More than ever, COP29 in Baku needs to deliver on climate promises

Damaged cars are piled-up in the flood-hit municipality of Catarroja, Valencia province, Spain, 06 November 2024. The devastating floods in Valencia and neighboring provinces have caused at least 216 fatalities, as efforts to search for missing people, provide supplies, and care for the victims continue after the DANA (high-altitude isolated depression) weather phenomenon hit the east of the country on 29 October. (Photo: EPA-EFE / ANA ESCOBAR)

By James Reeler

7 Nov 2024

For the 29th time since the landmark Rio Convention in 1992, all the signatories to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change are gathering, this time in Azerbaijan.

It’s tempting to write off COP29 (the 29th Conference of the Parties since the Rio Convention) before it even starts, given the questionable progress on climate change that has been delivered over that time.

Indeed, the “COP troika” (UAE, Azerbaijan and Brazil, aka the presidencies of COPs past, present and future) is responsible for nearly a third of the new oil and gas emissions last year, and are planning to increase fossil fuel extraction by 32% by 2035.

Given this, it can be hard to imagine this year’s meeting is anything but window dressing.

But that’s absolutely the wrong framing: climate change is so cross-cutting that it absolutely requires multilateral agreements, and each COP is a key opportunity to move things in the right direction. Real wins can only be delivered by perseverance and clarity. So what are the main issues to be tabled at COP29?

Ambition

The just-released Unep Emissions Gap Report demonstrates that real climate implementation is lagging even the moderate goals laid out in countries’ nationally determined contributions (NDCs) to the Paris Agreement.

Despite the fact that 2024 is on track to be the warmest year on record, greenhouse gases continue to accumulate in the atmosphere, and no place in the world is untouched by climate change (as was evidenced by the recent catastrophic flooding in Spain).

Following last year’s damning global stocktake, COP29 will see renewed calls for countries to strengthen their NDCs, clearly outlining both what they intend to do and what is needed to make it happen. Which brings us – particularly for developing nations – sharply to the core focus on COP29: climate finance.

Cop 29 climate change A man walks over debirs to access a street in a mud-covered street in the flood-hit city of Paiporta, in Valencia, Spain, on 7 November 2024. The devastating floods in Valencia and neighbouring provinces have caused more than 200 fatalities, as efforts to search for missing people, provide supplies, and care for the victims continue after the Dana (high-altitude isolated depression) weather phenomenon hit the east of the country on 29 October. (Photo: Biel Alino / EPA-EFE)

COP29 climate change Damaged cars are piled-up in the flood-hit municipality of Catarroja, Valencia province, Spain, on 6 November 2024. The devastating floods in Valencia and neighbouring provinces have caused more than 200 fatalities, as efforts to search for missing people, provide supplies, and care for the victims continue after the Dana (high-altitude isolated depression) weather phenomenon hit the east of the country on 29 October. (Photo: Ana Escobar / EPA-EFE)

Climate finance

Last year it was finally declared that the much-delayed climate finance target of $100-billion was achieved, if you believe donor nations’ accounts.

Of course, the very lack of transparency in that accounting (show us the spreadsheets!) makes it easy for developing nations to deny it – and analysis by some civil society actors puts the lie to the claim. Oxfam’s 2023 climate finance analysis estimates that the real value of climate finance in 2020 was under $25-billion.

Nevertheless, last year’s COP provided an undertaking for a “New Quantified Collective Goal” for climate finance to be agreed at COP29, building from the current floor of $100-billion a year.

Civil society and developing nations are aiming high, hoping to get the quantum set between $1-trillion and $1.2-trillion – all to be provided from developed nations to developing nations under the core United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities”.

A trillion dollars seems an overwhelming, laughable amount, conjuring to mind Austin Powers’ Dr Evil laughing with his pinky in the corner of his mouth. Yet, to put it into perspective, it’s less than 2% of the OECD countries’ annual income.

