ECO 3, SB60
| It’s Urgent: Adapt or face the worsening consequences Once again we are in Bonn and hearing testimonies of how heat waves, storms, and floods are ravaging the most climate-vulnerable countries. It is clear as day that we are now in adapt or go bust territory. Nonetheless, ECO dares to start its adaptation coverage on a positive note! Parties largely agree that the workshops on the development of indicators for the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience should be planned effectively taking all contributions into account. So let’s learn from the GLaSS Programme and get the modalities for the UAE-Belem Work Programme sorted before we leave Bonn. Parties should establish a clear roadmap until COP30, detailing the criteria for the identification and development of indicators for adaptation action and support. This two-year process should ensure coherence and linkage with the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on Climate Finance to be agreed at COP29. In that sense, it is especially urgent to include indicators on the Means of Implementation (MoI) in the UAE-Belem Work Programme. Parties must also revisit the National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), focusing on assessing progress, identifying gaps, and mobilising support. Otherwise we might find ourselves repeating the frustrating experience of SB58, where Parties could not agree on MoI and made no progress on NAPs. We cannot afford to waste yet another year without making any meaningful headway on adaptation. ECO strongly supports the COP28 decision to emphasise locally-led and community-based climate adaptation, and urges recognition of the centrality of these initiatives in achieving the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA). A contextual methodology must be developed to operationalise and measure the effectiveness of locally-led adaptation (LLA) strategies and activities. Additionally, climate impacts on ecosystems cannot be neglected any longer – as ecosystem function is key to building resilience for many of the most climate-vulnerable communities. This is closely linked to locally-led adaptation. Taking full advantage of local and lived knowledge of the environment is crucial for the success of adaptation efforts, as well as in avoiding maladaptation that arises from the limited inclusion of local stakeholders and preventing further loss and damage. Despite frontline communities bearing the brunt of climate impacts, only a small fraction of international climate finance reaches local levels, limiting the effectiveness of adaptation efforts. Decision-making often excludes local expertise and hinders real adaptation. Therefore, climate finance and technical support should be directed primarily through locally-led approaches. Finally, ECO calls on Parties at SB60 to initiate efforts to redefine and restructure the adaptation negotiations architecture in order to address the fragmentation of the adaptation workstream. Establishing a single, permanent agenda item for adaptation would be more effective and cost efficient, and would save both negotiators and ECO from running from room to room only to hear the same people saying the same things. |
| How to make COP29 truly be the “COP of Peace” Today, the COP29 Presidency is hosting a dialogue on “Peace and Climate: Enhancing International Cooperation for Enabling Resilience to the Most Vulnerable.” This follows recent announcements that COP29 in Baku will focus on the “advancement of the peace agenda.” With violent conflicts raging across the world, the links between peace and climate justice have become ever more pertinent. Military spending exacerbates the climate crisis in three significant ways: – Firstly, an increase in military expenditure positively correlates with increased emissions, as militaries and their supply chains rely heavily on fossil fuels without any feasible prospects of the sector fully switching to renewable energy. – Secondly, it diverts valuable resources away from the urgent needs of climate mitigation, adaptation, and addressing loss and damage. The wealthiest nations, identified as Annex II in UN climate negotiations, allocate 30 times more to their military budgets than their provisions of climate finance to the most vulnerable countries. Similarly, lower income countries also spend significant proportions of their public finance on the military sector – to the detriment of climate adaptation and mitigation, as well as the well-being of their population. – Thirdly, ever-rising military spending creates a more insecure world, hampering diplomacy, trust, and cooperation, and leading to more conflicts and wars with devastating consequences for people and the planet. With the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) for post-2025 climate finance set to be adopted at COP29, developed countries must fulfill their climate finance obligations by dramatically scaling up provision of finance to developing countries. This can in part be done by ending fossil fuel subsidies and reallocating military spending to climate change mitigation, adaptation, loss and damage, and a just transition. Global military expenditure surged to an unprecedented $2.4 trillion in 2023 — the highest level ever recorded and the steepest year-on-year rise since 2009. Meanwhile, Simon Stiell, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, recently emphasised the need to mobilise that very same amount to achieve global climate change goals. A global reduction in military spending would not just reduce emissions but would also free up resources urgently needed to confront the diverse challenges posed by the climate crisis. Furthermore, given the structural under-funding of adaptation, just 3% of annual global military spending could provide $70 billion in funding for climate resilient development – almost three times the amount that developed countries were willing to provide to developing countries for adaptation in 2021. If the COP29 presidency is serious about making the Baku climate talks a “Peace COP,” it’s time to recognise that demilitarisation and military expenditure reallocation are central to achieving climate justice and peace. |
