Want to keep up with climate news, law, and policy? Sign up for the Green Economy Law Monthly Newsletter here.

On November 24, 2024, COP29 concluded in Baku, Azerbaijan with a climate finance agreement condemned as a “travesty of justice” by some negotiators, both for the insufficiency of funds pledged and for the manner in which the deal was rammed through at the 11th hour.

Unsurprisingly, few success stories came out of this year’s COP. Nevertheless, below, we’ve compiled COP29’s five (very modest) achievements and five of its most notable failures.

SUCCESSES

1.     $300 Billion a Year by 2035 in Climate Finance

Developed nations pledged to provide “at least” $300 billion a year by 2035 in climate financing to developing countries. The money is meant to help the countries least responsible for the global climate emergency cope with its costly consequences.

This is a step up from the $100 billion agreed at COP26 in 2021, but still falls well short of the $1.3 trillion that developing nations say they actually need from rich countries to protect their citizens and transition their economies away from fossil fuels. Plus, the deal reached fails to consider inflation, so the amount pledged only appears to have tripled.

2.     Rules for Carbon Trading

Trading in carbon credits, permitted under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, was once thought to be a quick and relatively cheap way for countries to cut their emissions. In theory, a polluter struggling to meet their commitment to cut emissions in time could finance, for example, a large-scale reforestation project, ensuring overall progress was still being made. In practice, the market in carbon credits remained unregulated, allowing wil proliferation of fraud and leading to the sale of largely worthless carbon offsets that did not actually result in any mitigation or reduction in emissions.

But at long last, governments at COP29 have agreed on rules for creating, trading and registering emission reductions and removals as carbon credits, completing implementation of the Paris Agreement. While concerns remain, and all of the technical details are yet to be sorted out, the market’s anticipated roll-out in 2025 could inject some badly-needed funds into climate mitigation and emission-capping measures.

3.     Countries Announce Ambitious NDC Targets for 2035

A coalition of 30 countries, including the UK, the EU and Canada announced tougher targets for their 2035 nationally determined contributions (NDCs) – commitments made by countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions - aiming to accelerate emissions reduction to the level consistent with keeping the global temperature rise within the 1.5°C Paris goal.

Given that scientists now say the 1.5°C climate target is “deader than a doornail”, and several countries involved also continue issuing new oil and gas exploration licences, one might be justified in greeting this announcement with skepticism. However, too little and too late as this commitment may be, the reductions pledged – if implemented – could still prove vital in keeping global temperatures as low as possible from the catastrophic 2.7°C rise currently forecasted.

4.     UK Pledges Funds for Forests

The UK announced it will provide GBP 239 million in funds to Colombia, Indonesia and other forest-rich nations to “support the critical role of forests as ‘carbon sinks.’”

However, of the amount committed, only GBP 3 million represents funds that the British government will pay over directly to the UN to help countries protect and restore their forests. Of the remainder, GBP 48 million “will go to blended finance to unlock private investment in sustainable forest enterprises”, while GBP 188 million will go to the Scaling Climate Action by Lowering Emissions, a forest carbon markets development programme.

5.     China Stepping Up?

With the dispiriting prospect of a second Trump presidency looming over the conference, the chief negotiator of “one of the most powerful countries at the COP” is tentatively putting his faith in China to take a “more central role” in future climate negotiations – or so, apparently, he confided to a BBC reporter.

According to the report, China’s negotiating style was “markedly different to [the] previous year,” with a surprise disclosure that, since 2016, the country has already paid $24 billion in climate finance to developing countries.

The hope among some parties is that China will step into the power vacuum Trump’s isolationist and climate-hostile policies will likely create. China may use this positioning to increase its international influence. Further, even though it remains the planet’s biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, some experts say that China’s emissions have either already peaked or will peak in 2025 – a hopeful sign that the country may be serious about establishing a leading role in green transition.

FAILURES

1.     $1 Trillion Funding Gap

Rich countries offered stiff resistance to the $1.3 trillion a year in grants and low-interest loans that nations on the sharp end of climate change demanded to help reach the $2.4 trillion needed to cut greenhouse gases and adapt infrastructure. In the end, only $300 billion was pledged - a figure that various commentators referred to as “abysmally poor” and “a joke”.

Dubbed a “global Ponzi scheme” by Oxfam International, the agreement preserves the $1.3 trillion sum as a “target”, but allows the majority of the funds to be “mobilised” from a variety of sources, including loans from private investors and yet-to-be agreed new levies on aviation and shipping.

Adding insult to the injury of inadequate funding, the deal struck left many with a bitter taste in their mouths. Oil-rich nations, aided and abetted by the host of the talks – Azerbaijan, itself a major fossil fuel producer – did all in their power to prevaricate and obstruct, before the COP president (Azerbaijan’s environment minister) gavelled through a “hedged, loose and half-hearted” settlement, over India’s last-minute objections.

2.     No Special Allocation for Developing Nations

Of the funds pledged, nothing has been reserved for countries most in need of support – those that are poorest and most vulnerable to the climate crisis. The Alliance of Small Island States and the Least Developed Countries groups fought hard for a bigger slice of the money, at one point walking out of the negotiations to protest the inadequate offers made by rich nations. To no avail, alas: the most vulnerable states will have to share what little finance is made available with growing economies, such as India.

3.     Failure to Endorse Fossil Fuel Phase-Out

One key success of last year’s conference was that the final text all parties signed included a vital commitment to transition away from fossil fuels. Unfortunately, this year’s COP failed to follow through: the UAE Consensus, a document containing the commitment in question, was not endorsed by this year’s conference, with Saudi Arabia and its allies mounting a successful effort to sideline any discussion on the issue.

4.     Saudi Arabia Behaves Badly.

It was clear from the outset of this conference that Saudi Arabia was going to do everything in its power to roll back COP28’s pledge to transition away from fossil fuels. From obstruction and “blatant and brazen” opposition to affirming the pledge, the country’s delegation was described as a “wrecking ball” at this year’s negotiations.

Its determined efforts went as far as unilaterally modifying the official negotiating text of the just transition work program. While such documents are usually circulated in non-editable PDFs, this text contained two edits made by Basel Alsubaity from the Saudi ministry of energy; one of which attempted to delete a section encouraging parties “to consider just transition pathways” in their various climate strategies and commitments.

While the tampering was quickly discovered – to outrage from other delegates and campaigners – Saudi intransigence carried the day. The part of the agreement dealing with transition away from fossil fuels was postponed until next year.

5.     Red Carpet For Fossil Fuel Interests

The president of Azerbaijan kicked off the festivities with the pronouncement that oil and gas were “a gift from God.” One of the senior officials in charge of the conference was filmed arranging meetings to discuss prospective fossil fuel deals. It appears the hosts of this year’s COP started as they meant to go on.

The presence of fossil fuel interests at the summit could only be described as “massive.” According to Kick Big Polluters Out, at least 1,773 lobbyists were in attendance, more than “all the delegates from the 10 most climate vulnerable nations combined.” The Azerbaijani government further rolled out the red carpet, directly inviting “132 oil and gas company bosses and staff” as its special guests.

I suppose it’s too much to hope they were all there to discuss disgorging some of the $1 trillion a year in profit that the oil and gas industry made, wrecking the planet over the last half a century?

Please contact our firm at 647-725-4308 or info@greeneconomylaw.com for legal assistance in connection with climate policy or green business matters.