According to the World Bank, the world currently spends $577-billion in direct fossil fuel subsidies annually (contrast with $128-billion for renewable energy) and close to $5.4-trillion in implicit subsidies. Small wonder that the profits from fossil fuels are so massive and attractive to the oil majors.

What’s more, the world spent close to $2.5-trillion on military expenditure last year, with the US military alone nearing $900-billion.

I’m not arguing that this is all wasteful expenditure (it mostly is), but an honest risk assessment would place far higher emphasis on addressing the drivers and exposure to a potential civilisation-ending threat such as climate change.

Diverting fossil fuel subsidies and half of military expenditure to safeguarding development, nature and the global economy is not a ludicrous ask.

So, the question is not realistically “where will that money come from?” – we have plenty of resources to underwrite it. Nor is it even “is it worth it?”, because the evidence that climate impacts are already impacting on economic growth and development is overwhelming, with African economies losing 2–5% of GDP each year. The only real question is “why are we taking so long to make this shift?”

Climate and nature

The failure of the just-ended Convention on Biodiversity COP16 to make any resolution on the call for $700-billion a year to support biodiversity doesn’t bode well for ambitions for the New Collective Quantified Goal.

While this may not be true (sadly, the biodiversity convention remains the poor cousin of climate change), there are also clear overlaps between the two issues.

Natural systems currently remove roughly half of historical human-caused emissions, playing a key role in mitigation. At the same time, a shifting climate increasingly impacts on the organisms that underpin these removals, and accelerates greenhouse gas emissions from soil and permafrost.

We saw warning signs last year, with preliminary analysis indicating that the ability of these natural systems to absorb carbon (the global land sink) dropped to an historic low because of drought, extreme heat and fires.

While this is expected to recover somewhat post El Ninõ, it indicates how ecosystems are vulnerable to climate change, and how climate change is accelerating the breakdown of natural systems that underpin human wellbeing.

This can both accelerate climate impacts and undermine net zero goals, given that large numbers of countries are counting on their natural systems to help meet those goals. WWF is therefore calling for a specific Climate-Nature Work Programme to start aligning work on biodiversity and climate, exploring how to best use nature-based solutions (not just carbon markets) to both mitigate and adapt to climate impacts.

Fossil fuel phase-out

The shift to clean energy is a boon to developing nations. Energy deficit is linked to poor developmental progress, and the use of firewood and charcoal for cooking and heating is a key form of pollution impacting on people’s health.

Nowhere in the world are both extreme poverty and extreme exposure to dangerous smoke microparticles (PM2.5) more prevalent than sub-Saharan Africa. But at the same time, the rapid fossil-fuel driven industrialisation model has also resulted in massive exposure in south Asia to the same health risks, driven instead by transport and coal plants.

Clearly, the need to provide clean energy for cooking and for economic growth is imperative. Analysis by oil industry analytics firm Rystad demonstrates that under even a moderate global transition, oil- and gas-linked government revenue is highly unlikely to materialise, so a clear focus on leveraging the just transition is critical.

Last year’s COP28 delivered multiple initiatives and commitments to tripling renewables by 2030, enhancing clean cooking in Africa and supporting energy access. What is needed is to see these initiatives underwritten and accelerated, while drawing down on the risky and damaging development of new fossil fuel resources.

There are no guarantees in multilateral negotiations, and there is no doubt that positive outcomes are going to be hard-fought and challenged. There is a good chance that what this COP actually delivers may not be adequate to the task, and there is no doubt that the climate is currently changing faster than we are.

But for all that a myriad countervailing influences and political economy will be brought to bear at COP29. Every incremental win squeezed out of the morass will make a real difference to our futures.

We have the technology, the money and the understanding to turn around the snowballing disaster of climate change. Perhaps this is the moment where we’ll demonstrate the willpower. DM

James Reeler is senior manager: climate action with WWF South Africa.

Categories:

Tags:

DM is much better if you are signed in...

Our Burning Planet

Ambition

Climate finance

Climate and nature

Fossil fuel phase-out