions to some of the treaty negotiations’ most divisive elements.

Cordano is expected to distill those views in a new document intended to serve as the basis for a new draft text of the future treaty, which governments would take up at the next official round of negotiations, scheduled for March 13-24, 2027.

Two earlier rounds, each billed as the final one, ended without agreement, derailed largely by a standoff over how the treaty should address plastic production, which the UN says is set to triple by 2060 without intervention.

Production curbs in the spotlight

Large fossil fuel and petrochemical producers, led by Saudi Arabia, the United States, Russia and India, have repeatedly argued that the treaty should focus only on managing plastic waste. A US State Department spokesperson told Climate Home News that Washington supports “practical, cost-effective solutions” to plastic pollution, while opposing “global plastic bans”.

A majority of countries – including most European, Latin American, African and Pacific island nations -want to limit the manufacturing of plastic to “sustainable levels”, but have not pushed for any wide-ranging ban. 

Ahead of what it described as “critical” talks in Nairobi, the French government said last week it had already shown flexibility and “significantly scaled back” its initial ambitions. But a French official told a meeting of EU environment ministers that without an explicit reference to the “unsustainable nature” of plastic production, the treaty would be “fundamentally unbalanced, ineffective and, worse still, could set us on the wrong path for decades to come”.

In a separate written communication, the French government lamented that informal meetings held in recent months have given “disproportionate visibility to the positions of the least ambitious states”, fuelling a “risk that partial agreements may be reached only on the issues with the broadest consensus”.

Dennis Clare, a negotiator for the Pacific island nation of Micronesia, told Climate Home News that “if we fail to address any key elements”, including overproduction, the impacts of the plastic crisis on the climate, human health and ecosystems will only grow more severe. 

Fears over “political calculations”

Despite such concerns, plastics production is not mentioned in the wide-ranging list of topics Cordano has drafted for the meeting – an omission that has alarmed observers.

Christina Dixon, a campaigner at the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA), said there appeared to be an attempt to write off this crucial element of the treaty as “too complicated and politically unviable”.

David Azoulay, environmental health programme director at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), said the meeting’s proposed structure was “highly concerning”. He accused the chair of “making political calculations in favour of potential short-term wins” and aiming to deliver a treaty “based on the lowest common denominator”.

UN asks AI companies to reveal full environmental impacts

Speaking to journalists last week, Cordano pushed back, insisting that “no topic is off the table” and inviting countries to bring whatever proposals they judged necessary for a successful outcome.

He added that the treaty could not be allowed to settle for just any level of ambition, and that he would not be happy with an outcome at all costs.

“This is what makes it so difficult and complex,” said Cordano, who was elected in February after his predecessor’s resignation. Countries “are trying to be creative” in finding solutions, he explained, because “the road to the objective of our work might not be so obvious”.

The post UN plastics pact talks restart amid fears production curbs will be left out appeared first on Climate Home News.

The threat that mining critical raw materials poses to some of the planet’s most important ecosystems is beyond dispute. To prevent it, some places on Earth must be declared off-limits for mining under any circumstances. Work has already began to identify them.

A global power struggle to secure strategic resources powering the energy transition, AI and weapons systems is driving growing demand for minerals such as copper, cobalt, lithium, nickel and manganese, which are used to make electric vehicles (EVs), batteries, wind turbines and other clean energy technologies needed to transition away from fossil fuels.

This mining boom is compounding the threats that extraction poses to precious ecosystems – including tropical forests which are vital to address climate change – and the communities who depend on them.

Preventing this environmental destruction and ensuring that mining is carried out within planetary boundaries is urgent. One solution that is gaining traction has long been advocated by Indigenous groups: creating mining no-go zones.

Fern and a group of NGOs in consultations with Indigenous Peoples’ organisations have began to sketch out a methodology to map out where mining poses unacceptable social, environmental and human rights-related risks and should be prohibited.

Off-limits: Fragile ecosystems that store carbon

The methodology is based on six criteria to determine where mining should be off-limits.

This includes areas protected under international conventions; areas with high conservation value from intact forests to key biodiversity hotspots; forests, peatlands and wetlands that are critical for carbon storage; significant ecosystems such as small islands, mangroves and grasslands; critical water bodies and Indigenous Peoples’ territories.

Around half of the of the metals and minerals needed for the energy transition are located on or near Indigenous Peoples’ territories.

A case in point is Brazil, one of the most mineral-rich countries on earth. Recent research shows that the expansion of mining threatens the conservation of about 363,000 km2 of protected land in the Brazilian Amazon, which consist mainly of forests, and is home to 195,000 traditional and Indigenous people.

Deforestation is a major driver of climate change as it releases carbon stored in the trees into the atmosphere, weakening the forests’ role as a carbon sink. Most of the Brazilian Amazon should therefore be off-limits to mining, both to protect Indigenous Peoples’ rights and because of its crucial role for the climate and biodiversity.  

In the Democratic Republic of Congo, mining has had a devastating impact on the precious Miombo forest, one of the world’s largest dry forest ecosystems, and local peoples’ food security. This too is an area where mining should not be allowed to take place.

Protected areas must be default no-go zones

In Europe, efforts to secure access to minerals is also threatening fragile ecosystems. Recent reporting revealed that the European Commission disregarded expert advice when selecting “strategic” mining sites eligible for streamlined permitting procedures, with several environmentally and socially controversial projects added to the list after they initially failed to meet expert assessments. 

One project which met the expert assessment but is nevertheless attracting controversy is the Sakatti nickel mining project in Finnish Lapland. 

Part of its nickel deposit lies under a rich peat bog ecosystem, a major carbon store which developed when glacial rivers and a lake melted at the end of the late Ice Age. The site is protected under Finnish law and is as part of the Natura 2000 network intended to protect Europe’s most valuable species and habitats. These legal safeguards are on the verge of being overridden. Such protected areas should always remain off-limits to mining.

Kicking starting a discussion

To prevent mining from undermining human rights and global climate and biodiversity goals, we urgently need to adopt a global and precautionary approach. This should start with a shared definition of which areas on land and sea should be considered off-limits for extraction.

The methodology we propose is intended to kick-start a broader and transparent discussion, based on scientific, legal and social criteria, in which rights-holders and Indigenous Peoples’ organisations have a seat at the table. No mining should go ahead if it doesn’t have the Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) of Indigenous Peoples’ or local communities.

Many of the restricted areas are bound to lie in forested tropical countries in the Global South, which understandably want to capitalise on their resources to spur industrial development and create jobs. But history has taught us that relying on a single resource for development runs the risk of being trapped in a resource curse. The more diversified an economy is, the more secure it is. 

Reducing mineral demand

Our modelling shows that for minerals such as nickel, cobalt, lithium, there are sufficient resources that could be mined outside of these restrictive areas to wean the global economy away from climate-wrecking fossil fuels and shift to clean energy systems.

However, that requires hard policy choices, such as reducing mineral demand by promoting more efficient vehicles and alternative battery technologies that are less reliant on critical minerals, as well as better public transport, active travel and car sharing opportunities.

In addition, recycling has a major role to play. A major study recently showed that Europe could meet half of its critical mineral needs through recycling by 2050.

Some mining to access the materials the world needs to address climate change is both inevitable and necessary. But agreeing on a framework to restrict mining in the world’s most sensitive areas will protect them from its ravages, and break the destructive patterns of the past.

The post We need no-go mining zones for the energy transition to be just: Here’s how it could work appeared first on Climate Home News.

For generations, African communities have lived on the frontlines of climate disruption, managing erratic rainfall, prolonged droughts and the slow erosion of their livelihoods, which depend on predictable seasons.

When the rains failed across Southern Africa in 2024, it was but the latest chapter of a crisis already long underway. During that season, maize crop failures of 40-80% devastated farming communities in Zambia, Zimbabwe and Malawi, where roughly 70% of people depend on rain-fed agriculture. Governments already stretched by debt were forced to raid development budgets, trading long-term growth for emergency relief.

Then came the floods. In early 2026, parts of Mozambique, Zimbabwe and South Africa received over a year’s worth of rain in days. More than 2 million people were affected. In East Africa, drought has displaced nearly 62,000 people in Somalia this year alone, with nearly one in four Somalis now facing acute food insecurity.

This is what climate change looks like on the ground – not parts per million or diplomatic jargon, but whether a school stays open after floods cut off the road, whether a clinic can function in extreme heat, whether a country can still invest in its future when every year brings another disaster bill.

As Nigeria rails at loss and damage “mirage”, fund boss assures money is coming

Africa as a continent contributes the least to global emissions yet bears a disproportionate share of the consequences. Nine of the ten countries most vulnerable to climate change are African. As livelihoods collapse and rural economies fail, migration pressures will intensify, driven by climate change intersecting with poverty, conflict and constrained opportunity.

Chronic under-funding

Europe is only now beginning to experience, in more limited form, what African communities have navigated for decades with far less fiscal space, thinner insurance coverage and fewer resources for recovery. With El Niño conditions confirmed and a “super” version of the naturally occurring weather pattern possible later this year, the pressure is set to intensify further.

In Africa, climate action is fundamentally a development challenge where adaptation and mitigation must go hand in hand. Building a solar grid and flood-proofing the road that serves it are not separate agendas. Yet for too long, the global climate conversation has prioritised mitigation while leaving adaptation – the work of protecting lives, livelihoods and economies in a changing climate – chronically under-funded.

The result is three compounding gaps. A visibility gap: much of Africa’s adaptation work remains under-documented and under-recognised in global climate narratives. A financing gap: capital does not flow at the scale or speed required to the people and institutions best placed to use it. And a decision-making gap: too many solutions are still designed elsewhere and imported into African contexts, rather than backing African-led platforms to scale what is already working.

Live from LCAW – Raw diplomacy: Can new mineral alliances deliver a just energy transition?

Solutions ready for finance

The solutions exist. Rwanda’s green investment fund has mobilised climate finance at national scale through its own systems. Egypt’s Nexus of Water, Food and Energy programme has shown how integrated planning can stretch limited resources across interdependent systems.

Zambia’s Presidential Irrigation Initiative is building climate-resilient food production from the ground up. In Pata, Senegal, a solar irrigation project has unlocked agricultural production and created jobs, demonstrating how integrated investments in water, energy and livelihoods can deliver resilience and development gains simultaneously.

In South Africa, the African Climate Foundation’s work with the South African Local Government Association (SALGA) is supporting district municipalities to assess their climate risks and develop fit-for-purpose Climate Action Plans, building adaptation capacity where it is needed most – at the local level.

These are not pilot projects waiting to be validated. They are working systems waiting for investment.

Closing the gaps requires a decisive shift in posture from global finance, philanthropy and development institutions. It means backing country-led platforms that can prepare, aggregate and finance adaptation projects. It means investing in place-based initiatives grounded in local knowledge.

French court rules Total must revise climate plan to account for all emissions

It means fostering intra- and inter-continental collaboration, so that lessons from Kigali inform decisions in Nairobi and innovations in Lagos reach communities in Dakar. And it means treating adaptation as core economic infrastructure, not charitable relief.

Invest now for future gains

The economic case is clear. Every dollar invested in climate adaptation returns an estimated four dollars in benefits on average – and up to five in the poorest economies. Under-investment in African adaptation is as economically irrational as it is morally unjust.

The world depends on Africa’s food systems, its young workforce – the majority of the continent’s population is under 25 – and its minerals. Several African countries supply a substantial share of the copper, cobalt and other critical materials underpinning the global clean energy transition.

