Sci&Tech writer Olly Ashton investigates the shady deals, hypocrisies and key actions of the latest Conference of the Parties

3rd Year Environmental Science
Published
Images by Lloyd Alozie

Petrostate (noun): a small oil-rich country in which institutions are weak and wealth and power are concentrated in the hands of a few. Where better to host the 29th Conference of Parties – where nations, corporations and other global organisations gather to find climate change solutions – than Azerbaijan? Its capital, Baku, where COP29 is located, is branded the ‘Land of Fire’ as a testament to the county’s wealth built on oil. Despite the poorly ironic context of its host, COP manages to be a platform where treaties are signed, promises are made, and (more importantly to the attendees) climate funds are discussed. With many calling it the ‘Finance COP’, all eyes are on where the money comes from and what – or who – it is going to.

COP29 had a controversial start. Oil and gas are a “gift from God” according to the Azerbaijani President, Ilham Aliyev, as he opened the conference, adding that there is mass hypocrisy from the western world surrounding fossil fuels, as Azerbaijan may be a country that sells oil but the USA and Europe are the ones buying it. Later on in the conference, the BBC caught senior COP29 officials secretly discussing, not climate deals, but new fossil fuel deals.

[…] the BBC caught senior COP29 officials secretly discussing […] new fossil fuel deals

Away from the drama of the host nation, many other member parties were keen to set out their climate pledges. Some were less so. Sir Kier Starmer was one of the first world leaders to deliver their countries nationally determined contributions (NDC’s), although not really required until the next COP in Brazil 2025. He announced the UK Government will take on the advice of the Climate Change Committee (CCC) and aim to cut emissions by 81% compared to levels in 1990 by 2035. With the USA fading into a climate denying administration, China has taken on the mantle, aligning with the EU and the West to increase the climate financial pledge. The current financial agreement of global climate funds, standing at $100 billion (USD) a year from ‘developed’ countries to ‘developing’, is set to run out in 2025. At the time of writing, COP29 talks have overrun its deadline, but the most current draft increases the pledge to $250 billion (USD) a year – this may yet change. The number has received criticism from every side possible. The Climate Action Network (CAN), which consists of over 1800 climate activist organisations, has called for $5 trillion a year while the UN-backed Finance for Climate Action 2022 report calls for around $1 trillion per year from the global north. These numbers are meant to help developing nations recover from the damage of climate change as well as adapt and mitigate the effects. Tasneem Essop, the Executive Director of CAN International argues the means to do so is  “through tax justice, wealth and polluter taxes, and by redirecting public finance away from destructive subsidies.” Since 2015, the UK has given £20 billion more to support fossil fuels than renewable energy producers. If Essop’s plan for climate financing were to be acted on, that would need to change.

Some European negotiators have told Reuters they are unhappy with the size of the fund increasing without an increasing number of contributing nations. China and Brazil are still considered ‘developing’ nations and so aren’t required to allocate funds despite representing nearly 20% of global GDP together

Notable absences were found in COP29. Some nations have made less of an effort to show up, let alone be involved; Argentina, who in 2023 elected far-right Javier Milei (a proud climate denier, calling climate change a “socialist lie”), withdrew their negotiators three days into climate talks. Since overseeing the landmark Paris Agreement in 2015, France has not sent a senior representative to COP, a result of remarks made by the Azerbaijan President surrounding Frances’s control of its ex-colonies. Straining already thin relationships due to French Armenian support, it begs the question of whether other future climate talks will be hindered by political interests.

Some nations have made less of an effort to show up, let alone be involved […]

Regarding Armenia, Greta Thunberg, one of the most defining faces of global climate action, is missing from the scene, instead attending a COP29 boycott in Armenia because of Azerbaijan’s actions towards ethnic Armenians. She has told the Associated Press that Azerbaijan is “a repressive, occupying state, which has committed ethnic cleansing, and which is continuing cracking down on Azerbaijani civil society.”

The actions and absences of COP29 are salient, but the host has been the main talking point for the preceding weeks. Negotiations are a way for parties to get the best deal possible, but in climate talks, no one can come out on top as the people really impacted by these negotiations are not governments,but those living with the threat of climate change, and with a new president of the US starting next year, the danger posed by climate inaction is ever growing.


Enjoyed this article? Read more from Sci&Tech here:

World Health Organisation and TikTok to Collaborate for Science-Based Wellbeing

Re-imagining the Future of Psychedelic Medicine

Your Brain On… Exercise

Comments