| New North Sea gas on collision course with North Star Yesterday morning climate activists boarded a gas rig in the Dutch North Sea, around 20 kilometres northwest of the German island of Borkum. The Greenpeace activists occupied the rig for over 9 hours, preventing the platform from being fixed and installed, holding banners saying ‘No new gas’ and ‘Gas Zerstört’ (‘Gas destroys’). ‘Rich countries must lead by setting 1.5-aligned fossil fuel phase-out plans in NDCs’ was probably too long for their banners. But it’s the logical continuation, and this clearly is what ECO expects from Parties. Especially from countries like Germany and the Netherlands, who profited for decades from fossil fuel extraction that fueled the climate crisis. ECO hopes we can leave this hypocrisy behind and put the ‘transition away’ words from Dubai into action. New gas extraction in the North Sea means collision with the North Star. The IEA has said it for years: there’s no room for new oil and gas extraction, if the world is to keep 1.5°C within reach. New research from University College London and the International Institute for Sustainable Development makes this even more evident, concluding that new fossil fuel projects are not needed to meet the world’s energy needs, under scenarios that limit global heating under 1.5°C. ECO calls on rich countries to take responsibility for preventing further climate breakdown. They should take the lead from the brave climate activists and ban all new fossil fuel projects. At the same time, the NCQG offers Parties a unique opportunity to hold the ones who profited from causing the climate crisis accountable. For ECO it’s a no-brainer to apply the polluter pays principle and make the fossil fuel industry pay up towards the needed contributions for the NCQG. Meanwhile on the North Sea, activists paused their protest after over 8 hours, when the Dutch highest general administrative court ruled that the gas extraction cannot proceed until a hearing on June 12th. This comes after a preliminary injunction was requested on Friday by Deutsche Umwelthilfe, Greenpeace Netherlands and others, urgently requesting to suspend the drilling activities. Whether it is occupying a gas rig or fighting in court, people are no longer silent; they are standing up to the fossil fuel industry — unlike their governments. |
| Light and shadow by the IEA – Close the 3000GW Renewables Gap ECO was pleased to read the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) new report on the renewable energy ambitions of 150 countries in light of the goal agreed at COP28 of tripling renewable electric capacity worldwide by 2030 from 2022 levels. Among the key findings: Only 14 governments have quantified their domestic renewable power objectives for 2030 in their NDCs; if implemented, they would add up to a mere 12% of the tripling target, most of this from China. Even after aggregating the data from all kinds of non-NDC domestic announcements and targets, the IEA finds we’re only on track to reach 8,000 GW of renewable energy capacity by 2030 – 3,000 GW less than the over 11,000 GW we need to stay in line with 1.5°C. But there is some good news: actual deployment of renewables has been growing much faster than the ambition of governments (though most of this is in the OECD countries, China and India). Governments must urgently close this gap, by making accelerated renewables deployment goals part of their next round of NDCs, enabling some level of international scientific review on their adequacy. The IEA examination of both existing and likely new policies finds that China, Germany, the US, India, and Spain are delivering the bulk of the current action when it comes to renewables deployment; trailing behind particularly are Sub-Saharan Africa and the OPEC countries. ECO notes that the IEA falls somewhat short on its recommendations for what governments should do both on adopting binding domestic policies to help reach the tripling goal as well as on assisting poor countries appropriately. The IEA does suggest a few financial measures, from concessional loans to government renewable uptake guarantees, but fails to even mention the need for significantly enhanced public funding from the richer countries to help poorer countries tap their renewables potential. ECO has strongly supported the global tripling target but has called for it to be broken down to national targets in line with different capabilities and historic responsibilities. OECD countries, as a group, should unconditionally agree to grow their renewable capacity fourfold by 2030 and commit to a drastic upscaling of public funding for renewables infrastructure investments in poorer developing countries, to help move the world towards a fully renewable electricity sector by 2035. A good place to make a start on this is at the G7 leaders’ summit in Italy next week. |
––
Download file: http://ECO-06.05.2024.pdf