Action on methane is increasingly being recognised as crucial to limiting the global temperature increase. Methane is an extremely potent greenhouse gas in terms of its global warming potential, with the IEA attributing almost one-third of the increase in global temperatures since the Industrial Revolution to the gas.

The good news is that methane has a short lifespan – its atmospheric life is only around 12 years, compared with decades or even centuries for many other greenhouse gases. As such, reducing methane emissions could bring about climate mitigation results fairly swiftly; this is the premise of the Global Methane Pledge signed by more than 150 nations. The Pledge commits nations to a 30% reduction in methane emissions between 2020 and 2030. 

The IEA’s new tracker confirms a slight increase in methane emissions from energy year-on-year, with the total in 2022 standing at 135 million tonnes. Coal, oil and natural gas operations are each responsible for around 40 million tonnes of these emissions, with the remainder accounted for by incomplete combustion of biomass and from leaks from end-use oil and gas equipment.

Record high methane emissions from the energy sector were tracked by the IEA in 2019, when the total stood at just over 135 million tonnes.

The Agency has chided the sector for not cutting methane emissions more steeply in recent years, given that the technologies needed to take action are available and are cheaper than ever to implement. It questions why energy majors are not setting aside “only a fraction of their bumper income from the energy crisis” to tackle methane emissions, estimating that 3% of the income generated by oil and gas companies worldwide during 2022 would be needed to deliver a 75% reduction in methane emissions from oil and gas.

According to the IEA, around 70% of methane emissions from fossil fuel operations could be reduced with existing technologies. Its tracker report sets out interventions such as leak detection and repair programmes, equipment upgrade and methane utilisation at coal mines. The most impactful intervention, the tracker states, would be halting all non-emergency flaring and venting of methane. It states that three-quarters of the methane that was not emitting due to lower venting and flaring levels could be retained.

The interventions suggested would cost $100bn to implement.

“Based on average natural gas prices from 2017 to 2021, we estimate that around 40% of methane emissions from oil and gas operations could be avoided at no net cost because the outlays for the abatement measures are less than the market value of the additional gas that is captured,” the tracker emphasises.

Commenting on the tracker’s findings, IEA executive director Fatih Birol said: “Our new Global Methane Tracker shows that some progress is being made but that emissions are still far too high and not falling fast enough – especially as methane cuts are among the cheapest options to limit near-term global warming. There is just no excuse… normal oil and gas operations around the world release the same amount of methane as the Nord Stream explosion every single day.”

The report also emphasises that, ultimately, fossil fuel extraction and use will need to decrease in the coming decades to reach global climate goals. It highlights the importance of rolling out clean cooking and modern heating in developing and emerging economies, and of electrifying cooking at heating in wealthy economies, as a priority action.

Industry response

Responding to the tracker is the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative (OGCI), comprising 12 of the worl’s largest oil and gas firms, collectively representing 30% of global production.

OGCI executive committee chair Bjorn Otto Sverdrup, formerly of Equinor, said: “The IEA is right to point out that there’s a huge opportunity to cut methane emissions from the oil and gas sector and much of the technology to do that already exists.”

He added that the Initiative’s members “have already collectively reduced upstream methane emissions by 40% since 2017” and are urging peers to follow suit. The Initiative, he said, wants to “shift the industry’s mindset to treat emissions of the gas as seriously as the industry treats safety.”

The tracker revealed that, far from cutting methane emissions on an absolute basis, most oil and gas organisations are not even cutting methane intensity significantly. It confirms a 5% fall in the global average methane intensity of oil and gas production.

Stop Rosebank campaign 

The publication of the report comes as we await the UK Government’s final decision on the Rosebank oil field off the coast of Shetland.

Equinor acquired ownership of Rosebank, considered to be the largest undeveloped field in the North Sea, in 2019. It holds a majority stake in the project and the other stakeholders are Suncor Energy and Ithica Energy. Equinor has touted the job development potential of the field and stated that the project could be delivered in line with the UK Government’s 2050 net-zero target.

This is despite the fact that the IEA’s global 2050 net-zero scenario entails the development of no new oil and gas extraction capacity, beyond what was agreed pre-2021. Moreover, the UK Government’s Climate Change Committee (CCC) has recommended a “presumption against exploration” for new oil and gas extraction capacity.

With this in mind, the project has faced fierce opposition from climate campaigners and public figures. The Stop Rosebank campaign is this week sending an open letter to the Prime Minister, signed by 200 organisations including charities such as RSPB, WWF Norway and Oxfam. Also signing the letter are comedians Frankie Boyle and Aisling Bea.

The letter highlights the climate impact of fields like Rosebank, but also calls into question the touted socio-economic benefits. It emphasises that the project is being overseen by Norwegian, Canadian and Israeli firms, with 80-90% of oil likely to be exported. It highlights how the developers will benefit from taxpayer subsidies, despite recording bumper pre-tax profits due to high wholesale energy prices.

“Why we’re subsidising Rosebank’s development to the tune of half a billion pounds, when [its developers] clearly don’t need the cash and there are plenty more worthy causes, is a mystery,” said Frankie Boyle.

Taking much of the mainstream media attention was the World Leaders’ Summit portion of the COP – the first two days, in which special addresses are given by leaders representing each participating nation. Some of the most memorable speeches included that of Barbadian Prime Minister Mia Mottley, who slammed wealthy nations’ half-hearted climate efforts as “reckless”, and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who unveiled a 2070 net-zero target for his nation.

Joining these world leaders on stage was Kenyan climate activist Elizabeth Wathuti. The then-26-year-old captivated attendees in Glasgow and viewers across the world with her plea for world leaders to “open their hearts” and “have the grace to fully listen” to the most climate-vulnerable communities.

Ahead of her upcoming appearance at edie 23 in March (scroll down for details), Wathuti expresses continued disappointment that this call to action was not reflected in the Glasgow Climate Pact. She said: “We left Glasgow with an outcome that was not really promising for communities on the frontlines, facing the worst impacts of climate change right now.”

There was a shift at COP27 in Egypt two months ago, in her opinion.  She welcomes the “breakthrough” on loss and damage; After decades of tireless campaigning by the most affected people and communities (MAPA), nations agreed to create a new fund and facility, overcoming previous opposition by the likes of the US, UK and EU.  Wathuti spoke of “so much advocacy” until “the very last minute” to secure this.

But Wathuti also shares concerns that COP27 “did not deliver in terms of addressing the root causes of the problem”, calling more funding for loss, damage and adaptation without strong pledges to deeply and rapidly cut emissions “treating the symptoms”.

The final text weakened language on fossil fuels, partly due to interventions by oil and gas exporters. It only requires a ‘phase down’ of fossil fuels, not a phase-out. Subsidies are OK indefinitely so long as they are not ‘inefficient’. And nations do not have to shift to renewables and/or nuclear, they can supplement fossil fuels with other ‘technology’, even if it is emissions benefits are unproven.

“We had an expectation that COP27 would be different – that nations would agree to take responsibility,” Wathuti says. “In this case, responsibility does not mean new investments in fossil fuels.”

Beyond these top-level thoughts on the final agreements struck in Sharm El-Sheikh, Wathuti outlines several ways in which the COP process can be improved going forward to ensure that the scale of the response meets the scale of the crisis – on both mitigation and adaptation and loss and damage.