Drought in Zambia has already shown how climate stress can disrupt hydropower, electricity supply and mining output. A transition that depends on African minerals cannot afford to ignore African climate resilience.

The world can continue to under-fund adaptation and pay repeatedly for emergencies, instability and lost development. Or it can invest now in the people, institutions and systems already doing the work on the ground in Africa, not in solutions imported from elsewhere.

UN asks AI companies to reveal full environmental impacts

Africa has the agency, the knowledge and the platforms. What it needs is the finance to match. A super El Niño will not wait for consensus to form. Neither, frankly, should we.

The post Climate adaptation in Africa needs investment, not imported solutions appeared first on Climate Home News.

A group of non-profit organisations and local authorities filed the claim in 2020 under France’s then-new duty of vigilance law. This requires all large businesses headquartered in France and international corporations with a significant presence there to set out a clear plan to prevent human rights violations and environmental damage – even among their subsidiaries.  

“It’s a very big win for the whole climate movement,” said Justine Ripoll, head of campaigns for Notre Affaire à Tous, one of the NGOs that brought the claim.

She said the judges made clear that companies have climate obligations reflecting their impact on global emissions, and added that the ruling shows “lobbying to undermine legislation won’t have the impact corporations could expect”.

The ruling marks another legal victory for climate activists, after the International Court of Justice issued a landmark advisory opinion last year finding that countries can be held responsible under international law for breaching their climate obligations, including by expanding fossil fuel production. In May, the UN General Assembly backed the ruling and called on countries to comply with it.

Total’s climate lawsuit

As part of their claim, climate activists and local authorities wanted the court to force TotalEnergies to take stronger action aligning with the 1.5°C warming threshold in the Paris Agreement, including by stopping new fossil fuel projects and reducing production levels. 

The lawsuit claim was ruled inadmissible in 2023, but this was overturned the following year. However no public bodies except the city of Paris were allowed to join. A court in Paris finally heard the claim on its merits in March.

Two weeks before the hearing, the French public prosecutor’s office said it agreed with TotalEnergies that the scope of duty of vigilance law did not extend to climate change. But the court had a different view, saying climate risks and impacts do fall within the law’s scope. 

As Nigeria rails at loss and damage “mirage”, fund boss assures money is coming

Coming two days after France recorded its hottest-ever day, the court said the law is not intended to make the companies concerned responsible for all climate risks – resulting from all human activity since the industrial revolution – but they must “act according to their situation”.  

In TotalEnergies’ case, its oil and gas activities release greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere with resulting negative climate impacts, which must be properly identified in its vigilance plan.  

The court also explicitly said that the plan must include scope 3 emissions from the use of products and services by customers, “due in particular to the inherent link between oil and gas production and the combustion of products by users”. This is in line with domestic and international court rulings across the world in recent years.  

TotalEnergies was given six months to update the plan. After that, the court will scrutinise whether the measures are adequate, with a hearing already scheduled for 21 January 2027. 

Milestone for climate accountability

Théa Bonfour, senior advocacy and litigation officer at NGO Sherpa, which was also involved in the case, said it was a “first important milestone” but she warned that the tribunal will still have to exercise its power to analyse the plan’s details. 

However, the court did not agree to a request by the NGOs and the City of Paris for TotalEnergies to completely stop all of its new fossil fuel projects or to cut production by 37% for oil and 25% for gas by 2030.  

In a statement, TotalEnergies noted this “with satisfaction”. It said it would update its plan to include scope 3 emissions but argued that changes in its customers’ emissions “also depend on their own investment and consumption choices, such as purchasing an electric vehicle, a heat pump, or using biofuels”.

The company could still appeal the decision but, even if it does, it still has to comply with the ruling while the process is ongoing. 

COP31 presidency ‘open’ to reflecting Santa Marta in UN climate process, ministers say

Sébastien Duyck, senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law, said the ruling is a “key step towards stronger corporate climate accountability”.  

“The inclusion of the whole range of emissions attributable to TotalEnergies’ activities in the sphere of responsibility of the company is a critical legal step validating other recent judicial decisions,” said Duyck. “This constitutes a stringent rebuttal of the argument that the responsibility lies solely with consumers.” 

Christina Eckes, professor of European law at the University of Amsterdam, said the ruling had increased pressure on polluting companies to justify their business decisions.

“It’s not just TotalEnergies. When you look at the sustainability plans of fossil fuel industries in Europe, they’re mostly scope 1 and 2; you can’t claim to have a sustainability plan if you’re only talking about 10% of your emissions.” 

Influential ruling

The Total decision has significant implications for other ongoing lawsuits. 

The most important is that brought by a Belgian farmer who is bringing a climate damages claim against TotalEnergies. A decision on the merits was postponed until 9 September so that judges could see the outcome of the French ruling. 

A separate duty of vigilance case against TotalEnergies in relation to the East African Crude Oil Pipeline in Uganda is still ongoing at the Paris Judicial Court, after a similar earlier claim was dismissed in 2023. The $4-billion project has been controversial due to its social and environmental impacts.

This article was updated on 26 June 2026 to include TotalEnergies comment

The post French court rules Total must revise climate plan to account for all emissions appeared first on Climate Home News.

At an event at London Climate Action Week on Tuesday, Nigerian environment minister Balarabe Abbas Lawal said that whenever he goes to UN climate summits “we talk about loss and damage funds, and all these years nothing has been translated into action”.

He added that the fund currently “looks like a mirage”, and said that “a number of our governments are beginning to believe that COPs are just talk shops”.

The idea of addressing the loss and damage caused by climate change was first discussed at COP13 in 2007. A fund was agreed to at COP27 in 2022 to help vulnerable countries respond to climate emergencies, and it was officially set up the next year. Since then, the fund’s board and management have been working out the details of how it will work.

Ibrahima Cheikh Diong, a banker from Senegal, was appointed CEO in 2024. Referring to Lawal’s frustration, Diong told Climate Home News on Thursday that the fund is “moving according to plan”.

A call for funding requests, launched at COP30, closed on June 15. Projects – including those to strengthen responses to floods in Bangladesh and Lagos and improve water infrastructure in Jamaica – bid for a combined $250 million. Diong said that the fund’s board would decide which projects to fund at its next board meeting in the Philippines, starting on July 8.

“We hope that by the end of the year we can begin then to make the decision and see the funds going, so hopefully the frustration for Nigeria will be reduced”, he said, adding that “every time wasted, when it comes to loss and damage, is lives not saved”.

Funding concerns

While climate campaigners have called for tens of billion of dollars of funding a year, wealthy nations have promised the fund $822 million and delivered just $449 million – with countries like Italy, France and Luxembourg failing to pay in full.

A briefing paper prepared by the fund’s secretariat earlier this year warned that, unless fresh contributions are secured, the fund could run out of resources by the end of 2027.

Diong said that the fund intends to hold a replenishment round, where governments promise money, next year. In the meantime, as public finance “is being very difficult to mobilise”, the fund is looking at other sources of funding.

“What exactly that source of funding will be, we have to look at the potential, look at the feasibility and so on”, he said, so the fund can keep up with demand.

In an open letter in April, a group of climate campaigners called for developed countries to increase contributions to the Loss and Damage fund and introduce taxes on fossil fuel companies, financial transactions, luxury air travel and wealth to help finance it.

“Rich countries must be held strictly accountable for the devastation they have caused,” said Climate Action Network International head Tasneem Essop. “Their failure to fulfill their responsibility to the loss and damage fund is not just an oversight; it is a shameful betrayal of humanity.”

The post As Nigeria rails at loss and damage “mirage”, fund boss assures money is coming appeared first on Climate Home News.

In autumn, the European Commission is due to adopt the Circular Economy Act (CEA), aimed at supporting the EU in its stated aim to become a world leader in circularity by 2030.

There is a clear environmental imperative behind the legislation, but also a geopolitical one. Europe imports the vast majority of all its critical raw materials; for example, 100% of its heavy rare earth metals come from China and 71% of its platinum from South Africa.

The bloc is seeking to reduce its dependency on imports of key commodities, energy and materials, and as a result achieve greater self-sufficiency. Circular products are one route to achieving that.

Circular ambitions

Whether the EU’s aim is achievable, or not, brings into sharp relief the current state of the circular economy. According to the European Environment Agency, in 2024, secondary recovered materials made up 12% of total material use across Europe. This was only 1.5% higher than in 2010.

But, by some estimates, the global circular economy is already worth around $700 billion and could reach several trillion within the next decade. This rate of growth would take considerable support from national governments, starting with something akin to the CEA, which aims to double the EU’s circularity rate to 24% and create a single market for secondary raw materials. The hope is that this will stoke demand from businesses to adopt more circular practices. 

Carsten Wachholz, business-policy engagement lead at the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, described the forthcoming act as “a critical opportunity to turn circular solutions from a niche proposition into a mainstream market choice,” adding that by harmonising rules across the single market the EU can allow the circular economy to “scale across borders”.

From there the argument runs that rules created in Europe will be copied in other markets, shaping global supply chains and standards elsewhere. “The EU can work towards shared international ambition, reducing protectionism risks, and unlocking large-scale investment globally,” he added.

Making two ends meet

Raising awareness of what is meant by circularity, and being able to identify and treat circular products correctly, is one of the challenges the sector faces.

The global economy has been built on a simple linear structure where we source a material, create something out of it, sell it on and then throw it away. This process, sometimes called ‘take, make, use, dispose’ is the opposite of the principles of circularity. 

The Ellen MacArthur Foundation defines the circular economy as a system where “materials never become waste”. In such a system, products and materials are “kept in circulation through processes like maintenance, reuse, refurbishment, remanufacture, recycling and composting”.

Circularity is about the whole life cycle of a product, seeing how it can be used for longer, upgrading when possible, and then potentially using that product to create something else afterwards. The intention with circularity is to increase the use of non-virgin materials, reducing the need to extract more from the ground.

Signify: “We believe resilience is becoming more important to businesses right now”

Thomas Marinelli, head of sustainable innovation and design at Signify, a global lighting company, said: “I once explained it to a child with Lego. You put Lego blocks together and you can pull them apart again and make something new.” 

Circular practices also lead to more products – phones, washing machines, lighting – being leased instead of created from scratch. These services cut the need for large upfront investments and reduce environmental impacts.

How business is responding

The next step is to convince businesses it is the right thing to do, from a financial, environmental and product perspective.

“Using products for longer and using less material and energy is a topic of interest in our markets,” added Marinelli, while at the same time acknowledging that part of the challenge is “awareness creation”.

“We need to prove that products made from non-virgin, or bio-circular materials are at least as good. And that a business’s environmental footprint is much lower when you use non-virgin materials,” he said.

Part of the awareness-raising piece is showing that older products can be repaired, refurbished and remanufactured, depending on their condition. Signify takes lighting systems that are up to 10 years old, and makes them new again, saving on material waste and cutting emissions, often at a lower cost than buying a new product.

A growing number of companies are already sold on the benefits of going circular. A recent survey from the World Economic Forum found that out of 491 manufacturing executives, 79% said circularity is crucial to their business, and 95% said it will be important within three years.

Carrefour, the French retail giant, has adopted circular practices in some of its stores as a way of driving down energy costs and cutting carbon emissions. In one of its Belgian stores, the company installed 3D-printed light fixtures made from recycled water bottles. Lighting systems were made from recycled materials that can be fully dismantled and used to make new ones after they reach the end of their natural life.

