“Banknotes” scattered on the ground, “minerals” lying on the ground and a banner about a missing kitten named “Ambition” – these are images from the protests during the ongoing COP29 climate summit in the capital of Azerbaijan.
Manifestations of activists from all over the world are, on the one hand, a highlight of climate summits, and on the other hand, an important element of the meetings. Because this is one of the rare occasions when activists are in the same place as company presidents and state leaders. But at the end of the summit, everyone's attention turns to what was actually negotiated. A day before the official end, it's still a big unknown.
The summit is expected to end on Friday, November 22. And for it to be any kind of success, at the end it should adopt a document to which all delegations from almost every country in the world will agree. Dramatic plot twists and negotiations several hours or even several days after the official end of climate summits are not uncommon.
However, in recent years, the gap between the positions of certain countries and groups of countries has been growing from summit to summit. On Thursday morning, a day before the official end of the summit, the European Union delegation assessed the proposal for the final document as “uneven, unacceptable and unsuitable for further work.” Small island countries – particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change and therefore having a loud voice at summits – recognized that “there is still a lot of work to be done.” Bolivia's delegation alleged that developed countries were “shockingly” avoiding their obligation to support poorer countries.
Climate summit – what is it about?
COP climate summits have been held for over 30 years. The entire process assumes that climate change is a global problem and can only be solved through international cooperation.
The greatest success so far is the adoption of the Paris Agreement at the COP21 summit in 2015. In this document, the whole world agreed to act to keep global temperature rises to well below two degrees Celsius, preferably at one and a half degrees. This number is not accidental – a level of one and a half degrees of warming is considered “moderately safe.” And so it means more unstable, dangerous weather, dangerous heat waves and stronger floods. But beyond a degree and a half, and especially two degrees, the effects of climate change will become so severe that it will become difficult or impossible to adapt to them.
We are already dangerously close to the level of one and a half degrees – the average level of warming in recent years is already about 1.3 degrees. Exceeding two degrees of warming may trigger “irreversible” effects
The Paris Agreement sets goals for the entire world, but global climate policy does not end with its adoption. Subsequent summits analyze what and how to do to stop climate change, how to adapt to it and how to pay for it. The latter topic is the main subject of negotiations at COP29 in Azerbaijan.
Money, money, money
In the 2015 Paris Agreement, the world agreed not only to stop rising temperatures, but also that developed countries should play a major role in providing financial assistance to developing countries. On the one hand, this is supposed to be an expression of justice (richer countries are responsible for most of the greenhouse gases, and the poorer ones suffer disproportionately from the increase in temperature), and on the other hand, it is also an act in their own interest (because to stop climate change, all countries must cut emissions).
Years ago it was established that from 2020, PLN 100 billion would go to developing countries dollars (not only grants, but also loans and private funds). This level was reached only in 2022, and a new target is to be in force from 2025. Developing countries say it has to be drastically higher to meet their needs – even trillions (thousands of billions) dollars.
Because it is the main topic of talks in Baku, COP29 is called the “financial summit”. – Developed countries can stop the suffering of millions of people if they fulfill their obligations – argued the Bolivian delegation at the conference. The climate financing arrangements, and everything else, should be included in the final document, which must be adopted with the consent of all countries.
But the proposal presented to the delegations on Thursday included neither a specific amount nor even a range of financial support from 2025 – the determination of which is the main task of the conference. The proposal states that the fund will amount to “[x] billions.”
– There is no specific amount stated in the proposal. So we are negotiating about nothing, said the head of the Colombian delegation, Environment Minister Susana Muhamad, on Thursday. – Countries like mine are suffering from climate change today. We have just experienced floods that caused great destruction. Who will pay for it, since we are already in debt and have a high debt servicing cost? – she said.
Most developed countries did not propose specific amounts for the new climate fund. The European Union mentioned 200-300 billions of dollars a year, but developing countries called this scale of support a “joke”. In their opinion, it should be several times more, even 1.3 trillion.
Who is “developed”?
One of the most controversial issues is not only the amount itself, but also who will contribute to it. Theoretically, the money should go from “developed” to “developing” countries. However, which country belongs to which group was written down in the climate convention more than 30 years ago.
The countries obliged to support include the European Union, the USA and Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. However, there is no China, Singapore, or the Persian Gulf countries. There are ongoing discussions at subsequent summits that the economic situation of these countries has changed dramatically over the last decades and it is difficult to consider them as countries in need of financial support.
The countries most in need are watching these disputes. – I don't care in which category of countries the potential donors are. Our and other countries really need this money! – appealed Minister Susana Muhamad.
The proposal for an agreement at the COP29 summit proposed the possibility of voluntarily joining the list of donors, but without specific details. Some countries – China, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates – already provide financial support to developing countries and these amounts could be counted towards the fund being debated at the climate conference.
What about the United States?
The key country is the United States – the largest economy and historically the largest emitter of greenhouse gases. However, a delegation from the Joe Biden administration is taking part in the summit in Baku, and Donald Trump will take over the White House from January.
His victory a few days before the start of the summit in Baku cast a shadow over the negotiations. Now any promises made by Americans face the prospect not only that they will not be fulfilled, but also that the US will probably withdraw from the Paris Agreement altogether.
In his first term, Donald Trump withdrew the US from the Paris Agreement (Joe Biden reversed this decision), now he will probably do it again, and there is even talk of leaving the UN Climate Convention (which is the foundation of this agreement). According to experts, it would be an “earthquake” for the multilateral system, the climate system and the UN in general.
Without the United States, countries may find that they will not financially support others in the green transition or make efforts at home. On the other hand, when Trump first withdrew the country from the climate agreement, no other country followed suit. Now others may see the gap left by the Americans not only as a problem, but also as an opportunity to take their place on the international stage. In this context, the most frequently mentioned is, of course, China, which is turning green technologies into the engine of its economy.
While global climate negotiations seem to be at a very difficult moment, a breath of optimism during the climate summit (and the parallel G20 meeting) comes from the declarations of some individual countries. This week on the occasion of the G20 summit, the president of Indonesia he declaredthat the country intends to close its coal-fired power plants within 15 years, build a huge amount of renewable energy sources and could achieve climate neutrality before 2050. Today coal and gas are responsible for 80 percent of electricity production there.
The UK has unveiled its new climate target – cutting emissions by 81 per cent by 2035. Country I want to be a “global leader” of clean technologies, which it sees as “the places of the future”. Brazil also presented its updated plan, which will reduce emissions by between 59 and 67 percent by 2035. The country already gets its electricity mainly from hydroelectric power plants, but it has a lot of work to do when it comes to emissions from agriculture (including deforestation).