As any COP is doubtless one of the largest climate engagement activities in its given year, her calls to action chime well with edie’s ongoing focus week on sustainability engagement (23 – 27 January).

Closing loopholes that enable delays

Wathuti called the Glasgow Climate Pact “more like a dialogue”, in that the ‘agreement’ reached in many cases was simply to have further discussions in subsequent years. For example, much of the detail of Paris Agreement Article 6 on carbon markets, which was meant to be finalised in Glasgow, was pushed back to COP27. It is still not finalised and, according to experts, there is no hard deadline for agreeing on some facets.

Even when deadlines are set, they are not always met. The Pact saw nations pledging to update their Paris Agreement plans within a year, but most failed to do so, with many arguing that addressing the energy crisis and rising cost of living took precedence. Fewer than 30 of the 190+ nations participating in the UN submitted updated plans on time.

Wathuti tells edie that, even in this situation – perhaps, especially in this situation – nations cannot be allowed to delay. She explains that she is “not seeing, in seriousness, a crisis response” to climate issues, despite seeing this kind of response to Covid-19 and to the ending of Russian fossil exports.

She says: “Nations talk about every other crisis, right now, that comes up. The energy crisis risks becoming more prominent than the climate crisis, and without recognition that all of these issues are connected. If we address them in a connected way, we will easily find solutions.”

Wathuti calls for future COPs to, in energy work, adopt an ethos of the just transition. This ethos involves the pathway to clean energy which is as fair as possible, with benefits shared and burdens shouldered in an equitable manner – by those most able to carry them and most liable for them historically.

Through a just transition lens, Germany, a historically high emitter, would not be able to bulldoze a village to expand a coal mine. The UK would not be able to finance mega-gas projects in Mozambique, with the Global North reaping the exports while locals continue to go without energy access. Kenya, where 81% of energy generation is clean but energy access is not universal, would be supported to improve energy access with clean and local solutions. Energy efficiency would be improved in all geographies, with a focus on improvements in the homes of those most in need.

Building in accountability

In a bid to end the culture of delays and to get nations to develop and deliver Paris-aligned pledges, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres recently added a new ‘Climate Action Summit’ to the diary for September 2023.

Guterres is calling for nations to present “credible, serious and new” solutions and plans that “will move the needle forward”. At present, national Paris mitigation pledges are aligned with a 2.5C temperature trajectory even if they are delivered in full.  Guterres has warned that there will be “no room for back-sliders, greenwashers, blame-shifters or repackaging of announcements of previous years”.

Wathuti welcomed the creation of the Summit and shared hopes that it could usher in greater accountability year-round.

She says: “When leaders come together, there is a platform for them to be held to account. But, at the same time, it is in the periods between these forums, conferences and summits that change happens.”

She would like to see a requirement for world leaders at COPs not only to update their pledges but to report what their nation has achieved between summits. This information should be publicly accessible and easy to compare, enabling nations to be held to account.

Wathuti also emphasises the importance of accountability on pledges beyond mitigation. On the loss and damage funding, she says: “What I now think is needed is a lot more of a push – externally and internally – to make sure that this isn’t just another promise… what communities on the frontlines actually need is access to this finance when disasters hit. There also needs to be a move not just one step further, but several steps, because we have known about this issue for years.

“When it’s just now being recognised in the text for the first time, it’s a signal that we cannot continue to not show solidarity and to not take responsibility for the climate crisis in bigger ways.”

While the energy crisis may be prompting nations to set aside climate mitigation in favour of short-term solutions, there is an arguement that the opposite is true for loss and damage – that current events are laying bare the fragility of planning. Wathuti says: “The global community can no longer shy away or ignore these issues – we can see them every day. Most of these impacts are also starting to be felt in other parts of the world that have not experienced them before, including in the Global North.”

The World Economic Forum this month ranked the increased frequency and severity of extreme weather events as the second-biggest global risk for the next two years, with only the cost-of-living crisis coming higher. Last year, extreme weather was classed as the biggest short-term risk of all. The Forum also sees this as a top-three risk for the next 10 years.

Showcasing solutions

COP27 was the first UN climate COP to have a themed day dedicated to solutions. This theme was chosen for the last full day of proceedings – a framing doubtless intended to leave attendees with a sense of possibility for a more sustainable future.

There has been debate about whether the solutions on offer were credible or simply those best preferred by fossil exporting countries like host Egypt and future host the UAE.

Wathuti argues that there should be more of an opportunity for youth climate workers to showcase their own solutions at international forums.

She is notably the founder of the Green Generation Initiative (GGI), which runs tree-growing programmes at schools across Kenya. It has engaged more than 35 schools so far, collectively growing more than 30,000 trees to maturity. Trees help to sequester more carbon but there are multiple co-benefits to planting them at schools, including fruit production, improving local soil and air quality and providing access to green spaces. The progammes also provide students with practical skills relating to tree maintenance, plus soft skills. In this way, climate solutions become community solutions.

“As young people, we are not just asking people in power to respond to the climate crisis… we are also, in our own ways, taking immediate action within our communities,” Wathuti says, alluding to how showcasing solutions could help end stereotyping of young climate activists as entitled. “As young people, we can do so much, but we are asking leaders in positions of power and with more resources to do much more.”

Speaking on the link between solutions provision at home and climate activistm internationally, she adds: “When young people are directly involved in co-creating the kind of future they want, it helps them to become bolder. They know that they can change their schools, their communities, their countries and, eventually, the world at large.

“They know what is at stake and they know these resources are their own to protect.

“We must keep demonstrating that every person can make a contribution, make a difference. That every person must be involved.”

Hear more from Elizabeth Wathuti at edie 23

Taking place in London on 1-2 March 2023, edie’s biggest annual event has undergone a major revamp to become edie 23, with a new name, new venue, multiple new content streams and myriad innovative event features and networking opportunities.

edie 23 will take place at the state-of-the-art 133 Houndsditch conference venue in central London. Held over two floors, the event will offer up two full days of keynotes, panels, best-practice case studies and audience-led discussions across three themed stages – Strategy, Net-Zero and Action.

Click here for full information and to book your ticket.

Elizabeth Wathuti will be delivering the opening keynote speech on Day 2 of edie23 ( March 2 from 9.20am). Directly after her speech, she will sit down with former Unilever CEO Paul Polman for a frank discussion on ensuring social justice as we work to decarbonise the global economy and achieve the UN’s Global Goals.

View the edie 23 Mission Statement here.

View the full list of edie 23 speakers here.

View the full edie 23 agenda and stage-by-stage content here.

The announcement of Al Jaber’s appointment for COP28 has been anticipated for months. It has been timed to coincide with preparations Abu Dhabi Sustainability week, which is being put on by the UAE Government from 14-19 January as part of its preparations for the UN climate summit. Global figures set to be in attendance this week include the US’s special envoy for climate, John Kerry, and King Charles III.

In his role at ADNOC, Jaber has overseen the foundation of the UAE’s first partly state-owned renewable energy firm, Masdar. ADNOC holds a 24% stake in Masdar. Masdar is the headline business host of Abu Dhabi Sustainability Week.