Does the future of green manufacturing lie in 3D printing?

A separate example comes from Denmark where the area of Tuborg Havn in Copenhagen chose to upgrade its historic street lamps with efficient LEDs instead of replacing them. More than 80 light fixtures were cleaned, upgraded and reinstalled as part of the new initiative, and the new lights will be 3.5 times more efficient than the old ones. The initiative has allowed the harbour to retain its historic character while reducing energy consumption and modernising the area.

Overcoming barriers

The Ellen MacArthur Foundation recently coordinated an open letter to the European Commission – signed by 12 global brands including The LEGO Group, H&M and Philips – calling for lawmakers to support new reforms that address common barriers facing circular products. 

These include simplifying EU-wide rules, creating tax incentives and stronger financial support for the burgeoning sector. Current VAT rules, for example, can mean secondhand goods are repeatedly taxed across their lifetime, something the charity is seeking to change.

“Capital is not lacking,” said Wachholz, “but the risk profile of circular economy projects keeps too many ventures stuck at pilot scale rather than reaching industrial deployment.”

The letter calls for the creation of a secondary materials platform to improve price transparency, digital product passports to track material flows, and the creation of new industrial hubs to provide the infrastructure and technology the sector needs in order to scale up.

Is electrification a no-brainer in the race to net-zero?

Those measures, coupled with fossil energy price spikes, will help circular products compete on cost with the extractive economy, experts say. “Using recycled materials or non-virgin alternatives can become competitive in the long run,” said Marinelli, pointing to the volatility in the price of raw materials. “If you look at plastics, when oil is a problem, the price of plastics goes up. But recycled plastic stays at the same level.”

“And it’s not only about materials but production as well. When volumes of recycled materials go up, then the price remains stable or goes down,” he added.

Opportune moment

The current geopolitical environment could serve to support growth in the circular economy. Supply chain constraints caused by the war in Iran have caused commodity prices to skyrocket. This has led many companies – and countries – to seek ways to protect themselves against future shocks.

In that context, new circular policies and products could receive a favourable hearing from businesses looking to build resilience, cut costs and protect nature. A future where circularity is fully embedded across society will need time and support to grow, but may well be on its way.

Adam Wentworth is a freelance journalist based in Brighton, UK

The post Can the circular economy win over big business? appeared first on Climate Home News.

At a high-level summit in London’s Mansion House on Tuesday, energy ministers and business leaders were joined by UN secretary-general António Guterres in calling for faster action to curb demand for oil, coal and gas by powering homes, industry and transport with clean electricity.

Electrification – which spans measures such as switching from petrol cars to electric vehicles – has emerged as a key priority in climate and energy policy circles this year. 

COP31 co-hosts Türkiye and Australia have made a global target for electricity to meet 35% of final energy demand by 2035, up from around 20% today, the main plank of this year’s action agenda for the UN summit. Reaching that level is necessary to keep the 1.5C warming limit within reach, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).

Turkish COP31 President-Designate Murat Kurum said earlier this month that the host nation would work to forge “a strong global coalition that is ready and determined to act” and promised to facilitate access to technical assistance.

Rallying support for electrification

Five months before countries are due to sign on to the pledge, efforts to rally support gathered momentum at London Climate Action Week, as a record-breaking heatwave baking the capital underscored the urgency of weaning the world off fossil fuels.

Guterres said the world faces an “historic opportunity” to turn the page on its dependence on fossil fuels and fully embrace clean electrification powered by renewables.

“The age of clean electrification is here,” he added. “The question is whether we can build the grids and storage, mobilize the investment, and deliver the infrastructure at the speed and scale required”.

Without investment and government policies supporting upgrades in infrastructure, ageing power grids are often unable to handle the growing influx of renewable energy, creating bottlenecks and slowing the energy transition, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

Meanwhile, the high upfront costs of buying electric vehicles, heat pumps and industrial equipment remains a challenge to switch households and businesses away from using fossil fuels across the world, according IEA analysts, despite these technologies being cheaper over their whole lifecycle.

Global coordination platform

In a bid to overcome these hurdles, the European Commission and the UK government on Tuesday launched a new platform to coordinate global progress on electrification.

EU energy commissioner Dan Jorgensen said the goal was to build coalitions, draw up policy recommendations, share best practice and secure new funding to speed up the electrification of homes, industry and transport.

Brazil’s COP30 presidency, the joint Australia-Türkiye COP31 presidency, Ethiopia’s incoming COP32 presidency, Canada, the Philippines and South Korea joined the initiative at launch.

Jorgensen urged governments worldwide to “choose transformation over turbulence” and switch to clean electricity to make economies and societies more resilient and shield them from future shocks driven by volatile fossil fuels.

COP31 leaders unveil global targets, with spotlight on electrification

For many countries, especially those heavily reliant on imported fossil fuels, the oil and gas crisis triggered by the US and Israeli attacks on Iran and the ensuing blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has driven home the urgency of the clean energy transition.

The UK’s energy secretary Ed Miliband said on Tuesday that, unlike previous fossil fuel shocks, clean electrification now offers the world a clear alternative.

“An alternative that cannot be disrupted by foreign wars, that isn’t subject to global shocks because it is locked in stable prices at home, and that can create good jobs and drive growth,” he added, “an alternative that can deliver national security, energy security and indeed climate security.”

At the recent conference on transitioning away from fossil fuels in Santa Marta, a group of 60 governments led by the Netherlands and Colombia said electrification is one of the areas where they can align work with the UN climate talks.

Financial reforms needed

Achieving the electrification target – dubbed the “35 by 35” goal – will require significant financial resources. Investments in power grids alone need to double from their current rate to around $1 trillion each year in the next decade, according to IRENA. 

But Guterres said that developing countries are still “starved from investment” in their clean energy sector. He urged deeper reforms of the global financial architecture by reducing lending risk, lowering the cost of capital and attracting more private investment. 

Surangel Whipps Jr., president of the low-lying Pacific island state of Palau, said faster progress in electrification is a “powerful weapon in our arsenal”. But he warned that the energy transition would stall without “fit for purpose investment that is fast, predictable and accessible”.

The post EU, UK lead push for electrification as “powerful weapon” against fossil fuels appeared first on Climate Home News.

Less than two months ago, Colombia hosted the world’s first international conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels. This weekend, however, it appears that Colombia’s first ever leftist presidency has ended. Far-right candidate Abelardo de la Espriella, who was last week strongly endorsed by Donald Trump, will not only take the reins of government but also steer the future of Colombia’s energy transition.

As the world’s sixth-largest coal exporter, and fourth largest oil exporter in Latin America, Colombia plays a critical role in the world’s energy markets. However, this role had shrunk under President Gustavo Petro’s administration, as it sought to proactively shift the country away from its fossil-fuel based economy, ahead of a potential oil and gas production shortage over the next decade. 

That could all change as De la Espriella’s takes power. Calling himself the Tiger (“El Tigre”), he has promised to focus on deregulation, exploit oil extraction “to the maximum” and leverage the energy sector as a key “engine of growth”.

Colombia’s world-leading energy transition

Over the last four years, Colombia has embarked on one of the most rapid and holistic energy transitions anywhere in the world. Shortly after coming to power in 2022, the government of Gustavo Petro halted new oil and gas exploration contracts, suspended all hydraulic fracking pilots, and pledged to end the development of new unabated coal power plants. 

While many of these moves faced domestic and legislative challenges, they were widely praised in climate circles around the world.

Colombia soon became a pivotal member of the Powering Past Coal Alliance, the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance and the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Alliance. It then went on to host the biodiversity COP in 2024, launch a $40-billion climate transition investment portfolio, and famously, host the Santa Marta conference earlier this year.

While fossil fuels still comprise around 7% of Colombia’s GDP and 56% of its total exports, there were already signs that the transition policies had begun to have an effect.

Coal production last year fell to its lowest level in the last 22 years. According to the Colombian national association of coal producers, coal export volumes declined by 23% in 2025. While the oil sector has not seen an equivalent precipitous drop, production levels have remained historically low since COVID. 

What about its domestic electricity sector?

Since the 1970s Colombia’s electricity sector has been dominated by large hydro-electric dams, endowing it with some of the lowest carbon electrons anywhere in the world. Today, close to 70% of its electricity supply comes from these large dams.

However, electricity demand rose by close to 10% under the Petro government. To meet this demand, total installed electricity capacity has expanded by a similar figure, and solar power has made up over 70% of new electricity capacity since.

As a result, by the end of 2025, gas power generation in the electricity sector had hit its lowest point since 2018. Wind power had doubled, and solar power generation had risen by over 630%. Colombia’s renewable energy association predicts that, by the end of 2026, the country may be home to more than 4.2 GW of installed variable renewable energy capacity.

Far-right jumps on energy challenges

Despite the progress, the last three years have been an incredibly challenging period for Colombia’s energy sector. 

During Petro’s first two years in office, inflation remained above 10%, and interest rates stayed above 13% for most of 2023. This put a pause on new energy investments, as foreign direct investment fell by a third since 2022. 

On top of this, Colombia suffered through an El Niño-fuelled drought in 2023-24, crippling its hydro-electric power supply. This forced the country to turn to expensive gas and coal power, just as both sectors had effectively begun to pull back. This sent electricity prices through the roof, increasing nearly 40% in a single year, and led the Petro government to intervene with price controls, aiming to protect everyday Colombians.

Unsurprisingly, this made energy investors even more cautious. By the end of 2023, GDP growth had plummeted and renewable energy investments fell by 70%. Since then, all the major credit agencies have downgraded the country’s credit rating, making it even shakier to invest.

As a result, even with the new solar coming online, and 1.2 GW of additional hydro-power from the Ituango dam expected by 2028, the country could still face a major energy deficit by 2027, with permitting delays halting project developments, and 5.1 GW of approved projects unable to reach financial close.

Challenging domestic debate

This has led to a challenging domestic debate on energy policy. While 96% of Colombians want to see solar expand further, they have been understandably frustrated by high electricity bills and limited economic growth.

As a result, De la Espriella’s campaign, which has largely focused on taking a hardline stance to combat growing concerns around security and crime, was relatively open to solar power, but sought to blame Colombia’s current energy crisis on the speed of its current energy transition.

Branding himself as neither a climate denialist nor “dogmatic environmentalist” the incoming president who will take office in August, will likely seek to revoke the ban on new hydrocarbon exploration contracts, legalise fracking and restructure the national oil company, Ecopetrol.

While he is unlikely to cancel market-driven projects and may reduce regulatory hold-ups, it is also likely that he will shift away from the government’s recent overwhelming support for long-renewable energy and battery storage projects, which have driven much of the recent uptake in solar power. 

Future of energy transition in doubt

In a country of close to 54 million people, the final election count was only decided by about 250,000 votes. However, this weekend’s margin belies the magnitude of the shift that will likely now take place.

With the country facing a potential domestic energy shortage 2027, President-elect De la Espriella has promised to revitalise the hydrocarbon economy, shifting Colombia’s recent energy transition on an entirely new course.

While this may unlock some regulatory challenges hindering renewables roll-out, broader support mechanisms for solar projects will likely be dismantled, and the broader economic transition abandoned, along with its recent flurry of international climate alliances.

He will also take his place among a wave of right-leaning Presidents that have swept to power across the continent in the last 18 months. This has seen right-wing electoral victories across Ecuador, Bolivia, Chile, Costa Rica, Argentina and now Colombia, with Peru’s Keiko Fujimori potentially joining the club soon – pending a final vote count.

