(Bloomberg) -- Countries are set to work through the night at the UN COP29 summit in a bid to resolve deep differences over how to scale up international climate finance, after an initial proposal sparked widespread anger.
The draft agreements presented early Thursday by host Azerbaijan left core details unresolved — including how much money could be summoned to help poor countries contend with climate change and where it would come from. They also included scant references to moving away from fossil fuels, a main cause of global warming.
Tensions spilled over in a five-hour meeting as more than 60 countries took turns blasting the potential accord. Many developed nations and small vulnerable countries — from the US to Panama and Vanuatu — insisted a final deal needed to acknowledge a landmark pledge from last year’s COP in Dubai to boost renewable power, increase efficiency and transition away from fossil fuels.
Developing nations including Colombia and India insisted that affordable finance was a key to address climate-induced disasters and scale up their own emission-cutting ambition, which is critical to keeping warming below 1.5C from pre-industrial levels.
That “1.5 is not just a number,” said Vanuatu’s negotiator Abraham Nasak. For small-island developing states, “it is a line in the sand necessary to ensure our survival.”
The nearly 200 countries gathered in Baku have one chief goal: boosting climate finance for developing countries, which need to transition their economies to net zero and build resilience to the worsening impacts of global warming.
A day before the conference was due to close, there appeared to be little common ground. While poorer nations lambasted rich peers such as the US and the European Union for not specifying how much money they’re willing to offer, the latter group returned fire by saying the potential agreement fell far short of what is needed for their emissions-cutting ambitions.
Running Overtime
With the summit divided on key issues, talks could run well into the weekend. COP29’s lead negotiator told delegates to brace for a new text late Friday, coinciding with the conference’s scheduled end date.
The initial draft plan appeared to set a funding floor of $1 trillion a year coming from a range of sources going beyond those that count toward an existing $100 billion target that expires next year. It presented two options on how to get to that goal — one giving countries time to ramp up to the increased sum and another seeking that amount annually from 2025 to 2035.
Thorny questions over the scale of the finance — including how much would come in the form of affordable support, with grants or deeply discounted loans — were left unresolved.
Sign up for the Green Daily newsletter for comprehensive coverage of the climate summit right in your inbox.
The draft deal also opened the door for wealthier nations that aren’t currently obligated as donors, such as China and Saudi Arabia, to offer support. But both countries made clear they opposed any changes to a decades-old program that divides nations by their status as developing or developed.
An earlier version that was drafted — but not released — had set a $1.3 trillion overall climate finance goal, with developed countries on the hook to provide around $500 billion of funding on near-grant terms, according to a person familiar with the matter, who asked not to be named because negotiations were private.
Saudi Stance
Saudi Arabia’s negotiator Albara Tawfiq, speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, referenced those numbers, insisting they should be the quantum of climate financing. Riyadh has also opposed reiterating the fossil fuel pledge from last year, which is part of a process known as the global stocktake.
The kingdom warned that Arab countries “will not accept any text that targets specific sectors, including fossil fuels.”
Norway’s climate minister, Tore O. Sandvik, pushed back, saying the fossil fuel commitment needs to be “more than a piece of paper.”
The various disagreements are putting the entire deal in the balance.
John Podesta, senior adviser to the US president for international climate policy, called the draft deal “completely inadequate.” Without commitment on mitigation, he told Bloomberg News, “there’s no way to bring this all together.”
--With assistance from Alfred Cang.
(Updates with details from meetings from the third paragraph.)
©2024 Bloomberg L.P.