ADNOC has set out plans for $15bn of investment in the low-carbon transition, but is a major emitter historically. It was named by CDP in 2017 as one of the 100 companies responsible for 71% of the greenhouse gas emissions generated globally by human activity since 1988. Specifically, CDP classed ADNOC as the world’s 14^th largest source of historical emissions  within that timeframe. It also classed ADNOC as the world’s eighth largest source of emissions in 2015.

With this in mind, and with Saudi Arabia’s reported moves to block stronger language on reducing emissions from the energy sector at COP27 late last year, Al Jaber’s appointment as COP28 President will doubtless prove controversial. COP Presidents are tasked with assisting preparations for the summits ahead of time and overseeing international negotiations on final agreements on the ground.

Reacting to the appointment, Climate Action Network International’s executive director Tasneem Essop said: “Al Jaber cannot preside over a process that is tasked to address the climate crisis with such a conflict of interest, heading an industry that is responsible for the crisis itself.

“If he does not step down as CEO, it will be tantamount to a full scale capture of the UN climate talks by a petrostate national oil company and its associated fossil fuel lobbyists.”

COP27 in Sharm-El-Sheikh, Egypt, concluded with a final text that did not mention phasing out all forms of fossil fuels – something that had been proposed in the draft. Oil and gas exporters including the UAE reportedly pushed for weaker language around ‘phasing down’ and advocated the mention of ‘low-emissions’ energy rather than clean or renewable energy, opening the possibility for carbon capture at fossil fuel plants to be framed as an alternative to renewables and nuclear. Also advocated was a pledge to reduce “inefficient” fossil fuel subsidies rather than all fossil fuel subsidies.

With this in mind, and with national climate commitments setting the world on course to exceed the Paris Agreement’s temperature limits, the UN has scheduled an additional global climate meeting this September. In a first for the UN, it will host a ‘Climate Action Summit’ in the hopes of aligning national pledges with climate science and ensuring they include adequate detail on climate adaptation and nature-based solutions.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres is calling on nations to develop “ credible, serious and new climate action and nature-based solutions that will move the needle forward and respond to the urgency of the climate crisis”.  Guterres said that the Summit would be “no nonsense” with “no room for back-sliders, greenwashers, blame-shifters or repackaging of announcements of previous years”.

Al Jaber’s statement

Accepting his appointment, Al Jaber said: “This will be a critical year in a critical decade for climate action.

“The UAE is approaching COP28 with a strong sense of responsibility and the highest possible level of ambition. In cooperation with the UNFCCC and the COP27 Presidency, we will champion an inclusive agenda that ramps up action on mitigation, encourages a just energy transition that leaves no one behind, ensures substantial, affordable climate finance is directed to the most vulnerable, accelerates funding for adaptation and builds out a robust funding facility to address loss and damage.”

“Pragmatism and constructive dialogue must be at the forefront of our progress. As a nation at the crossroads of the globe, the UAE is well-positioned to build bridges, foster consensus and bring the world together in one shared mission to keep 1.5C alive and protect the planet for the generations who will follow us.”

Critical minerals partnership

In related news, the UK Government and the Government of Saudi Arabia have this week agreed to deepen collaboration on critical minerals, which will be needed in greater quantities as industries such as electric transport, grid-scale battery energy storage, solar and wind scale up. The agreement was confirmed at the Future Materials Forum in Riyadh (pictured below) and will be built upon with a set of formal commitments later this year.

Image: BEIS

The UK Government stated that, as supply and demand grow in the coming decades, it is important to ensure that supply chains are not “overly reliant on one country”, naming China. According to Our World In Data’s Hannah Richie, China currently accounts for more than 38% of the world’s copper refinery production, making it the largest player in the world. It is also the world’s largest player in terms of vanadium production and hosts the world’s third-largest reserves of lithium, behind only Chile and Australia.

“The impact of Putin’s illegal war in Ukraine on energy prices has shown us all how important international supply chains are to our economy, and why we can never be too reliant on any one nation,” said Business Secretary Grant Shapps.

“That’s why it’s so key that we work with partners like Saudi Arabia to make sure our supply chains are diverse and robust, supporting jobs and prosperity across the UK in the decades to come.”

While it has not yet grown its production or refinery capacity as rapidly as some other markets, Saudi Arabia does sit on considerable critical mineral reserves, which it has valued at $1.3trn.

The UK Government has stated that the new agreement paves the way for British mining and refining firms to do business  in Saudi Arabia, and for greater Saudi investment in British manufacturing and mining finance.  It has also stated that there will be opportunities to improve environmental and human rights standards and enhance transparency in critical mineral supply chains. Almost 500 allegations of human rights abuse linked to the extraction of transition minerals were made between 2010 and 2021 according to the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre.

The collaboration announcement follows the UK’s first Critical Minerals Strategy, which was published last July.

Beyond the big, top-line visions agreed upon by nations, the COP also played host to continued discussions designed to flesh out details on Article 6 of the Paris Agreement – the part of the accord ‘rulebook’ pertaining to carbon markets and credits. Article 6 covers both “compliance” markets, enabling nations to trade emissions credits garnered from reduction and removal activities with each other (under Article 6.2), and “hybrid” national-private markets, enabling countries to sell credits to businesses (under Article 6.4).

Article 6.2 is gradually replacing the existing Clean Development Mechanism; nations have been trading carbon credits for more than a decade already. But whether this has actually led to anywhere near the stated level of climate benefits is debatable.

The Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit’s climate and land programme lead Matt Williams tells edie that the Clean Development Mechanism has around 4.2 billion credits in it, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2. He explains that the majority of these credits – around 3.8 billion – are “‘junk’ credits that aren’t worth very much”. Worth is poor in both carbon terms and cost paid – typically around $1 for each ‘junk’ credit, compared with at least $20 for a higher-quality credit.

Persistent problems that could render credits ‘junk’ include double-counting; accounting for activities that do not result in additional or permanent emissions avoidance or sequestration, and getting the ‘vintage’ of credits right. The term ‘vintage’ refers to the timeframe in which the emissions reduction or removal takes place; you cannot plant a sapling today and immediately assume the benefits of a tree that has stood for decades.

Williams tells edie that all of these issues are still pertinent, but that most credits created after the Paris Agreement was ratified in late 2015 have “much higher scrutiny”. This is because, unlike their predecessors, they count towards nations’ Nationally Determined Contribution commitments through the UN. Similarly, Standard Chartered’s head of carbon markets Chris Leeds noted a particular increase in credit quality in 2021 and 2022 when speaking with edie.

However, another issue is emerging. Williams argues that we are “at a headline level, on the same path as post-COP26 – to a system or market framework that bakes in more secrecy and potentially risks carbon credits not being worth that much.”

The secrecy part bears exploring. Williams observed that the language currently on the table under article 6.2 “allows countries to be as secretive as they want to about the credits they trade with one another”. He elaborated that, due to amendments led by COP28 hosts Saudi Arabia, national governments “can deem any information confidential, and they don’t even have to explain why. They are encouraged to, but it’s not required”.

Nations arguing in favour of the amendments stated that they would be necessary on national security grounds. The rationale is the governments may use their defense sector to generate credits, or purchase credits to apply to this sector. It is clear how this change could also work in favour of both private and state-owned fossil fuel entities that are hampering the energy transition.