With the Brazilian elections scheduled for October, and run-off scenarios between Lula and Flávio Bolsonaro still far too close to call, 2026 will undoubtedly be a pivotal year for Latin America’s energy future.

The post Did Colombia’s energy transition just come to a halt? appeared first on Climate Home News.

Join us for an afternoon of high-level discussions at London Climate Action Week on what resource-rich developing countries need to make new critical mineral partnerships genuinely beneficial.

We are bringing together high-level speakers from mineral producing countries, the finance sector, the UN and civil society to reflect on the latest developments in resource diplomacy and ask what’s next for mineral governance.

Agenda

02:00 PM
Welcome
MC, Gabriela Flores, NRGI

02:00 PM – 02:30 PM
In conversation: Minerals governance – what’s next?
Celine Kauffman, IDDRI, Patrick Schröder, Chatham House, Sascha Raabe, UNIDO (online), Moderated by Chloé Farand, Climate Home News

We will explore G7 outcomes and the practical steps the G7 and G20 can take to advance mineral governance and responsible mining, with a spotlight on how the UK can seize its 2027 G20 presidency to drive this critical agenda forward.

02:30 PM – 03:00 PM
Tracking allegations of abuse in mining for transition minerals
Phil Bloomer, BHRC, Ketakandriana Rafitoson, Resource Justice Network

The Business and Human Rights Centre presents its 2026 Transition Minerals Tracker update and unveils new data on allegations of human rights abuse linked to the extraction of bauxite, cobalt, copper, iron ore, lithium, manganese, nickel, rare earth elements and zinc – and the companies behind them.

03:00 PM – 03:30 PM
Break

03:30 PM – 04:30 PM
Can finance clean up mining? The role of investors and lenders
Stephen Barrie, Church of England Pensions Board/ Global, Pavel Laberko, Emerging Markets Investors Alliance, Margaux Day, Accountability Counsel

Finance can be a powerful force for raising environmental and social standards in mining — but only if financial actors remain in the sector rather than walking away. This session examines how investors and lenders can drive accountability and responsible practices in transition minerals, and whether the answer lies in divestment, engagement, or stronger oversight from civil society. Moderated by Caroline Avan, BHRC.

04:30 PM – 05:50 PM
What should equitable mineral partnerships look like?
Eric Ngang, African Resources Watch (Afrewatch), Thomas Scurfield, NRGI , Tobias Musonda, Director of Policy and Planning, Zambia , Wen-Yu Weng, Ellen MacArthur Foundation.

As demand for critical minerals surges, the race to secure supply chains risks repeating the extractive models of the past. This session cuts to the heart of what truly equitable mineral partnerships look like — and what it will take to to move from principle to practice. Moderated by Chloé Farand, Climate Home News

06:00 PM
Closing
Amir Shafaie, NRGI

The post Live from LCAW – Raw diplomacy: Can new mineral alliances deliver a just energy transition? appeared first on Climate Home News.

Speaking on the sidelines of London Climate Action Week, the outgoing Colombian environment minister and Dutch climate policy minister, said COP31 presidencies Australia and Türkiye were “open” to suggestions on how to reflect the discussions in Santa Marta on transitioning away from coal, oil and gas at the end-of-year summit.

What format this might take, “we don’t know yet,” said Colombian minister Irene Vélez Torres.

“We had this very interesting conversation with COP31 and they were clearly open for suggestions about what is needed in the discussion in Türkiye, and we were explicit about the need to engage with the phasing out of fossil fuels,” she said.

Australia and Türkiye will jointly preside over the COP31 climate conference, which is taking place in the Turkish resort city of Antalya in November. Türkiye will lead on the action agenda, referring to initiatives that lie outside of the formal negotiations, while Australia will chair the negotiations.

Dutch minister Stientje van Veldhoven said the outcomes of the Santa Marta conference could be part of COP31’s action agenda,

“We are here to facilitate action on one particular part of what COP has agreed to do, namely transitioning away fossil fuels so there is a very logical connection to the COP process, and we will make sure that we continue to bring this coalition of the willing, this coalition of the doers back into the COP process,” she said.

At the event in London, UN secretary-general António Guterres urged countries to reduce their fossil fuel dependencies, arguing that “economies based on renewables are much more secure than economies based on the imports of fossil fuels”. He added that the transition to renewables is “unstoppable”.

European, island states seek clear future for global roadmap to cut fossil fuels

Including the fossil fuel transition in UN climate negotiations, rather than the action agenda, is likely to be controversial among governments. While nations agreed to transition away from fossil fuels at COP28, at COP30 last year Saudi Arabia, Russia and others successfully opposed a push to agree for a roadmap to be drawn up on how to meet this goal.

Despite the lack of agreement, the Brazilian government which presided over COP30, is drawing up a global roadmap. But the Russian government has said it opposes this roadmap being referenced in UN climate talks.

Finding agreement on referencing the Santa Marta process in UN climate talks is also likely to be difficult. Last week in Bonn, the chair of the African Group of Negotiators, Antwi-Boasiako Amoah from Ghana, criticised “minilateral initiatives and coalitions of the willing” as distracting political attention and lacking the legitimacy that comes from multilateral climate negotiations, where any country can veto anything.

Strengthening the COP process

The Santa Marta conference kick-started a diplomatic process outside of the formal UN climate negotiations to offer a space for governments to make progress and find solutions to wean their economies away from fossil fuels.

Around 60 countries, including many large fossil-fuel producers attended the meeting after being frustrated by failed attempts to get UN climate talks to sign off on the global roadmap away from fossil fuels. They agreed to work towards voluntary national roadmaps away from fossil fuels.

A 170-page report summarising the outcome of the conference published on Tuesday says that the Santa Marta coalition of countries will seek to influence the formal UN negotiations.

The report says Colombia proposed to build “a strong coalition to bring these discussions to the second Global Stocktake”, a process in which countries will review climate progress and agree on measures forward at COP33 in 2028.

Colombia also suggested organizing “a high-level event during the next COP presidency” to discuss Santa Marta outcomes, while Italy proposed an event during the UN General Assembly.

“We will make sure that Santa Marta conference is not a separate, parallel process to the COP” but “strengthens” the negotiations without becoming a formal part of them, said van Veldhoven, adding that the process will remain “a conversation” to demonstrate that transforming economies away from fossil fuels is possible.

COP30 CEO Ana Toni from Brazil told a separate event in London that the response to the second Global Stocktake “will probably need several pages” to deliver an agreed commitment to transition away from fossil fuels. The Santa Marta report says that Brazil’s global roadmap should also be included in the response.

Colombian election signals u-turn

Colombia, which has been one of the most proactive countries promoting a global transition away from fossil fuels, is likely to reverse course after the election of right-wing candidate Abelardo de la Espriella as the country’s new president at a general election on Sunday.

The newly elected president has branded himself as an ally of US president Donald Trump, and has promised to reverse a current halt on new coal, oil and gas licenses, as well as venture into “responsible fracking” without overlapping with protected areas or high-mountain páramo ecosystems.

Vélez Torres said the current Colombian government has already “delivered to the international community and to our sub-national forces, social forces, movements, academia” a process to keep the energy transition moving forward.

She told Climate Home News she hoped the work the government had done could be picked up by social movements in Colombia to demand change from the incoming government. “What we did cannot be erased, and we have had our voices heard, and we have been as radical as any other government could have been.”

The minister said the elections have left the country facing a “dark night” that “can really shift the politics in terms of energy transition and environmental protection”, but said she is certain that their “legacy will continue being there”.

The post COP31 presidency ‘open’ to reflecting Santa Marta in UN climate process, ministers say appeared first on Climate Home News.

During a speech at London Climate Action Week on Tuesday, António Guterres noted that AI can accelerate climate solutions, among other key challenges, and said its potential must be harnessed.

“But AI is also hungry for land, water and power,” he emphasised, adding that the data centres needed to run AI models already consume more electricity than most countries. 

The UN Secretary-General repeated a call he first made in July 2025 for all big AI companies to commit to power every data centre with renewable energy by 2030. 

Some tech firms have announced they are sourcing or building out clean energy to run their hubs, but growing power demand is also contributing to gas-fired generation in the US, according to data from Global Energy Monitor.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that data centres are set to more than double the emissions from the electricity they use between 2024 and 2030 in a high-growth scenario. But AI’s use could lead to far larger reductions in the energy sector through efficiency gains if adopted widely.

‘No more hidden costs’

Proposing the new “AI Environmental Transparency Initiative” on Tuesday, Guterres also urged big AI firms companies to measure and publicly disclose the full environmental impact of their systems, including their carbon, water, and land footprints.

“No more hidden costs. No more shifting the burden onto those least able to bear it. It is time to come clean,” he said in a major speech on responding to the world’s twin climate and energy crises. “If AI is to help build a better future, it must be honest about what it costs us now.”

A report issued earlier this month by the UN University Institute for Water, Environment and Health noted that most current assessments of AI’s environmental cost focus on carbon emissions from training models. But, it added, this misses a substantial part of the picture. 

Every kilowatt-hour of electricity for AI also carries a water footprint, from cooling and generation, and a land footprint, from infrastructure and supply chains, it said. 

Explainer: Will AI data centres make or break the energy transition?

The report estimated that AI data centres globally could consume 945 terawatt-hours of electricity annually by 2030 –  more power than all but five countries and roughly twice France’s 2025 consumption.

Offsetting this carbon footprint by 2030 would require growing some 6.7 billion trees over 10 years, it calculated. Producing power for the data centres would consume water equal to the basic needs of 1.3 billion people in sub-Saharan Africa for a year and take up land of more than 14,500 square kilometers, roughly twice the Jakarta metropolitan area.

The European Union said earlier this month it will develop minimum energy-efficiency standards for both new and existing data centres, with a “needs assessment” ​due by 2027, Reuters reported. It’s also planning ⁠a sustainability label for data centres, covering criteria including water use and clean energy supply – but that has been delayed.    

US community push-back 

Asked after his speech what the response had been, the UN chief said “we’ll see”, without giving more details.

But, he argued that, in his view, the push for transparency “is perfectly reasonable and even positive for the AI industry, because eventually some people will say that they consume much more than they really do”. “I think the truth is essential,” he added. 

Concerns about the environmental impacts of AI and the infrastructure needed to run the technology have led to growing opposition in some communities, especially in the US.

This month, Monterey Park in Los Angeles County was the first city in the United States to enact a citywide prohibition on data centres through a voter-approved ballot measure. The developers behind a proposed centre in the area had already pulled the project in April amid an increasingly hostile local environment and regulatory uncertainty.

The vote that stopped a data center: US communities query resource-hungry AI

According to nonprofit Data Center Watch, around $64 billion-worth of data centre projects nationwide were delayed or blocked between May 2024 and March 2025 as communities pushed back against them. 

Industry lobby groups argue that data centres can provide economic benefits in their host communities. According to the US-based Data Center Coalition, which represents big operators and developers, data centres generate tax revenue, support construction and technical jobs, and provide infrastructure needed for cloud computing, scientific research and AI development.

The industry has also challenged claims that data centers necessarily raise electricity costs for households.

Force for good?

The UN chief said benefits can be few in the places that are home to the data centre, while “communities are often left in the dark about the environmental impact of the infrastructure rising around them”.

Guterres said companies have an “obligation” to be clear and open about the services they are offering but also the level of resources they require. 

