The climate talks agreed a $300 billion finance deal. Not everyone is happy about it.
The COP29 climate talks in Baku, Azerbaijan, finally ended around 5.30am on Sunday morning, almost 36 hours after they had been originally scheduled to close. The good news was that the negotiators representing about 200 countries agreed a deal on climate finance: flows of capital from developed countries to low and middle-income countries, to help them cut emissions and adapt to a warming world. The bad news was that many countries felt the amount agreed – $300 billion a year by 2035 – was much too low. India and other developing countries had suggested a sum of $1 trillion or more a year was needed.
Ed Crooks, now back home after attending the talks, is joined by Energy Gang regulars Melissa Lott, the partner general manager for energy technologies at Microsoft, and Amy Harder, the executive editor of the energy and climate news service Cipher. They discuss the outcomes from the negotiations: what was agreed and what it means. We also hear from Amy’s colleague Anca Gurzu, who was following all the action at the talks in Baku.
This conference was billed as “the finance COP”. If it had failed to agree a deal on finance, that would have been disastrous for the international effort to tackle climate change through the UNFCCC. But with a deal offering so much less than the amounts that developing countries had been hoping for, where does COP29 mean for the global energy transition? And as we look ahead to the crucial COP30 in Brazil a year from now, can we expect the countries of the world to commit to more ambitious goals for cutting emissions?
See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