Willaims argues that these “niche cases should not justify confidentiality across the board”. He elaborates: “Carbon markets and credits don’t have the best reputation, given what we’ve seen over the last decade or so of their use… More transparency, not more secrecy, would benefit everybody, I think.”

Leeds also observed these amendments, but his concerns are perhaps more subdued. He tells edie: “I’m probably over-optimistic but I believe we’ll start to see a market developing that comes down to trust and high integrity. Then, we will start to see differentiations in price – people will pay up for credits from countries where the system is robust and there is transparency.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if those working on credit ratings start to come up with country ratings for credits, pointing out which have the right infrastructure and are worth investing in.”

In short, nations refusing to be open about the credibility of their credits may have nowhere to sell them to – or, at least, be missing a significant economic opportunity by failing to create credits that trade at higher prices.

Private sector involvement

As for article 6.4, the process of designing and launching these markets has been marred by even more delays than 6.2.  Leeds said he saw the “can, certainly, being kicked down the road” at COP26 in Glasgow, and then again in Sharm-El-Sheikh.

With so much still to be decided, it is unlikely that governments will be able to generate credits to sell to businesses for at least another few years. Leeds observes that some of the detailed rules of 6.4 are “unlikely to get agreed upon until 2024, meaning we’re unlikely to get anything in place until 2025”. Technically, there’s no hard deadline by which nations absolutely have to sign off on this topic.

There may be a silver lining here: there is the argument that rushing talks and reaching week compromises will lead to weak and ambiguous rules.

Williams has already observed one key area of progress here. Emissions reductions verified under 6.4 can be “authorised” – safeguarded against double-counting by both the country and the business – or “unauthorised”. “The language in the text suggests, quite strongly, that companies should not use these unauthorized emissions reductions towards their net-zero targets,” Williams explains.

“They could buy them to support additional climate action,” he adds, but argues that the space for using them in accounting towards net-zero targets is “narrowing”. COP27 notably saw a UN-convened group launching a major new set of recommendations to ensure that net-zero corporate claims and targets are credible.

Nonetheless, we all know that climate mitigation and adaptation are not currently being scaled at the pace science tells us is required. And a delay to 6.4 is a delay in unlocking new sources of funding for emissions reductions and removals.

Leeds has observed that several governments are already making bilateral deals for carbon trading involving their private sectors as we await the final sign-off on 6.4 rules. These include Switzerland-Ghana and Papua New Guinea-Japan. Japan also has an internal ‘GX League’, enabling corporates in certain sectors to trade emissions reductions with each other. It also enables the use of internationally traded credits certified by the government of origin. The GX League launched on a voluntary basis in early 2022 but high levels of uptake indicate that most firms are preparing for a more mandatory setup.

This sort of approach may well emerge elsewhere. China has signalled a willingness to explore this approach, with its history as host of the world’s largest emissions trading scheme (ETS) positioning it well to do so. Also, at COP27, the Africa Carbon Markets Initiative was launched, targeting 300 million high-quality credits annually by 2030, predominantly from the energy transition. Then, in a more controversial move, the US’s climate envoy John Kerry announced plans for a new Energy Transition Accelerator (ETA), to finance the energy transition in developing nations in exchange for carbon credits.

With all these moves in mind, Leeds has observed that 6.4 may fast be becoming “irrelevant” for some nations. “Suddenly, you’ve got this growing demand for so-called voluntary credits sitting within mandatory markets,” he says.  Standard Chartered is supporting the Africa Carbon Markets Initiative and has also stated, in principle, its support of the ETA, while acknowledging that it is in the very early stages.

This is before one even considers the boom in truly voluntary carbon markets. These markets collectively surpassed $1bn in value in 2021. Mark Carney’s Taskforce on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets is predicting that their scale in 2050 may be up to 160 times larger than in 2020. The fact that net-zero targets now cover 91% of GDP is a strong indication that further exponential demand growth is on the horizon.

As the growth accelerates, so must efforts to ensure credibility and weed out the ‘junk’ credits. Both Leeds and Williams agree that a strong signal from the UN could set the bar for de-junking voluntary markets as well as the 6.2 and 6.4. Williams says: “The risk of Article 6 being set up badly is that these other markets look at Article 6 and say: ‘these are the UN rules, this is best practice’.”

The UN can also further guide which credit purchases corporates and nations can use in accounting towards goals, and which should just count as additional funding towards climate solutions. Additionally, the UN discussions are ongoing about the language on the human rights impacts of carbon markets, notably the land rights of Indigenous communities.

The UN has, for the first time, added an additional international climate meeting to the calendar for 2023, with a focus on increasing ambition from nations and moving from talk to action. So, the state of play may be very different this time next year. Or, once again, the carbon credit can could yet be kicked down the road.

The impacts of the climate crisis are tangible and worsening as we speak. The devastation of the floods in Pakistan this summer led to the deaths of more than 1,700 people, two million homes destroyed and millions of children displaced from school as a result of the devastation. The Pakistani Government places the damage at a total of more than $30bn.

Wildfires, flash floods and even immigration and displacement caused by climate-related conflicts have all hit the headlines with alarming frequency over the last few years.

But as the risks of the climate crisis become more visible, surely the desire, want and the necessity to respond to it grow as well?

Cast your mind back more than 12 months to COP26 where the Glasgow Climate Pact left the 1.5C and net-zero movement “alive”, but “in intensive care”.

As the gavel came down on the Glasgow Climate Pact, created at COP26, the International Energy Agency (IEA) published research based on the updated climate commitments made during COP26. These include India’s net-zero target for 2070 and how more than 100 nations have pledged to cut methane by 30% by 2030.

The IEA estimates that, if these targets were met on time, the world would be on course for an 1.8C global temperature rise by the end of the century. Others put the trajectory at a slightly different number, most notably Climate Resource claiming the pledges would lead to 1.9C of warming. This is a more optimistic reading however. Climate Action Tracker (CAT) published analysis during COP26, stating that they are likely to result in 2.4C of warming.

One of the key agreements of the Glasgow Climate Pact was that nations would agree to revisit climate targets with the aim, of strengthening them over the coming years. These formal country pledges (NDCs) were ideally meant to be updated prior to COP27.

Surely, as the window for action shrinks, nations have collectively upped their ambitions to alleviate the greatest threat facing humanity?

NDCs and COPs

It appears not. Research from Energy Transitions Commission (ETC) finds that just 24 nations have submitted updated NDCs since COP26, and these are unlikely to shift the dial on the net-zero movement. As of mid-October 2022, of the 24 new national updates, only Australia has substantially updated its emissions goals. Australia is the largest emitter to update its NDC with a new 2030 target for a 43% cut in emissions on 2005 levels. This, the ETC claims, has lowered the 2030 emissions gap by around 0.1 Gt.

Overall, the updated NDCs to date will “make only a very limited contribution to closing the 2030 emissions gap” and keeps the world on course for more than 2C of warming.

As 2022 drew to a close, a sense of optimism swelled as nations met in Egypt for COP27, the “world’s last best chance to limit global warming to 1.5C”. As negotiations drew on and overran in Sharm el-Shaikh, however, that optimism soon flatlined.