“Transparency is essential for the decisions that communities must make – and transparency is essential even for the future of artificial intelligence, and to make sure that artificial intelligence is essentially a force for good,” he told an audience of climate professionals in London

A senior UN official told journalists ahead of Tuesday’s announcement that the AI industry has started to talk about and disclose some of their impacts, but those efforts are not yet comprehensive enough. 

The hope is that the new initiative will “encourage the industry to come together and take further action on it”, the official said.

The post UN asks AI companies to reveal full environmental impacts appeared first on Climate Home News.

In an image, his left hand is shown draped over a block of wood, reflecting years of hard work and determination as he pushes a cart filled with pails of water through the streets.

The picture was taken by Danelle Fraser, a woman in her thirties who lives in Rose Town, Jamaica. She puts herself, and her family, into the photo essay, revealing how they must wake up early every day and travel to neighbouring communities to fetch water.

The residents of Rose Town, in West Kingston, have been forced to do this for decades after their own water pipes stopped working.

The photos are personal history, depicting the efforts of local people making do without access to a reliable water supply, leaving their community less resilient and more exposed to climate-related shocks.

“It has been over 23 years now since I saw water running through the pipes of my house in Gordon Lane,” writes Danelle in the essay.

Women’s lived experience

She is one of six women in Jamaica chosen to take part in the first phase of the Envisioning Resilience initiative in 2023. Led by the NAP Global Network and Lensational, a non-profit social enterprise, the project is designed to enable women to tell their own climate stories through photography. 

So far, these stories have ranged from how street vendors are surviving extreme heat to the Rastafari community’s attempts to adapt to drought.

The project, extended to another seven women in 2025, was born out of an understanding that women and girls are more severely impacted by climate change. The UN estimates the crisis is pushing tens of millions more women than men into poverty and food insecurity around the world. Global warming is worsening gender inequalities and making it harder for women to survive and become more resilient to extreme weather events.

“Women are one of many vulnerable groups and one that often lacks agency when it comes to decisions of critical importance such as climate change,” explained Orville Grey, head of secretariat for the NAP Global Network.

“Empowering women to speak to their lived experience [and] capture that through creative communication tools such as photography is a unique way to get them involved in the process of developing adaptation plans that are fit for purpose and inclusive,” he added.

The power of individual action

Starting in 2021, Envisioning Resilience initially ran pilots in Ghana and Kenya before expanding to Jamaica in 2023. The initiative formed a new partnership with GirlsCARE, a feminist climate justice organisation, based in the Caribbean country. Ayesha Constable, founder of GirlsCARE, told Climate Home News that participants on the programme are selected through a targeted call shared across their national network.

“We intentionally focus on reaching young women and girls from vulnerable communities, including rural and inner city areas,” she said. “The selection process… ensures a cohort that is both engaged and reflective of the communities most impacted by climate change,” she added.

The group goes through a training programme of between four to six months, learning professional photography skills through workshops and individual assignments. Participants are also provided with policy training and a grounding in how their stories are connected to wider climate concerns.

Jamaica set for post-Melissa payout but experts warn of limits to hurricane insurance

“We sometimes say if you only had one day to tell this story, what words would you use, what actions would you take to do so?” explained Lydia Wanjiku, CEO of Lensational.

Envisioning Resilience offers a rare opportunity for women from different backgrounds to tell these stories, reach a wider audience, and gain valuable skills along the way. The photo essays are collected online and the stories have received widespread media attention.

“Ultimately, we want participants to embrace their own agency, and recognise the power of individual and collective action in driving change, and to carry forward the principles of justice, care and equity in whatever paths they choose,” added Constable of GirlsCARE.

From pilots to policy

The wider intention in Jamaica is that the photo essays influence the development and implementation of new climate policies. When the stories are complete, they are shared in a dialogue that brings the newly trained photographers together with adaptation policymakers. 

According to Angie Dazé, director of gender equality and social inclusion at the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), the policy dialogues “flip the script, allowing the conversation to be led by the women and their stories, placing the government representatives in listening mode”.

Lensational is seeing interest from some countries in using the programme as a core part of national policy processes. The essays have validated some issues that government departments have known about, while others have shone a light on new areas of concern.

Women must be a starting point, not an afterthought, for adaptation

“We have really tried to embed policy and storytelling elements into the training, ensuring the projects are more targeted and aligned with what policymakers are working on,” added Wanjiku. The intention is to support women to articulate their stories with policy concepts in mind, broadening their reach and impact.

The approach seems to be paying off in Jamaica. Wayne Robertson, permanent secretary at Jamaica’s Ministry of Water, Environment and Climate Change, said the initiative had “meaningfully supported the Jamaican government in strengthening climate adaptation policy development by bridging the gap between technical planning and lived community experience”.

He added that the photo essays are supporting Jamaica’s National Adaptation Plan process and contributing to existing efforts by reinforcing the need for “inclusive, locally informed and participatory adaptation planning” and allowing for “a more people-centred understanding of climate risk.”

Jamaica’s growing climate impacts

Jamaica is a natural choice to run an initiative of this kind. As a small island developing state in the Caribbean, it is vulnerable to rising sea levels, coastal erosion and intense cyclones and hurricanes. A 2024 USAID assessment found that these stressors are likely to increase due to climate change.

Grey, of the NAP Global Network, commented that Jamaica is “dealing with rising temperatures impacting ambient heat both in day and night-time, increased severity of hurricanes, longer duration droughts, increased variability in rainfall, increased impacts of coastal erosion due to storms… and warmer oceans”. These climate stresses all have economic impacts on agriculture, tourism, fisheries and productivity.

A tale of two women: What climate vulnerability actually looks like

Many Jamaicans now have direct experience of what it means to live in a hotter world. In October 2025, Hurricane Melissa, a Category 5 storm, battered the island, causing multiple fatalities and almost $9 billion in economic damages. Researchers rank Melissa as one of the strongest storms ever recorded – with winds of up to 185mph (295km/h) – and the costliest hurricane in Jamaica’s history.

Climate change played a direct role in making the storm worse, according to a study from Imperial College London. Its storm model, called IRIS, found that climate change increased Melissa’s extreme rainfall by 16%, with a hurricane of its kind made four times more likely due to rising temperatures.

Collective action for resilience

Surrounded by the devastation of Hurricane Melissa, the new recruits to the Envisioning Resilience initiative picked up their cameras to record the event. 

Ashlee Gooden travelled to Treasure Beach on Jamaica’s south coast a few days after the hurricane made landfall. She spent time documenting how one family, the Ritchies, had prepared for what was to come. Fishermen tied down the zinc roof, with sandbags placed on top for extra support. Plywood was nailed to windows, and essential food items stockpiled in the days leading up to the storm.

Gooden’s essay demonstrates not only the physical impacts of Hurricane Melissa – destroyed businesses and beach debris – but how the close community has bounced back,  although a full recovery could take years. “One member of the community even opened their backyard to be used as a makeshift trail, allowing residents to bypass the blocked main road,” she writes.

No one left behind

The UN reports that in recent years the development of National Adaptation Plans under the UN climate process has moved from formulation to “implementation readiness”.

As adaptation policy matures, the photo essays produced by women on the Envisioning Resilience initiative are supporting governments to create plans that are more sensitive to the climate-related issues communities are now facing. 

Jamaican official Robertson said the initiative “strengthens gender-responsive adaptation by creating space for women, youth, and community members to share their experiences and priorities”.

While much work has been done to centre women’s issues and decision-making within the climate debate, researchers acknowledge it is still not a high priority for some countries. The photo essays can help change that, by providing an insight into stories that “don’t typically get heard in adaptation policy conversations”, according to IISD’s Dazé.

“The project is about a shift in mindset on the role that women are playing and their adaptive capacity. Women are resilient in their own right,” she added. “Women are already adapting to climate change, and policymakers are getting to see them as agents of change.”

Adam Wentworth is a freelance journalist based in Brighton, UK

The post Women in Jamaica are opening eyes with climate photography appeared first on Climate Home News.

In a major speech at London Climate Action Week, with the British capital under a heatwave warning, the UN Secretary-General said countries had not done enough to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in line with what is needed to keep warming below the globally agreed goal of 1.5C. 

“The task before us is to strictly limit the overshoot, shorten its duration, and bring temperatures down below 1.5 degrees Celsius as fast as possible,” Guterres said. One way of doing that, he added, is by cutting methane emissions first.

He noted that methane – a potent greenhouse gas that traps around 80 times more heat than carbon dioxide – is responsible for around one-third of global warming but breaks down in the atmosphere within a decade or two.

“That means that aggressive cuts could produce visible temperature relief within a generation,” the UN chief emphasised, launching a global call to action on methane covering fossil fuel production, agriculture and organic waste disposal.

Of the three main sources of methane, he singled out the fossil fuel industry, where he said “the most immediate gains can be made”.

He cited the International Energy Agency (IEA) finding that around 70% of oil and gas methane emissions can be eliminated using existing technology, mostly at low or no net cost. This is because the gas leaking from coal mines and oil and gas production facilities can be captured and then used or sold.

Despite this, in 2025 alone, Guterres said some 167 billion cubic metres of gas were flared – as much as Africa consumes in a year.

“I am urging the fossil fuel industry to step up and do what is long overdue,” added the UN chief, whose term ends this year.

Guterres said voluntary action “is no longer enough” and there were similar global precedents for getting rid of harmful substances, including leaded petrol and ozone-depleting chemicals. “Methane pollution must be next,” he emphasised.

Methane emissions stuck at highs

The latest Global Methane Tracker report from the IEA shows that methane emissions from fossil fuels remained at very high levels in 2025, with no sign of a decline globally despite progress in some countries. In 2025, energy generated 41% of global methane emissions, followed by agriculture (40%) and waste (17%).

On Tuesday, a World Bank tracker showed that global gas flaring rose for the third year in a row in 2025, wasting an estimated $54 billion worth of gas by burning it off.

Demetrios Papathanasiou, the World Bank Group’s global director for energy, said that at a time when many countries are struggling to expand their access to affordable and reliable energy, “the economic development costs of continued flaring are simply too high”. “The gas currently flared could be captured to power industries and businesses, create jobs and strengthen energy security,” he said in a statement.

As well as easing climate change, the IEA says capturing waste methane could help improve gas market security after Iran’s near-closure of the Strait of Hormuz removed close to 20% of global liquefied natural gas supply from the market. 

The prime minister of Barbados, Mia Mottley, last year called on leaders at the UN General Assembly to draw up a “legally binding global agreement” to reduce methane emissions, an idea that is also supported by France. 

Mottley’s “legally binding” methane pact faces barriers, but smaller steps possible

However, Guterres stopped short of supporting such a solution on Tuesday, throwing his weight instead behind a proposal for governments to set a new global standard for net near-zero methane emissions across the value chain in the oil and gas sector.

This initiative, outlined in a report on the new call to action, would establish a common, internationally recognised methane intensity benchmark, for use by both producers and consumers. Compliance with the standard would then become a condition for financing, procurement and long‑term market access.

Voluntary action ‘not enough’

In recent years, countries and companies willing to act on the methane problem have teamed up on the Global Methane Pledge, which aims to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030 from 2020 levels, and the UAE-led Oil and Gas Decarbonisation Charter, signed by over 50 oil and gas companies. But their success has been limited in real terms.  

