The irony of last years’ COP being hosted by an oil state can only be rivalled by the deforestation of the Amazon rainforest to build a highway to this year’s summit. COP30 will be held in Belem, Brazil, 10th -21st of November, considering that the controversy began before the negotiations did, how effective can we expect this conference to be? Last years’ COP focused on enabling progress towards reduced emissions through financial agreements.
Delegates painstakingly agreed to an annual fund of $300 billion, with an aspirational sum of $1.3 trillion annually by 2035, from developed to developing countries. Whilst a specific budget is progressing from previous years of perfunctory promises, it still falls catastrophically short of what is required. Indias’ delegate Chandi Raina told the committee that ‘This document is little more than an optical illusion.
This....will not address the enormity of the challenge we all face.’ With the somber acceptance that overshooting the Paris target of less than 1.5 degrees of warming is inevitable, COP30 aims to address 6 thematic pillars in the Action Agenda. These focus on energy transitions; stewarding biodiversity, transforming agricultural systems, urban resilience, and fostering social development, to be underpinned by financial and technological commitments. The 6 pillars are divided into 30 key objectives.
It is expected that objective 1 and 4 (tripling renewables and transitioning away from fossil fuels) will be agreed upon this year. Renewables maintained their price advantages over fossil fuels, with solar 41% cheaper and wind 53% cheaper than the lowest-cost carbon alternatives. Moreover, objective 30, information integrity in climate change matters, will likely be accredited, as public and media scrutiny grows with awareness and interest in daily discussions.
Many other objectives, such as land restoration (8) and reforestation (5), are unlikely to result in clear agreements, as stakeholders involved still harbor conflicting opinions. Additionally, we should expect objective 27, artificial intelligence, to be incredibly divisive, and should not hope for a unanimous decision. As the Caribbean attempts to recover from one of the worst Atlantic hurricanes in history, and another record hot year comes to a close, we can anticipate a renewed sense of urgency from policy makers to utilize the conference to review the success of last years’ solutions and improve upon them.
Historically, public outrage and the exploitation of the developing world haven’t tugged at the heart strings of COPs’ most influential players. Nevertheless, these entities can be relied upon to act in their financial interests. Fortunately, as UN Secretary-General Guterres stated ‘Clean energy is smart economicsand the world is following the money’.
Whilst it seems surmounting social and financial pressure may set the stage for a more productive COP; the absence of a US delegation cannot be understated. It is likely that much of this year's negotiations will have to devise energy into damage control of the expected lack of US engagement during Trumps’ term. Moreover, whilst China voluntarily committed to last year's aid budget, the nation cannot be pushed into any greater commitments this year due to its official title as a developing country.
How can significant progress be made when two of the world's largest polluters either wholly exempt themselves or slip through terminology loopholes of the declaration. However, it would be reductionist to suggest slow progress is no progress. The COP conferences are still important forums for change; we can only hope that those attending are not there to save face and ‘ditch their obligations’.
COP29 laid a foundation for serious financial commitments to be enacted this year. It is reasonable to propose that this year's discussions will continue to result in concrete agreements as climate consequences encroach closer to the comforts of our own homes. How fruitful these results would be without the aid of the US remains to be seen.
Any action, if taken, may be a relative improvement but not a realistic way out of the race against the climate clock.