While a monumental agreement was delivered that will see developed nations contribute to a loss and damage funding facility, expected to commence next year, delegates expressed their disappointment at the weakening of key language in the final text that creates confusion and potential loopholes around “low emissions” energy to be used alongside renewables.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres welcomed the formation of the Sharm el-Sheikh Implementation Plan, but noted that deals struck at COP27 do not adequately introduce mechanisms to take the planet out of “the emergency room”.

Attention then turned to Montreal, for the culmination of more than two years of negotiations on the CBD’s COP15 summit, which has suffered from Covid-related delays.

The gavel came down on those negotiations this week, with a new “Paris-style” deal for nature. Given that nature-based solutions can account for one-third (close to 7Gt CO2) of the climate mitigation to reach a 1.5C trajectory by 2030 – and at a lower cost than other solutions – what was established in Montreal may well act as the bedrock for the net-zero movement moving forward.

The summit was widely regarded as a once-in-a-lifetime chance to accelerate global efforts to protect and restore nature, but not all delegates are confident this will be achieved through the new framework.

The new framework aims to “take urgent action to halt and reverse biodiversity loss to put nature on a path to recovery for the benefit of people and planet by conserving and sustainably using biodiversity, and ensuring the fair and equitable sharing of benefits from the use of genetic resources, while providing the necessary means of implementation.”

Weakened wording around financial mechanisms and missing details have muddied the waters of this landmark new deal.

COP15’s Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, COP27’s loss and damage breakthrough and Glasgow’s Climate Pact are all notable steps forward in the efforts to protect humanity and the planet, but are all accompanied by various loopholes that suggest that if the journey to net-zero is too taxing, nations, businesses and the economy itself will revert back to the damaging ways of business as usual.

So in a year where transformational change was required, the planet instead got short-changed. We are still facing and causing the next mass extinction and we are only just starting to adapt to the damage we’ve caused. Indeed, the UN Environment Programme estimates that the global cost of adapting to the climate crisis is expected to grow to $140-300bn per year by 2030 and $280-500bn per year by 2050.

Reasons to remain a stubborn optimist

Many will point to other megatrends that have disrupted the economy as to why the net-zero movement is failing to pick up the pace.

The coronavirus pandemic has left parts of the world reeling and has slowed down global supply chains. The energy and cost of living crisis have led many non-state actors to switch focus to the short-term and others see war, famine and mass displacement of communities as something that is more actionable than the climate crisis. But one thing all of these trends have in common is that climate crisis runs through them. It is the single thread that disrupts all parts of the economy and only a coordinated and accelerated response to the climate crisis will start to ease these other megatrends.

Even as policymakers buckled during key negotiations in 2022 (or in the case of the UK, approving a new coal mine that jeopardises an already unlawful net-zero strategy), major non-state actors have driven forward under the mindset that is “impossible is not a fact, it is an attitude”.

At the end of the first week at COP27, hundreds of the world’s largest businesses and civil society groups delivered a joint declaration of action to meeting 1.5C at COP27, calling on nations to “decide where they stand” in raising ambitions in order to meet the aims of the Paris Agreement.

Convened through the We Mean Business coalition, prominent corporate leaders including Sir Richard Branson, Steve Howard, Arianna Huffington, Mary Robinson and Johan Rockström have joined more than 200 businesses in signing a declaration that business and civil society are “all in” to deliver the Paris Agreement.

In total, more than 2,200 companies have committed to science-based targets through the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) and 80% of companies that had targets approved last year were aligned with the 1.5C pathway.

The SBTi’s Progress report also notes that companies with approved targets had collectively reduced emissions by 29% between 2015 and 2020, compared to a 25% reduction for the four years prior.

Incremental change is happening at a faster pace, but 2023 needs to be the year when science-based, net-zero targets become the norm, rather than an outlier. Achieving net-zero should be a prerequisite of a responsible business and we need more examples of businesses delivering paradigm shifts of what corporate sustainability looks like.

Whether it’s the cohort of corporates that are looking beyond net-zero to deliver a net-positive future, the select few organisations seeking to account for their historic emissions, or even the likes of Patagonia, which announced plans to allocate all profits that are not re-invested back into the company to environmental causes, it is clear that net-zero shouldn’t be viewed as the end destination, but rather as a milestone on a journey to truly transform what business looks like as a force for good.

So maybe 2022 was the beginning of the end for net-zero, but only as we know it. Many governments need to revisit and restrengthen net-zero strategies, and many businesses will be looking at frameworks like the SBTi and the new transition plans required for UK plc next year. An evolution of net-zero ambitions is required.

It’s clear that net-zero has spent all of 2022 in the emergency room and treating it as a target, something confined to a spreadsheet that needs to be ticked off, won’t work. If there are lessons to be learned from this year its that disruptive trends emerge quickly and transform society for better or worse even quicker. So let’s make 2023 the year that businesses shift from net-zero targets to net-zero mindsets and actions that disrupt society and traditional ways of working for the better.

This is not the beginning of the end for net-zero, but rather the end of the beginning and a new chapter of climate action needs to be written in 2023.

From an energy and cost-of-living crisis that emerged at the start of the year to key climate and biodiversity summits in recent weeks, 2022 was topped and tailed by events that showcase why it is so important to combat the climate emergency in a just and green manner.

After such a hectic and landmark year, many of us will be keen to wind down, take stock of the past year and set out what we want to focus on for 2023.

And, with this in mind, edie has rounded up all of the biggest sustainability stories from the policy, business and public spheres during 2022. We are UK-based, so there is a focus on stories from the UK, but with some global implications too. Enjoy!

1) How will the energy price crisis affect UK Plc’s net-zero transition?

The energy crisis swelled at the start of 2022 and predictions warned that annual household bills were due to rise from around £1,000 to £3,500. At the same time, a noisy minority used the cost rise to push back on net-zero legislation, in favour of increased North Sea oil exploration and fracking.

So, why not cast your mind back to January to see how these twin disruptions were impacting how UK corporates were approaching the net-zero transition.

Read the full story here.

2) TCFD mandate comes into force for UK businesses

From 6 April certain large businesses in the UK were required by law to include climate risks in their annual reporting. The aim of the mandate is to increase climate-related engagement between investors and the companies they invest in. Until now, non-unified climate disclosures have made it challenging for investors to truly measure their exposure to climate risk. Another benefit is that, in measuring their climate impact, risks and opportunities, businesses may well be compelled to increase their environmental ambitions and accelerate actions. For businesses, this may come with operational cost savings and cost savings in terms of avoided risks.

Here, edie rounds up all the key information about aligning with the Taskforce on Climate-related Disclosures’ (TCFD) recommendations.

Read the full story here.

3) Carbon offset prices set to increase 50-fold by 2050

The net-zero movement is well underway, despite some noteworthy bumps in the road. More than 11,309 non-state actors including more than 8,000 companies have committed to net-zero through the Race to Zero initiative.

Setting a target and reaching the destination are very different, however. Many businesses have turned to offsetting to account for some unavoidable emissions, why others are perhaps leaning to heavily into the market. Regardless, one of the most-read stories on edie in 2022 was a regarding a study from BloombergNEF (BNEF) that prices for carbon offsetting could reach highs of up to $120 per tonne by 2050, up from between $2 and $3 in 2021.