Speaking at a separate event on Monday, Jonathan Banks, vice president of methane pollution prevention at the Clean Air Task Force (CATF), said the global pledge had been successful in creating “high-level political buy-in”, raising more money to detect methane emissions and helping countries plug their sources.

But it “is not there to be this all-encompassing binding treaty that drives emissions down”, he added.

At last year’s COP30, 11 countries representing around 10% of global oil production and 18% of gas exports signed a pledge to “drastically reduce” methane emissions in the fossil fuel sector, including by eliminating routine gas flaring and venting.

Comment: Curbing methane is the fastest way to slow warming – but we’re off the pace

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) also runs a system that detects methane leaks around the world. It has issued more than 5,000 alerts across 33 countries, but received responses in only 12% of cases.

Meghan Demeter, a programme manager at the UNEP service, said on Monday that countries face several barriers to responding to the alerts, including limited capacity to interpret the data and act on it, as well as funding shortages, particularly among national oil companies.

A senior UN official told journalists that existing initiatives on methane had raised awareness of the issue but had failed to deliver the emissions cuts needed. “’It’s absolutely critical that governments step in and strongly regulate the oil and gas sector,” he added.

Norway leads the way

As an example of how this could work, the call to action report singled out Norway, which banned routine flaring in 1971, imposed a tax on emissions from petroleum production and transport in 1991, and increased its tax on flaring and methane emissions in 2017. It now has one of the lowest methane emissions intensities of upstream oil and gas production in the world. 

The report said that if all countries matched Norway’s standards, global methane emissions from oil and gas operations could fall by roughly 90%.

Recent COP hosts Brazil and Azerbaijan linked to “super-emitting” methane plumes

It added that China, Canada, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar reduced or maintained their methane emissions from oil and gas production between 2023 and 2024, even as output increased, indicating a decline in the emissions intensity of their operations.

On Monday, the Fossil Fuel Regulatory Programme (FFRP), a UNEP-backed initiative that works with governments to strengthen regulatory frameworks for cutting methane emissions from their energy sectors, added Egypt, Brazil, and Bosnia and Herzegovina to its existing partners, Ghana, Kazakhstan and Iraq.

Windfall tax on fossil fuel profits

Guterres also made a strong push for states to hit the very deep pockets of fossil fuel companies with windfall taxes, as countries like the UK, Italy or Spain have done in recent years.

He said fossil energy giants had reaped ”extraordinary profits”, with the eight biggest making an extra $6.5 billion in the first quarter of this year alone, which included only one month of the Middle East crisis which has pushed up oil prices.

“These are windfall gains born of pain – of instability, hardship and dependence. I urge governments to tax them,” said the UN chief. 

He added that the proceeds should be used “where they belong: helping vulnerable families and communities, and accelerating the shift to clean, affordable energy”.

The post UN chief says fossil fuel industry must cut methane for warming “relief” appeared first on Climate Home News.

With global oil and gas prices soaring at the start of the Iran war, China quietly broke ground on three major coal-to-gas and coal-to-chemical projects worth roughly $10 billion in two regions with abundant coal resources.

But as a Chinese saying goes, “three feet of ice does not form in a single day”. China’s push to use coal as a substitute for imported oil and gas has been gathering momentum since the Russia-Ukraine war began in 2022, prompting a recalibration of energy security priorities in Beijing and beyond.

The policy raises new concerns, threatening China’s climate goals and growing reputation as a global clean energy leader by creating renewed demand for coal.

A new expansion wave

Over the past three years, China has entered a new cycle of investment in so-called “modern coal chemicals”, differentiated from conventional coal chemicals. Four pathways – coal-to-gas, coal-to-liquids, coal-to-olefins, and coal-to-ethylene glycol – account for the bulk of new modern coal-chemical capacity under development.

According to Global Energy Monitor data, proposed and under-construction coal-to-gas capacity is approaching three times current operating capacity. Together, 34 projects under active consideration represent more than 1 trillion yuan ($150 billion) in planned investment and could add roughly 300 million tonnes of annual coal demand if completed, equivalent to South Africa’s entire coal mining capacity.

Most projects are in Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, Shaanxi and Ningxia, regions with plentiful coal resources and relatively low mining costs. Xinjiang has emerged as the epicentre of the new boom, accounting for more than half of all proposed modern coal chemical projects.

Why the world abandoned coal chemicals

Coal chemicals are often presented as an emerging industry, but the technologies themselves are more than a century old.

Earlier “conventional” coal chemistry was a byproduct of coking, a process run primarily for iron and steel making. “Modern” coal chemistry instead uses gasification to convert coal into synthesis gas, a versatile building block for fuels, plastics, fertilisers and other chemicals that would traditionally be made from oil or gas.

These modern processes were developed in the early 20^th century and expanded during periods of wartime fuel shortages. For example, Germany relied heavily on synthetic fuels during the Second World War while South Africa developed similar technologies in the apartheid era to reduce vulnerability to international sanctions.

Once cheap oil and gas became widely available, however, most countries moved away from coal chemicals, which required large amounts of energy, water and capital investment, and generally produced more pollution and carbon emissions than the conventional alternatives.

Today, only a handful of commercial coal gasification facilities operate outside China.

China has already tested this theory once

The current expansion is not China’s first attempt to build a major coal chemical industry.

A previous boom emerged during the 2010s, driven by many of the same arguments: high oil prices, concerns over energy security and expectations that technological improvements would unlock a new era of coal-based industrial growth.

Brazil jostles for rare earths share as US-China rivalry heats up

The outcome was far from successful. Dozens of projects were proposed, but many were delayed, suspended or scrapped before completion, and there were difficulties among those that did get off the ground.

Three of China’s four operating coal-to-gas projects reportedly spent much of the past decade operating at a loss, and several large coal chemical facilities generated only marginal returns despite government support.

Policy support is driving the revival

Backers say technological improvements have made the industry more competitive than it was a decade ago.

Yet coal chemical projects remain highly dependent on oil and gas prices. When international prices rise, coal-derived products can appear competitive. When prices fall, the economics often deteriorate rapidly.

More than changes in technology, government policy has played a pivotal role in the sector’s revival.

Following power shortages in 2021 and the energy market disruptions that followed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, energy security became a national priority. Coal production expanded, particularly in western China, boosted by government support.

China’s solar exports reach “gigantic” record in March as energy crisis bites

A key policy change in 2022 exempted coal used as industrial feedstock from certain energy consumption controls, easing regulatory pressure on coal chemical projects.

The impact of such measures highlights the degree to which coal chemicals depend on expansive and favourable policy treatment to remain viable.

At the same time, the current expansion is creating new demand for an industry confronting structural decline as China races to renewables in electricity generation.

The cost to China’s climate leadership

Converting coal into fuels and petrochemical products also releases substantially more carbon dioxide than conventional oil- and gas-based alternatives, which themselves are a major source of emissions. 

Proponents argue that coupling production with green hydrogen and carbon capture could resolve the emissions problem, but the arithmetic doesn’t support this. 

Sinopec’s flagship Dalu coal-to-olefins plant, paired with a 10,000 tonne-per-year green hydrogen demonstration, displaces less than 2% of the plant’s annual coal use. Replicating this across the proposed buildout would consume enormous quantities of clean energy just to partially decarbonise an inherently dirty process.

China could instead leverage that same industrial capacity and policy support to lead the development of cleaner chemical pathways, such as green ammonia for fertiliser, bio-based and CO2-derived feedstocks for plastics, and e-fuels or biofuels where liquid fuels are still needed. 

Rather than locking in another generation of coal-dependent infrastructure, China should learn from the lessons of the past and seek a cleaner and more viable industrial future.

The post China’s coal-chemicals boom risks repeating the mistakes of the past appeared first on Climate Home News.

With governments facing fiscal and political pressures, attracting private capital will be crucial for accelerating climate action in the coming years.

Yet many Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) still do not have the sector-specific plans, economic incentives, policy certainty, infrastructure investment and ongoing dialogue needed to break silos between the public and private sectors and bring more businesses on board.

“If you just have the high-level (NDC) target from the government in a vacuum, it’s not going to spur much business action,” said Greg Briner, senior manager for policy at the We Mean Business Coalition, which works with companies pushing for stronger climate action.

“But that target combined with … more specific policies and measures that get put in place as a result of that target-implementing process, or as a result of the NDCs, is where the magic starts happening,” he explained.

NDCs: late and inadequate

NDCs are voluntary climate action plans created by countries under the Paris Agreement. They include commitments such as expanding renewable energy, reducing fossil fuels, halting deforestation and other measures to cut greenhouse gas emissions and limit global warming.

First submitted in 2015 for the Paris Agreement, NDCs should be updated with more ambitious targets every five years, although some governments have not stuck to this timetable.  

Last year, most countries missed an initial February deadline to finalise the latest round of plans, known as “NDCs 3.0” – and at least 50 countries, mainly developing nations, have still not done so.

Paris Agreement committee snubbed over missing NDC climate plans

Although these national plans have helped drive emissions reductions in some sectors – including falling deforestation rates and greater investments in renewables – climate experts say progress remains far too slow to meet the Paris goals and urgent action is now needed.

Last November, the UN climate body projected that global emissions would fall by around 12% from 2019 levels by 2035, based on a preliminary assessment of new NDCs announced by countries that produce nearly 70% of the world’s greenhouse gases.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said countries should cut emissions far more rapidly, with a 60% drop by 2035 needed to limit global warming to 1.5C.

But for developing economies especially, the multi-billion-dollar costs associated with transitioning to greener energy systems and curbing their emissions are still a major barrier. Climate experts say governments and businesses need to move in step if NDC targets are to be achieved.

“There are positive actions going on but we need a significant ramping up. It’s not happening quickly enough,” said Briner. “It’s (about) building on these foundations that are being put in place.”

Nurturing the conditions for private investment

Last September, consumer goods giant Unilever published a report, entitled Bold Plans, Real Impact, examining how corporate climate transition plans and NDCs can support each other.

Among its recommendations, the report called for governments to provide clearer roadmaps for private-sector engagement. It also highlighted the need for stronger regulatory frameworks, market incentives, sector-specific transition pathways and integrated, economy-wide planning.

For businesses, the report recommended aligning their transition plans with national climate priorities, collaborating more closely with industry peers, strengthening monitoring and verification systems, and unlocking finance through public-private partnerships.

Comment: The missing piece in COP climate talks – market signals for adaptation 

A year earlier, the We Mean Business Coalition published a similar report, Time to Deliver: Business Call to Action for Ambitious and Investible NDCs.

This report urged governments – particularly in the G20 economies – to unlock private investment through sectoral targets, clean energy expansion, energy efficiency measures, fossil fuel phase-outs and commitments to halt deforestation.

It also stressed the importance of translating climate targets into concrete policies, backed by national implementation strategies and coordination across ministries.

Another key recommendation was the need for more transparent and inclusive dialogue with businesses throughout the NDC process. Early consultation with companies, the report said, should be embedded into the development and implementation of NDCs to ensure that climate plans reflect commercial realities.

Briner of We Mean Business said the economics of decarbonisation have changed dramatically over the past two decades.

“Ten to 20 years ago, decarbonising and investing in clean energy and electrification was seen as nice-to-have and a more expensive option, but these days, it simply makes business sense,” he said, referring to recent geopolitical events in the Middle East that have roiled oil and gas markets, pushing up fossil fuel prices.

However, upfront costs for clean energy infrastructure remain a major hurdle. Governments therefore need to complement climate policies with investments, concessional loans, grants, subsidies and tax incentives to help reduce risks, Briner added.

