Cop29 so far: the good and bad news

Gradually, then suddenly is how Ernest Hemingway described going bankrupt. The climate crisis could be on a similar trajectory.

“It took a century for the globe to warm the first 0.3°C, but the world has warmed by 1°C in just the last 60 years,” says Ed Hawkins, a professor of climate science at the University of Reading.

Read more:
Cop29: How fast is Earth warming?

Record-high emissions of greenhouse gas from fossil-fired power plants, cars and boilers mean that our planet is heating faster than at any time in at least the last half a billion years. This blistering temperature rise appeared to accelerate further in 2023 and 2024, threatening sudden shifts in the Earth system – like the collapse of the Amazon rainforest – that could transform our world.

It was a fear of triggering such tipping points that motivated signatories of the 2015 Paris agreement, particularly delegates from small island states, to strive to limit long-term warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Some experts believe that humanity has left cutting emissions too late to stop global heating at this threshold.

Read more:
We passed 1.5°C of human-caused warming this year (just not as the Paris agreement measures it)

So, what hopes rest on Cop29, the latest UN climate summit in Azerbaijan?

This roundup of The Conversation’s climate coverage comes from our award-winning weekly climate action newsletter. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed.

During each of these conferences, academics publish a major assessment of humanity’s carbon emissions over the past year. Here’s what they found.

Fossil fuel emissions are still rising

Countries agreed to transition away from fossil fuels, the overwhelming cause of climate change, at Cop28 in Dubai, which was the last time the world met to discuss global heating. A year on, the dominance of coal, oil and gas has not shifted.

“CO₂ emissions from fossil fuels continue to increase, year on year,” says Pep Canadell, chief research scientist of CSIRO Environment, and his team who led the assessment.

Read more:
Global carbon emissions inch upwards in 2024 despite progress on EVs, renewables and deforestation

They predict that humanity will emit 37.4 billion tonnes of CO₂ in 2024. Coal emissions are close to stagnant (up 0.2%), though India saw strong growth.

Gas (up 2.4%) and oil emissions (0.9%) drove this year’s peak, as international aviation, a big oil consumer, nearly recovered to pre-pandemic levels. Drought in the Amazon and unprecedented fires in Canada (strengthened by El Niño, a warm phase in a natural cycle centred on the Pacific Ocean which affects the global climate) account for land use emissions that were slightly higher than the last decade’s average – 4.2 billion tonnes, or 10% of all emissions from human activity in 2024.

There are glimmers of good news amid these findings.

The growth of fossil CO₂ emissions is slowing: they grew 1.1% in 2023 and 0.8% this year. Norway, New Zealand and South Korea joined the US and 17 other countries (mostly in the EU) whose emissions are falling. Their secret? More renewable electricity powering more electric vehicles and heat pumps.

China, the world’s largest emitter, installed more solar panels last year than the US has in its entire history. China’s emissions could even plateau in 2024.

China installed more solar panels last year than the US ever has.
Jenson/Shutterstock

Meanwhile, emissions from land use (think farming and forestry) have plateaued, after a decade of steady growth.

“This shows humanity is tackling deforestation and the growth of fossil CO₂ emissions is slowing,” the team say.

“However, this is not enough to put global emissions on a downward trajectory.”

No more distractions

The Earth system is working hard to absorb these emissions and balance out their effects. The strain is evident in a vast network of ocean currents called the great ocean conveyor belt, which redistributes the excess heat humans have introduced.

Melting ice in the Arctic is dumping freshwater into the north Atlantic portion of this conveyor, diluting the regional contrast in water salinity that is its engine. The current is slowing down, and may be more sluggish now than at any time during the last millennium.

Read more:
Meltwater from Greenland and the Arctic is weakening ocean circulation, speeding up warming down south

“It could be 30% weaker by 2040. That’s 20 years earlier than initially projected,” say Laurie Menviel and Gabriel Pontes at UNSW Sydney’s Climate Change Research Centre. “This means we have even less time to stabilise the climate.”

Scientists are reporting the consequences of inaction with a mounting sense of urgency. If the UN process for brokering a limit to global heating is failing, what needs to change?

Arctic ice is rapidly melting.
Michal Balada/Shutterstock

One proposal is to ban authoritarian states that sell fossil fuels, like Azerbaijan, from hosting future summits.

Read more:
Authoritarian fossil fuel states keep hosting climate conferences – how do these regimes operate and what do they want?

Even in supposedly healthy democracies, however, corporate lobbyists are allowed to treat these conferences as networking events. And the influence of big business on climate policy doesn’t end at the convention centre door.

Read more:
Thousands of corporate lobbyists are at the UN climate summit in Baku. But what exactly is ’lobbying’ and how does it work?

“In the UK, briefing by a thinktank linked to fossil fuel money helped the government draft recent anti-protest laws aimed at climate activists,” says Christina Toenshoff, an assistant professor of European politics and political economy at Leiden University.

Donald Trump’s return as US president dims the prospects of international collaboration. His brash climate scepticism also provides cover for people who profit from the climate crisis by making them appear reasonable. Annie Snelson-Powell, an expert in corporate sustainability at the University of Bath, suggests that ExxonMobil chief executive Darren Woods may have had ulterior motives when he recently urged president-elect Trump to honour the Paris agreement.

Read more:
US politics has long shaped global climate action and science – how much will Trump’s opposition matter?

Read more:
Why big oil and gas firms might want the Paris agreement to survive

It’s important not to get distracted. The problem has remained the same since this process began, says Lisa Vanhala, a professor of political science at UCL. The countries that got rich carbonising the atmosphere must compensate the countries that were impoverished, and help them decarbonise and adapt to a deteriorating climate.