Read about that 50-fold increase here.

4) Greenwashing isn’t going to fly in 2022

As use of offsets increase so too does the risk that brands “greenwash” their approach to sustainability. Greenwashing is neither a new tactic nor a new term; it was coined by environmentalist Jay Westerveld in 1986, but it definitely gathered pace in 2022.

Here in the UK, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) announced at the start of the year that it will undertake its first official investigation into greenwashing, with an initial focus on fashion. Brands found to be flouting its Green Claims Code could face fines and other penalties.

Read edie’s early-year analysis of greenwash and how corporates can avoid it here.

5) UK’s net-zero target deemed unlawful

Brands weren’t the ones twisting the truth regarding net-zero in 2022. Indeed, the High Court has ordered that the UK Government’s Net-Zero Strategy is “unlawful”, with an order now in place for policymakers to flesh out the Strategy with new details.

In July, the High Court ruled that the Net-Zero Strategy is too vague, meaning that there were no assurances that targets listed under the Strategy, which aims to decarbonise the UK economy to net-zero by 2050, could be met.

Read the full story here.

6) The Prime Minister merry-go-round creates green policy chaos

July was a tumultuous time for green policy in the UK. As well as that net-zero ruling, Boris Johnson resigned as Prime Minister following “Party Gate”. What followed was a fresh batch of Conservative candidates vying to become the new leader, all of whom had patchy records on green legislation

Liz Truss was named as the new Prime Minister, but didn’t even outlast a lettuce and Rishi Sunak has since stepped into Number 10 and has started U-turning his way through climate conferences and green policy red tape.

Here’s where it all started with the green credentials of the MPs who could’ve replaced Johnson.

7) Patagonia to redistribute profits to environmental and social causes

Corporate sustainability is constantly evolving and those who are considered leaders in the space can fall back into a common place position if they don’t continue to revaluate their role in society.

It is unsurprising that the most read story on edie in 2022 was the announcement that Patagonia, which has been a private company since it was founded in 1973, planned to allocate all profits that are not re-invested back into the company to environmental causes.

Read that landmark announcement here.

8) COP27 delivers landmark deal on loss and damage

COP27 officially opened in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, on Sunday 6 November as delegates from more than 190 nations spent the following two weeks trying to orchestrate new texts on how the climate crisis would be averted through finance and new national targets.

The result was some weakened language on clean energy, but a landmark new funding framework to help developing nations cover the cost of loss and damage. There’s a lot to recap over the two weeks at COP27, but edie’s live blog covered all the key announcements.

Catch up with the live blog here.

9) COP15: New global deal for nature agreed despite objections from developing nations

Following swiftly on from COP27 was the CBD’s COP15 in Montreal, which delivered a new Global Biodiversity Framework aimed at halting land and water deterioration, restoring 30% of degraded ecosystems on land and sea by 2030 and unlocking new finance streams for nature recovery, with 23 action-orientated targets to be achieved by 2030.

This “Paris-style” agreement for biodiversity is a huge step towards protecting and restoring our ecosystems, but not all nations left Montreal happy.

Find out why here.

10) edie’s 2023 Awards shortlist revealed

We wanted to finish this 2022 recap on a positive note, and what better way to spread positivity than by focusing on the exemplar initiatives and people from sustainable businesses.

After a record-breaking year of hundreds of entries from across the spectrum of sustainable business, we are proud to announce the shortlist of finalists for the edie Awards 2023.

Find out who made the shortlist here.

edie’s Better Business is about making that change happen, from the top. This series of quarterly roundtable discussions has been hosted by edie to unite CEOs and board-level directors for much-needed dialogue around the future of sustainable business.

Our final discussion of the series focused on engagement, inspiration and collaboration.

This report provides a detailed summary of this discussion in the Better Business series, hosted in association with our session sponsor, Centrica Business Solutions. The discussion took the theme of “Engagement, Inspiration and Collaboration” with more than a dozen business leaders from organisations in various sizes and sectors convening in London on 20 October 2022.

How can business leaders use their influential positions to drive positive engagement with key stakeholders around climate action? What decisions can be made to foster a culture of sustainability leadership within business? And how can new partnerships be formed within and between sectors to maximise impact?

All of these questions and more are explored and answered in the report. This report is free to download.

Click “Access the roundtable” to get your copy of our Engagement, Inspiration and Collaboration write up.

He called the agreement struck at COP15 a sign that humanity is “finally starting to form a peace pact with nature”, with nations agreeing to end destruction and degradation this decade. Under the top-line pledge, the agreed treaty includes steps to mobilise billions of dollars of finance; reform damaging subsidies; improve corporate disclosures on nature impacts and increase the proportion of land and water-based habitats designated as protected.

While acknowledging that there is still much work to do to shift to a nature-positive future, Guterres said he had hope for the implementation of the new post-2020 biodiversity treaty. In general, he stated, 2022 has been “a time for resolve, determination, and – yes – even hope”. He elaborated: “Because despite the limitations and long odds, we are working to push back against despair, to fight back against disillusion and to find real solutions.”

On climate, specifically, however, the Secretary-General was extremely blunt about how mitigation and adaptation efforts to date have fallen far short of what science tells us is needed – storing up economic, social and environmental risks for the future.

The UN’s latest synthesis report assessing the national climate commitments made by nations under the Paris Agreement concluded that, if all commitments were delivered in full, the global temperature increase between 1900 and 2100 will be 2.5C. This far exceeds the Paris Agreement’s 1.5C and 2C trajectories. The UN has also recorded that global emissions continue to increase year-on-year, whereas steep reductions are needed this decade to deliver the Paris Agreement.

Efforts on climate adaptation have also, the UN has emphasised, fallen short so far. The organisation’s latest ‘adaptation gap report’ confirmed that international adaptation finance flows to developing nations are at least five times below estimated needs. With estimated needs set to grow to at least $160bn by 2030 and $315bn by 2050, there needs to be a concerted effort to scale this type of finance.

This is why the new ‘Climate Action Summit’ will be held in September, ahead of the start of the 28^th climate COP in Dubai.

At the summit, Guterres said, nations will be asked to put forward “ credible, serious and new climate action and nature-based solutions that will move the needle forward and respond to the urgency of the climate crisis”. Without these plans, nations will not be able to attend.

In the lead-up to COP27, most nations failed to update their Paris Agreement commitments despite pledging to do so at COP26.

Guterres said that the Summit would be “no nonsense” with “no room for back-sliders, greenwashers, blame-shifters or repackaging of announcements of previous years”.

“Going forward, I will keep pushing for a Climate Solidarity Pact, in which all countries make an extra effort to reduce emissions this decade in line with the 1.5C goal and ensure support for those who need it,” Guterres said. “I have pulled no punches on the imperative for all of us to confront this existential threat. And I will not relent.”

Summit specifics

The Summit will be convened alongside an opening week summit for the UN General Assembly, at which the theme will be taking stock of progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The exact dates and the location of the event are yet to be confirmed by the UN.

Non-state actors including businesses, cities, regions, the finance sector and civil society groups are set to be invited to participate in the new Summit. Guterres has said that these organisations need to “step up” as well as nations “to accelerate the pace of change”.