“Globally, there are still significant subsidies going to fossil fuels in different forms,” he said. “If we could redirect some of those current incentives away from fossil fuels and into clean electrification and clean energy, then that would certainly help.”

Brazil’s sector-specific climate planning

Brazil’s NDC targets include expanding renewable energy – which already accounts for nearly 45% of its energy mix – ending illegal deforestation and reaching net-zero emissions by 2050.

According to Briner, Brazil’s climate strategy – known as Plano Clima – offers an example of how governments can provide businesses with clearer implementation guidance.

Years in development, the initiative sets out how Brazil intends to meet its climate goals through a series of sectoral plans covering areas such as energy, transport and land use.

“They’ve put together some pretty detailed, impressive plans,” Briner said. “Those are the types of things that will influence business models and business decisions. It’s this more detailed second layer of setting out national plans which is of interest to business.”

Last year, a transport coalition of more than 50 associations, companies and academia put forward a plan to help reduce the sector’s emissions and attract more than $600 billion in green investments in Brazil.  

The previous year, 55 companies operating in Brazil, including Natura, Nestle, Itau and Unilever, called for more ambitious NDCs and clearer implementation policies, as well as encouraging climate-friendly investment and private-sector involvement.    

Unilever, for example, has a global goal to create a deforestation-free supply chain and is partnering with a leading supplier in Brazil to ensure that soybean oil used at its factory there is not linked to forest loss.

Cheaper capital, high-quality projects

Although Brazil has relatively sophisticated capital markets, high interest rates still make long-term, low-carbon investments difficult, said Natalie Unterstell, president of the Talanoa Institute, a Brazilian environmental think-tank.

To address this challenge, Brazil is scaling up Fundo Clima – its National Climate Change Fund – as a central part of its implementation strategy by offering cheaper financing at scale.

But Unterstell said the private sector also needs to demonstrate that it can develop and deliver high-quality, low-carbon projects.

“Making Brazil’s policies investable is about making sure cheaper capital meets a pipeline of real, high-quality projects,” she said by email.

Brazilian firm behind SAF plan found growing oil palm on deforested Amazon land

While many companies have announced climate commitments, investment decisions have not always followed, she added.

“What companies can do better is move from targets to investment: adopt robust transition plans, and integrate carbon risk into core financial decisions,” Unterstell said.

On the government side, the priority is to “fix the signals”, she added. That means ensuring Brazil’s regulated carbon market – which is due to start in 2027 for sectors including iron and steel, cement, and oil and gas – operates with clear rules, credible enforcement and no delays, while aligning public finance with climate goals and providing long-term policy certainty.

“At the moment, both sides are waiting for stronger signals from the other, hence breaking that co-ordination problem is key,” she said.

Indonesia’s challenge: bridging the finance gap

Like Brazil, Indonesia is home to large areas of rainforest, but its energy mix relies far more heavily on fossil fuels, with coal providing about a third of supply. In its NDCs, Indonesia has pledged to reduce emissions by 31.9% by 2030 compared with business-as-usual levels, or by 43.2% with international support, on the way to reaching net zero by 2060.

Yet despite being promised more than $20 billion in international financial support from donor governments and investors under its Just Energy Transition Partnership, Jakarta has decided to row back on a plan to close a key coal power station early, saying it will focus on shuttering older and dirtier plants first.

To attract private investment to help achieve its emissions goals, Indonesia must provide policy clarity and long-term certainty, said Fabby Tumiwa, executive director of the Institute for Essential Services Reform, an Indonesian think-tank.

Comment: Indonesia’s failing Just Energy Transition Partnership is a cautionary tale

“Any investor wants to understand the long-term risks of the country so that they can assess the risks properly and come up with a risk mitigation strategy. Uncertain policies basically make investors unable to mitigate the risks,” Tumiwa told Climate Home News.

“To make Indonesia’s climate policies investable for the private sector, the core task is to convert climate ambition into bankable, enforceable, risk-adjusted projects,” he said. “Investors do not only need targets; they need predictable revenue, credible off-takers, permits, grid access, currency-risk management and policy durability.”

Indonesia has estimated the investment needed to meet its NDC goals at more than $400 billion but has yet to clearly outline how businesses can directly contribute, said Egi Suarga, senior manager for climate at World Resources Institute Indonesia, a research organisation.

He said climate action should be framed as an investment opportunity rather than an economic burden.

Evolving policies and regulations

Over 100 Indonesian companies have adopted net-zero and are ready to ramp up decarbonisation given clear national guidance, according to the We Mean Business Coalition.

Indonesia’s Indika Energy is making heavy investments in renewable energy such as solar, while cement company Solusi Bangun Indonesia is also investing in cleaner energy, fuel efficiency and pushing better biodiversity management.             

Meanwhile, Unilever’s climate transition plan states that the company is working with local government and environmental NGOs in Indonesia to protect and restore forests in Aceh and North Sumatra. It is also switching from natural gas to biomethane at its Indonesian sites.

One positive development, Suarga noted, is the creation of carbon pricing regulations aimed at attracting private finance, with an initial focus on the forestry sector.

“It can create a good climate for investors,” he said. “It doesn’t directly mention that this is for achieving the NDCs but there is no trade-off between development financing with environmental protections – so that’s a good start.”

Indonesia also needs stronger incentives and regulations for renewable energy, he added.

“We also have to think about other sectors now – like the energy sector and renewables,” Suarga said. “How can the government provide more incentives or facilitating regulations that can be more profitable to create a level playing field for renewables and fossil fuels?”

Ambition loop to drive action

Like Tumiwa, Suarga stressed the need for greater dialogue between the government and businesses so companies can understand better how they can contribute to Indonesia’s emissions targets.

“They know about sustainability because of the market and demands of the market… [but] I’m not sure whether [they] really understand about Indonesia’s target to achieve a certain amount of emissions reductions in the NDCs,” he said.

Currently, the government and private sector are largely working separately, Suarga added. The challenge lies in bringing them together to set targets, plan implementation and monitor emissions reductions. “It will need two to tango. The government should engage more with the private sector,” he emphasised.

Big banks’ lending to coal backers undermines Indonesia’s green plans 

For the We Mean Business Coalition’s Briner, what is ultimately needed is an “ambition loop” in which businesses lead on emissions reductions while governments create policies that accelerate private-sector action.

“It really helps governments when they have a strong voice from business calling for policy action. It helps move things forward,” he said.

Without stronger policies and incentives, achieving NDC goals will become increasingly difficult to achieve and costly, experts say.

“It’s really a case of all hands-on deck right now,” Briner said. “We need all sides of this equation working together and trying to get this done because there isn’t an alternative.”

The post Two to tango: How governments can unlock private investment for national climate goals appeared first on Climate Home News.

At the Our Ocean Conference in Kenya’s coastal city of Mombasa this week, some 3,000 delegates – including government officials, scientists, business representatives and activists – gathered to discuss ocean protection and push for marine issues to move from the margins to the centre of global climate diplomacy. 

Campaigners said the overall picture was positive. Oceans are gaining more visibility in international climate discussions: from blue carbon ecosystems such as mangroves, to coastal adaptation, marine biodiversity, ocean finance and the High Seas Treaty. 

In this year’s preliminary conference report, the secretariat listed 320 existing ocean commitments worth $6.4 billion, with about $1.1 billion destined to address the climate crisis. Many of these pledges were already announced before the conference.

But as momentum builds ahead of the COP31 climate summit in Türkiye, John Kerry, former US climate envoy and founder of the Our Ocean Conference, warned that the conversations and commitments on ocean protection will mean little if implementation continues to lag behind action. 

“The ocean can no longer be an afterthought in climate policy,” Kerry told delegates at the opening ceremony of the conference. “Now it must become central to our climate solutions.” 

“The challenge before us is not a lack of knowledge. We know exactly what has happened,” he said. “The challenge is whether political will can finally catch up with the science.” 

He added that the meeting taking place on the shores of the Indian Ocean should be remembered as the moment the process moved “from commitments to implementation”. 

The ocean has quietly shielded humanity from the worst impacts of climate change for decades, absorbing around 90% of the excess heat generated by global warming while sustaining the livelihoods of billions of people. 

From pledges to progress

Oceans have been largely absent from international climate negotiations, often treated as a conservation issue rather than a core component of climate action. 

Yet scientists say the ocean absorbs around a quarter of humanity’s annual carbon emissions and plays a critical role in regulating global temperatures.  

Research suggests that ocean-based solutions – from restoring mangroves and seagrass meadows to decarbonising shipping and expanding marine protected areas – could deliver up to 35% of the emissions reductions needed to keep global warming within 1.5 degrees Celsius by mid-century. 

That growing recognition has fuelled calls for oceans to play a larger role in climate policy and negotiations. Against that backdrop, the Our Ocean Conference – launched in 2014 to mobilise governments, business, philanthropies and activists – has emerged as a platform for advancing action to keep the planet’s seas healthy. 

According to the conference secretariat, the process has generated more than 2,900 commitments worth nearly $170 billion in the 10 years since its launch. The gathering in Mombasa was the 11th conference and the first to take place in Africa. 

This week, Canada and Jamaica were confirmed as the hosts of the next two Our Ocean conferences in 2027 and 2029. There is none planned for 2028, as the UN Ocean Conference will be co-hosted by South Korea and Chile that year, the secretariat said.  

Science ‘under attack’ from fossil fuel interests at UN climate talks

In Mombasa, governments reaffirmed more than 300 commitments linked to the creation of new marine protected areas, reducing marine pollution, and developing sustainable fisheries, among others.

Most of the finance mobilised went to “blue economy” initiatives, including the European Union’s Ocean Eye initiative, which will mobilise €50 million ($57 million) to offset a Trump administration decision to scale back the US Ocean Observatories Initiative and weaken scientific marine data.

“More important than the new pledges is the actual delivery of commitments,” Cynthia Barzuna, who heads the conference secretariat at the World Resources Institute, told Climate Home News. “That is what makes a difference for marine ecosystems and coastal communities.” 

Last year, the secretariat published its first comprehensive assessment of implementation, finding that nearly 80% of commitments made through the conference were either completed or progressing towards completion. 

Barriers remain

Yet while oceans are climbing the political agenda, significant barriers remain to turning ambition into meaningful action. 

The secretariat’s assessment found that successful projects involved local communities, strengthened local expertise, and secured long-term financing. Many organisations, however, reported difficulties accessing sustained funding, particularly in developing countries. 

African initiatives, for example, tend to rely on short-term project grants, creating what Barzuna described as a “patchwork of impacts on the ground” rather than the systemic change needed to protect marine ecosystems and coastal livelihoods. 

Campaigners say a broader challenge lies in ensuring that growing recognition of the ocean’s importance is reflected in wider climate and economic policies. 

While countries have pledged to expand marine protected areas, restore coastal ecosystems and strengthen ocean governance, many continue to pursue activities that place additional pressure on marine environments, including offshore fossil fuel development.

“This year’s Our Ocean Conference comes at a critical moment where the incoming presidencies for COP31 – both Türkiye and Australia – have a strong interest increasing the prominence of the ocean in the COP,” Shamini Selvaratnam, director of International Climate and Clean Energy at the Ocean Conservancy, told Climate Home News. 

“But we cannot talk about ocean health and then continue to explore offshore oil and gas – those two things are incompatible. It’s like asking the dolphin to swim on the land.”  