Read more:
Is Cop29 a waste of time? Not if rich countries commit to paying for climate damage in developing world

While it may seem expedient to deny it in the short term, there is nothing gained by downplaying political reality – as the UK prime minister, Keir Starmer, recently did when he said his country could cut its emissions without an upheaval.

“Tackling climate change effectively requires a shift to a more equal society, where happiness is prioritised over consumption,” say Sam Hampton (University of Oxford) and Lorraine Whitmarsh (University of Bath) who study low-carbon lifestyle change.

Read more:
Keir Starmer says the UK can decarbonise without disruption – that’s neither true nor helpful

“It necessitates radical behavioural changes, particularly from the wealthiest, and policies that enable these changes.” Läs mer…

Climate crisis: what Trump can (and can’t) do

Donald Trump will return to lead the world’s largest historical emitter of greenhouse gas.

Neither Trump nor Kamala Harris made the climate crisis a prominent feature of their campaigns, during an election cycle in which America was pounded by weather disasters. Hurricane Helene, which struck in late September was supercharged by an abnormally hot Atlantic Ocean and killed 232 people across the south-eastern US.

Nearly half of those deaths occurred in the swing state of North Carolina, which moved decisively behind Trump. Voters in the state’s still devastated west lacked polling stations yesterday and cast their ballots in tents.

Scientists say the Earth system is balanced on a knife edge: the carbon-rich Amazon rainforest is drying out, a North Atlantic current that redistributes ocean heat is slowing down. If either collapses, it would tip the climate into deeper chaos.

This roundup of The Conversation’s climate coverage comes from our award-winning weekly climate action newsletter. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed.

Drill, baby, drill?

Democrats lost in America’s former manufacturing heartland, the midwestern states that now comprise the “Rust Belt” and the party’s erstwhile “Blue Wall”. A river choked with industrial waste caught fire here in 1969 and prompted a wave of federal regulation that culminated in the founding of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by the Nixon administration. The EPA regulates climate pollution with rules that limit emissions from power plants and vehicles, two of the country’s biggest CO₂ sources.

EPA regulation has succeeded in curbing coal power over the last decade.
Matthew G Eddy/Shutterstock

“The policy proposals outlined by Donald Trump and the thinktanks advising his campaign would turn back the tide on America’s bedrock environmental laws,” say environmental policy experts Stephen Lezak (University of Oxford) and Barbara Haya (University of California, Berkeley).

According to a rightwing manifesto attached to the Trump campaign (though not formally endorsed by Trump himself), that could include “a whole-of-government unwinding” in which the EPA’s “structure and mission [are] greatly circumscribed”.

“Trump has promised to fire experts in government, install loyalists in their place, and adopt a ‘drill, baby, drill’ mentality,” say Lezak and Haya.

If he chooses to enact the Project 2025 manifesto, as it’s known, Trump would also cut funding for emergency preparedness and so risk lives unnecessarily during mounting disasters.

He would also “dismantle” and “privatise” much of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), a government agency that has studied the weather, monitored the ocean and managed the protection of endangered species since 1970.

Trump’s possible plans for NOAA indicate his wider climate agenda according to David Hastings Dunn, a professor of international politics at the University of Birmingham who has studied Project 2025.

“NOAA is described as ‘one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry’, and the ideological response is to abolish the scientific body that produces evidence that substantiates the impact of climate change,” he says.

IRAte

Trump could choose to scrap or fatally undermine the 2015 Paris agreement and the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

In his first term, Trump took America out of the Paris agreement, which committed countries to limiting global warming to well below 2°C. Climate scientist Mark Maslin (UCL) worries that a second US exit – or a full withdrawal from the UN climate negotiations themselves (another round starts next week in Azerbaijan) – could spur an international race to the bottom.

“Pulling out one of the world superpowers from negotiations to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions is a big deal as it allows other countries to slow their own decarbonisation and blame the US instead of their own lack of ambition,” he says via email.

Donald Trump and Mike Pence at a UN climate conference in New York, September 2019.
AC NewsPhoto/Alamy Stock Photo

Hailed as the greatest climate achievement of the Biden White House, IRA extended subsidies for building renewable energy until 2032. These subsidies generally take the form of federal tax breaks for investors in wind and solar farms. The biggest beneficiary? Banks, according to research by Durham University geographer Sarah Knuth.

“Renewable tax credits were never intended as a backdoor subsidy for Wall Street. Yet they now provide major tax shelters for banks; ones that need highly complex partnership forms to be legal at all,” she says.

This is not the only way to fund the green transition says Knuth, and Democrats may regret championing such an imperfect model for nurturing green energy.

“Even the biggest banks only have so many tax dollars to shelter, and fast-growing renewable power increasingly demands more capital than tax equity investors can provide,” she says.

“Major corporate tax cuts, like the one introduced under President Trump, can unexpectedly shrink the entire market.”

Maslin notes Trump’s vocal support for coal, the dirtiest fossil fuel, but he says he is buoyed by the strength of America’s green industries, and “simple economics”.

“Trump may slow down the transition away from fossil fuels and allow other countries to delay action – but the writing is on the wall both politically and economically for fossil fuels,” he says.

“It is when not if fossil fuel ceases to be used as an energy source.”

What can Paddington Bear’s citizenship journey teach our leaders?
Join The Conversation UK and migration experts in London on November 16 for a screening of Paddington in Peru and a discussion on migration, citizenship and belonging.
Click here for more information and tickets. Läs mer…