— SUBSCRIBE TO SUSTAINABILITY UNCOVERED HERE —

For our third episode of the series – recorded from edie’s HQ in West Sussex – Luke, Matt and Sarah serve up three interviews, all connected by a biodiversity theme.

First, Matt catches up with Lloyds Banking Group’s director of environmental sustainability Dr Rebecca Heaton who gives her reflections on the COP15 UN Biodiversity Conference in Montreal.

Next, Luke meets with Patagonia’s country manager for the UK, Ireland & Nordics Alex Beasley, who speaks about the clothing retailer’s recent ground-breaking move to effectively give away the $3bn company and transfer its ownership to a specially designed trust and a non-profit organisation to support climate action and restore nature.

And third, Sarah speaks with Wessel van Eeden, executive board member of climate charity  Justdiggit, which is on a mission to tackle climate change by regreening Africa.

And of course, the Christmas special episode of the edie podcast wouldn’t be complete without some festive fun and games. The episode closes out with our fan-favourite Big Fat Sustainability Quiz of the Year, based on edie’s most-read articles of 2022. And finally, Sarah gifts listeners with some top tips to have yourself a sustainable Christmas.

New podcast season

The Sustainability Uncovered podcast makes the big climate issues bite-sized, featuring live-in-the-studio guests, leader interviews, need-to-know round-ups, listener quizzes and more – all wrapped up into bi-weekly episodes. The podcast is hosted in association with Lloyds Bank, which has partnered with edie to showcase and support business leadership on sustainability and climate action.

Sustainability Uncovered is available to listen to on iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcasts and Soundcloud – or bookmark this page to see the full list of podcast episodes as they appear.

Have a question about this podcast or a suggestion for future episodes? Get in touch at [email protected].

Collectively, the nations participating in the JETP have committed $7.75bn to the initiative. It is envisioned that this will be matched by private sector finance leading to a total investment of more than $15bn. The national governments involved in the initiative will call on members of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) to consider accelerating support for the energy transition in Vietnam. GFANZ, which launched last year, now convenes finance sector players collectively managing more than $153trn of assets. Also engaged in the JETP are the International Finance Corporation and the Asian Development Bank.

Vietnam has set out several new energy sector targets that it believes it can deliver with the support of the JETP. It wants to see annual emissions from the power sector peaking by 2030, moving the previous 2035 target forward. This will result in national emissions peaking by 2030, also.

Vietnam will limit its peak coal capacity to 30.2GW of generation. This means that some projects in the pipeline will need to be downsized or cancelled.

Additionally, a new 2030 renewables target has been set. Vietnam was set to see renewables accounting for 36% of its electricity generation mix in 2020, but will now aim for at least 47%. Hydropower is its main renewables market and meeting the new target may require a broader look at other technologies.

Vietnam is in the top 30 highest emitting countries in the world in terms of annual emissions, largely because of its coal reliance. The successful delivery of the targets made under the JETP will result in the mitigation of 500 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions by 2035. For context, the UK’s annual net emissions in 2020 totalled around 405 million tonnes.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the JETP “will help Vietnam to build a 21st century power sector, energising its economic growth and bringing environmental and health benefits to its citizens”.

She said: “We will work together to show how emerging economies can accomplish the clean energy transition that their people and our planet so desperately need. With investments from international partners, Viet Nam can boost renewable energies and enhance its energy security and autonomy.”

Vietnam now has 12 months to develop and adopt a Resource Mobilisation Plan for the JETP.

JETP history

The JETP model was first launched at COP26 in Glasgow in November 2021. There, the Governments of France, Germany, the UK, the US and the EU committed to mobilise an initial $8.5bn for the first phase of a five-year programme of energy transition investment in South Africa. The UK’s commitment was $1.8bn. An update, one year on, was published last month.

South Africa put itself forward as the first nation to benefit from a JETP in recognition that its energy supply is dominated by coal and crude oil. In 2018, these fossil fuels accounted for more than 80% of primary energy supply.

A second JETP was then announced by Indonesia as it hosted this year’s G20 summit in Bali in November. Nations committed $10bn to the JETP and are seeking private finance to match this pledge.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has called JETPs “a crucial tool to unlock the emissions cuts our world needs in the 2020s”. The UN is calling for a 45% reduction in global emissions by 2030 if the Paris Agreement’s 1.5C trajectory is to be delivered. The reduction in a 2C trajectory would need to be 30%.

But it bears noting that, as was the case at COP26, attendees saw something of a ‘tale of two COPs’ in Egypt – that of the official negotiating process, and that of the agreements forged and progress posted by non-state actors (NSAs) including cities, NGOs and businesses.

edie’s content editor Matt Mace wrote, post-COP, about the willingness of businesses in the Global North to step up on climate mitigation and show more ambition and action than the text.

But there was undeniably a different mix of businesses on the ground in Egypt, with a different framing of the challenge, Nigel Topping tells edie in an exclusive interview.

He says: “It was a little less fanfare and a little more rolling up of the sleeves to focus on implementation, which is what the Egyptian [Presidency] wanted… there was less emphasis on starting new things and more on building upon initiatives we’d already started.”

‘Together for Implementation’ was notably Egypt’s chosen theme for the COP. The theme speaks to the fact that progress to actually deliver the Paris Agreement’s aims on the ground is off-track, with global emissions rising and international finance flows not scaling as needed. This is feeding a breakdown of trust between nations, as well as between the UN and the general public.

For Topping, the role of NSAs in delivering actions to translate lofty global pledges into action on the ground locally is swiftly becoming recognised at COPs.

He explains: “I think a really important evolution of the COP process is that, previously, they have tended to be very internal looking. It asks what countries can do within the UNFCCC. This year seemed to be a point, in quite a lot of ways, for focus on what needs to happen beyond the UNFCCC. This includes the non-state actors… but also very direct language from countries around the reform of multilateral [development banks].

“I think this is an important evolution; the COP process can, yes, deliver change directly -but it can also influence other things. It is a unique platform whereby all parts of the global system can contribute now, sending signals to other parts of the system.

“Collectively, we’re learning that the UNFCCC cannot solve everything. I’m using less blunt language than Mahmoud [Mohieldin, COP27 High-Level Climate Champion] as someone from the Global South, would use.”

Are energy transition fears founded?

Topping added that, as expected, there was “a more global business presence” than he observed in Glasgow, making for a different framing of the issue. While companies in Europe “have the luxury of focusing on decarbonisation rather than development”, Topping argues, emerging and developing markets must couple economic and social development first and foremost.

“A lot of big deals on green energy, green hydrogen, green ammonia, green shipping, and so on, landed in Egypt and other African nations during COP26 and COP27. More are still coming through. I don’t think you need to label this as within the sustainability community; it is a growth opportunity, it is what will drive development in emerging markets, it is different framing.”

But there were also several notable fossil fuel deals done on the sidelines of the COP. The UK and US laid the foundations for a deal on natural gas, to give one example. Global Witness also sparked the debate about who should be allowed to attend COPs in what capacity, claiming that more than 630 fossil fuel lobbyists were registered for COP27.