For supporters of the ocean agenda, the question is no longer whether oceans matter to climate action. The challenge now is ensuring that governments match rising political ambition with funding, implementation and accountability. 

“The ocean has actually been acting as Earth’s life support system – and it has been protecting us,” Kerry told delegates. “The question before us is whether we are willing to protect the ocean in return.” 

The post Mombasa ocean summit drives progress on marine protection, but threats persist appeared first on Climate Home News.

In their final hours on Thursday evening, the talks tried – and failed – to reach a deal that would have balanced developing countries’ demands for reassurance on finance to help them adapt to climate impacts with richer nations’ desire to move forward with work on speeding up emissions reductions in line with science.  

Simon Stiell, the head of the UN climate body, released a statement as the Bonn talks wound up, saying that “in some negotiating rooms, we’ve heard a familiar tendency towards you-first-ism – groups refusing to deliver commitments or allow the process to move forward unless others go first”.  

“This is a recipe for gridlock when we need all negotiating tracks to be moving in the fast lane,” he added.

Gridlock is where the talks ended, with countries unable to agree conclusions on at least three major areas of climate action, including adaptation and mitigation, invoking “Rule 16”. That means they will be taken up again at COP31 in Türkiye in November.

Bonn Bulletin: Finance row threatens to scupper work on adaptation goal

On the emissions reduction (mitigation) work programme, pushback – primarily from fossil-fuel producing nations – has prevented any meaningful progress since its creation at COP27, as countries have been unable to come up with a united vision for its scope and purpose.

Despite many countries expressing disappointment at the end of Bonn, China argued that some common ground had been found that could serve as positive elements to build on at COP31, including that “no one is against mitigation implementation and ambition”.

Adaptation “salt in our wounds”

Small island states and developing nations spoke bitterly of the lack of progress on the global goal on adaptation, which had been expected to launch technical work on putting into practice indicators agreed at COP30 in Brazil, and said it had destroyed trust between countries. 

Negotiations on the goal ended in deadlock after developed countries, including European governments refused to include a target to triple adaptation finance by 2035 that was agreed at COP30 in Brazil, insisting the text should focus on technical work to measure progress on making people more resilient to climate pressures. This was a red line for many vulnerable countries, especially the African group.

“Developed countries are hiding behind procedural arguments by claiming adaptation finance belongs in some other room, on some other day,” said Mohamed Adow, director of Kenya-based think-tank Power Shift Africa. “But climate disasters don’t wait for the right agenda item. Africa is burning and flooding now.”

In the final session at Bonn, Fiji’s delegate described the need to adapt to evolving climate risk as a “daily burden”, which he said is a question of water and food security and, in some cases, forcing people to face relocation on the Pacific islands.

“Some of us will now travel more than 30 hours home to report that one of the most fundamental issues we sought progress on here for vulnerable countries has stalled at a time when we need guidance and outcomes the most. In light of overshoot [of 1.5C of warming] and attacks on the science, this is simply further salt in our wounds,” he told the closing plenary as the clock ticked towards midnight local time.

On Wednesday, a coalition of European and climate-vulnerable developing countries accused fossil fuel interests and the “usual suspects” of mounting ”coordinated attacks” on science, as arguments erupted over the Paris Agreement’s 1.5C warming limit and its overshoot and when the next UN climate science reports should be published.

German Environment Minister Carsten Schneider said “an informed, fact-based public debate on the consequences of climate change is vital”.

“This makes attacks on the scientific foundations of climate science – such as those that occurred in Bonn this time – all the more serious. It is encouraging to see a large number of countries from both the Global South and the Global North clearly standing together against this,” he added in a statement on the talks.

Science ‘under attack’ from fossil fuel interests at UN climate talks

Stiell urged the Turkish and Australian COP31 co-presidencies to get ministers working “as soon as possible” on the “thorniest issues” in the UN climate process so that negotiations can move into the “fast lane”. The presidencies are under pressure to appoint pairs of ministers to resolve these issues earlier than usual, so that they are well-briefed and know their counterparts ahead of COP31.

Electrification bright spot

Alden Meyer, senior associate for climate diplomacy and geopolitics with E3G, lamented the “limited progress in most of the negotiating rooms” over the past fortnight. “As people across the world suffer the twin crises of mounting climate impacts as well as the sharply higher energy and food prices resulting from the war in the… Gulf, there was no sense of urgency at the Bonn climate talks.” 

He and others observers did, however, welcome a new goal on electrification proposed by COP31 host Turkiye outside of the formal talks under the Global Climate Action Agenda, which also brings in the private sector and cities. 

The electrification target would strive to ramp up the share of final energy consumption provided by electricity to 35% by 2035 from about 20% today by accelerating the switch to technologies such as heat pumps, electric vehicles (EVs) and electric cookers.

COP31 leaders unveil global targets, with spotlight on electrification

Nonetheless, some analysts said such goals lack significance without a global plan to transition away from fossil fuels. Brazil is now working on one, with inputs from countries and civil society, but it is unclear how this will be incorporated into the UN climate process, if at all.

Jasper Inventor, deputy programme director at Greenpeace International, said the stalled talks around climate finance for developing countries and a repeated deadlock on mitigation “took some of the shine off the emergence of a coalition of countries supporting a transition away from fossil fuels at a time where the climate and energy crisis is set to be supercharged” by an emerging El Niño pattern.

Bonn paves way for new just transition mechanism

One key topic that advanced more calmly at the Bonn talks and even achieved some promising consensus was just transition – how to achieve a green economic and social shift that is fair from the global to the local level. Countries approved the terms of reference under which the just transition work programme (JTWP), which began in 2023, will be reviewed. 

And following up on a COP30 decision to develop a mechanism to guide and enable support for just transition initiatives, which was hailed by civil society as a big win, countries in Bonn provided a first set of options on its structure and other elements of how it will operate, with a view to it being launched at COP31.

Comment: The UN climate process was built for negotiation – now it must support implementation

Anabella Rosemberg, senior advisor on just transition at Climate Action Network International, noted that “it will require a bit of work between now and COP31 to have an agreement” on what is being billed as the “Belém-to-Antalya Mechanism”. Informal discussions could take place, for example, during Regional Climate Week in Baku in October, or at the invitation of the COP31 presidency in Australia, she added.

“The next three months will determine whether governments build a mechanism that supports workers, communities and countries through the transition, or settle for another space for dialogue,” she said.

The post Bonn climate talks end in “gridlock” on adaptation and emissions-cutting appeared first on Climate Home News.

But the agreement adopted at this week’s G7 leaders’ summit in France is vague on what co-operation with resource-rich developing countries could look like, with critics warning against creating a consumer club of powerful nations that excludes others from shaping standards and building green supply chains.

“The G7 communiqué reaffirms our suspicion that, for the G7, it is all about resource security, not just energy transition,” Claude Kabemba, executive director of Southern Africa Resource Watch, told Climate Home News.

In a joint communique, the leaders of some of the world’s largest economies said they would step up coordination within the group and with partner countries to establish mineral processing and industrial capacity, support local value addition, promote innovation, develop standards, improve mineral traceability and share information on stockpiling systems.

They agreed to create a joint crisis-prevention mechanism with the support of the International Energy Agency to monitor mineral supply and demand disruptions, as well as establish harmonised platforms to provide information about the origin of minerals, starting with lithium and nickel.

The statement was endorsed by France, the UK, Canada, Germany, Italy, Japan, the US and the European Union at the end of the three-day summit in Evian, on the French shores of Lake Geneva. Australia, which isn’t a G7 member, also supported the declaration.

Breaking dependency on China

Western governments have been scrambling to secure the minerals they need to produce clean energy technologies such as batteries, electric vehicles and wind turbines, as well as hardware for artificial intelligence and military equipment while breaking their dependence on China.  

China controls most supply chains for the strategic minerals they need, dominating the processing of 19 out of 20 critical minerals. The only exception is nickel, where Indonesia leads on supply and processing. Last year, Beijing spooked governments in Europe and the US when it imposed restrictions on rare earths exports, signalling its willingness to use its industrial clout to achieve its geopolitical objectives.

“We are all faced with risks of over-dependence and therefore vulnerability in our value chains,” French President Emmanuel Macron told a press conference, citing the “risks of divisions” among the group on how to respond to China’s control over strategic resources. “We have decided to move forward together,” he said.

Leaders agreed to aggregate demand to support the development of minerals projects and set targets for reducing dependencies on any single country outside the G7 by the end of the year.

A US proposal to regulate mineral prices and a French push to establish a permanent secretariat to track G7 initiatives on minerals failed to reach consensus among the group, according to Reuters.

Who has a seat at the table?

The declaration recognises the need for “mutually beneficial partnerships” and “plurilateral trade agreements” between G7 countries and “like-minded” and “trusted” partners to build diversified supply chains. Other parts of the text refer to “developing countries” and “emerging economies”.

A separate G7 statement on “mutually beneficial international partnerships” mentions the need for international cooperation along the whole of mineral supply chains.

“Who is going to be part of this conversation is unclear,” said Sébastien Treyer, executive director of France think-tank IDDRI, citing the ambiguity of the language and calling for developing countries to be part of the conversation.

Trade agreements that support green industrialisation can be “an entry point” for investment into value-addition projects in developing countries, said Treyer, but “how this is going to be operationalised is the key question”.

Moving beyond a ‘consumer club’

Resource-rich developing countries, particularly in Africa, have called for investment to build their industrial capacity to turn raw materials into high-value components for clean energy technologies such as batteries, capturing more domestic value and creating jobs.  

But Kabemba, whose organisation is based in South Africa, said the declaration says “nothing about transferring industrial capacity to previously exploited regions such Africa”.

“Africa needs to react with its own coalition of the willing to put Africa’s interests first, otherwise, Africa risks being locked into a role as a raw material supplier in a new economic order it is not helping to build,” he said.

Patrick Schröder, a resource governance expert at Chatham House, agreed that the G7 remains overwhelmingly focused on securing minerals supplies and reducing its dependence on China. “The benefits for developing country producers are only marginal in the G7 discussions,” he said.

Brazil, which is rich in rare earths, graphite and copper, was invited to attend the G7 meeting but did not endorse the minerals declaration – highlighting the need for future minerals framework to be more inclusive and responsive to producer-country concerns, said Schröder.

For Luc Tezenas, head of policy and advocacy at the Resource Justice Network, “the answer to rising geopolitical fragmentation cannot be to shrink multilateralism into a smaller club of ‘like-minded’ consumer economies”.

Instead, a non-binding minerals framework put forward by South Africa during its presidency of the G20 last year “shows more promise as a pathway forward because it attempts to link supply resilience with regional value chains and economic justice,” he said. The UK, which is presiding over the G20 next year, has the opportunity to build a more inclusive way forward, he added.

Circularity: another way to capture value

G7 nations also described the circular economy and the substitution of minerals in designing technologies as “key” to meet growing demand and secure sufficient supplies.

This, they said, includes increasing recycling capacity by setting targets, combatting the illegal transfer of used products and components, and promoting the recovery of minerals from secondary sources such as mining waste.

“We also recognise the opportunity for emerging market and developing economies to benefit from capturing added value through the recycling and secondary processing of their mining waste, as well as from circular economy innovations,” they said.

Schröder, of Chatham House, said the challenge now lies in demonstrating that intentions can be turned into creating a circular economy for minerals through investments, business support and a favourable policy environment.

The post Warning against ‘consumer club’ as G7 forms critical minerals alliance appeared first on Climate Home News.