Topping is of the opinion that this figure is likely inflated, given that it includes ministers from fossil-exporting nations that are signed up to the UNFCCC, plus representatives from diversified energy companies such as Enel. He also believes that the overarching trajectory of the energy transition is clear due to the rapid scaling of renewables and their falling costs. The International Energy Agency (IEA) concluded earlier this month that renewables will account for 90% of global capacity additions in electricity generation between 2022 and 2027.

Topping told edie: “We’re in the age of the end of coal, albeit that there is still some work to be done. Oil is going to be the next fossil fuel in the spotlight because of the transport revolution. Then, we’ll be talking about when we stop gas. This will vary country by country.

“When you look at Africa, there are only a few countries seriously trying to exploit gas. They know it is the tail end of this industry. There are many more, like the six in the Africa Green Hydrogen Coalition, looking at quite a fast energy transition.

“This is where I think we get it wrong. We keep looking at policies now and status now, when everything is actually changing all the time.”

Focus areas for 2023

While the rush to divest from Russian fossil fuels is feeding increased investment in energy efficiency, renewables and nuclear, there are concerns about the other practicalities of delivering unprecedented global climate action in a recession. Wealthy nations have, since 2009, failed to deliver their committed $100bn to developing nations for climate finance – and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

As Climate Change Committee chair Lord Deben told edie before COP27, now is a time when you really need an abundance of capital and resources to deploy from wealthy to emerging markets. Instead, we’re facing a crunch.

Topping agrees. He says: “People don’t stop investing. There may be a ‘wheat from the chaff’ moment, but those who are really committed through good business plans still have the capital to deploy.

“The situation is, of course, different when you look at debt-stressed emerging markets. This is more of a concern. The public finance needed to create the right environment and to co-invest in early-stage projects is going to be harder to come by.”

“I see the evidence of, if anything, a continued acceleration of investment in clean technologies. My main concern is the geographical distribution of that investment.”

With this in mind, Topping was heartened to see Barbados’ Mia Mottley kick-starting the new Bridgetown Agenda to help reform international development finance, removing barriers for indebted, low-income nations on the frontlines of the climate crisis.

Going forward, there will need to be concerted collaboration between nations, businesses, finance providers, multilaterals and other key finance system stakeholders. This is why the High-Level Champions team has begun operationalizing regional finance roundtables – a workstream that Topping says was “very much the brainchild” of his successor for COP27, Dr Mahmoud Mohieldin.

It is also why the organisation worked with experts including Professor Nicholas Stern to develop a framework for scaling climate finance from all sources in line with meeting the Paris Agreement. It outlines how more than $1trn per year can be financed in emerging and developing markets excluding China – but only with “urgent” actions to transform financial systems in the near-term.

There is also the question of finance focus as well as the top-line figures. A greater portion of this finance will need to go towards adaptation than at present. The UN concluded last year that estimated adaptation costs in developing nations are five to ten times greater than current public finance flows.

Topping notes that adaptation will be a key focus for Dr Mohieldin this year, with work with NSAs needing to mirror nations’ work towards the Sharm El Sheikh Adaptation Agenda. The Agenda has a headline vision of improving climate resilience for four billion people this decade. While nations are being called upon to produce and update their own adaptation plans, as with mitigation, delivery will depend on NSA action as well.

The High-Level Champions is perhaps best known for supporting the Race to Zero for NSA emissions, but also operates the twin programme Race to Resilience. More than 2,000 NSAs are signed up to the Race to Resilience and we can expect further growth in 2023.

You can watch Topping and Dr Mohieldin’s closing speeches at COP27 here.

You can read all of edie’s content relating to COP27 here. 

A decision was due from the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities in July 2022, but a delay was confirmed in light of Boris Johnson’s resignation. A new date was set for early November but, again, this date was missed. The Government then told media representatives to expect a decision on or before 8 December.

The Department has this evening (7 December) published its decision to approve the mine. Green groups across the UK have been expecting this decision in recent days. The decision document states that Gove is “satisfied that there is currently a UK and European market for coal and that, although there is no consensus on what future demand may be [in these markets], it is likely that a global demand would remain”.

West Cumbria Mining has defended the potential climate impact of the mine by stating, time and again, that the coal extracted will not be burned to generate electricity. Instead, it will be used in the steelmaking sector. It has argued that its methods for extracting coal would be lower-emission than those used abroad and that emissions from transporting the coal would be avoided.

The approval document states that Gove “does not consider that there is a compelling case that hydrogen direct reduction will result a significant reduction in the demand for coking coal over the next decade”. This is also true of other clean steel innovation including improvements in material efficiency and electric arc furnaces. The document does note that steelmakers using coal will need to fit carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies to transition to net-zero.

The document adds that Gove is aware that “many of those in opposition to the development expressed a view that there is no need for a new coal mine as existing global reserves can satisfy the demand for HVA coal” and that he has read the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) energy pathway to net-zero by 2050. “However…he agrees that this does not necessarily mean that the other resources should remain unused, particularly if such exploitation would be by mining methods that take into account the need to be net-zero compliant”.

It concludes that “there is broad consistency between the assumptions underlying the Climate Change Committee’s net-zero pathway from the mining sector and the projected emissions from the mine by 2050”. West Cumbria Mining has pledged to end operations in 2049 at the latest. Operations are actually likely to be far shorter – but that, in itself, raises questions around the just transition and levelling up.

Immediate backlash

As expected, the decision has immediately drawn much criticism from across the UK’s green economy.

Lord Nicholas Stern said: “Opening a coal mine in the UK now is a serious mistake: economic, social, environmental, financial and political. Economically, it is investing in the technologies of the last century, not this, and that is the wrong path to growth. Socially, it is pursuing jobs in industries that are on the way out, creating future job insecurity.

“Environmentally, it is adding to world supply and thus consumption of coal and releasing greenhouse gases when there is an urgent need to reduce them. And politically, it is undermining the UK’s authority on the most important global issue of our times.”

Indeed, the Government first called in the mine ahead of COP26 in Glasgow last November.

Green Party MP Caroline Lucas said: “When we need a clean, green industrial strategy fit for the future, this Government has backed a climate-busting, backward-looking, business-wrecking, stranded asset coal mine.

“Let’s be clear, this mine is a climate crime against humanity – and such a reckless desire to dig up our dirty fossil fuel past will be challenged every step of the way.

“The steel industry neither needs nor wants this coal mine. Not only would it not displace a single tonne of Russian coking coal from UK imports – but British Steel, one of the two major steel companies in the UK, has said it could not use the mine’s coal due to its high sulphur content. So this coal is being dug up purely for exports abroad.

“Why should global emitters like China and India listen to us when just last month at COP27 we recommitted to “phase down coal”, while we’re now phasing it back in again? This decision simply confirms that the UK’s climate credibility on the world stage is in tatters.”

Building on Lucas’s point about British Steel’s bid for decarbonisation, the firm’s former chief executive Ron Deelan said: “This is a completely unnecessary step for the British steel industry which is not waiting for more coal as there is enough on the free market available. The British steel industry needs green investment in electric arc furnaces and hydrogen, to protect jobs and make the UK competitive.”

British Steel is currently seeking more than £1.5bn from the Government to implement technologies such as electric arc furnaces, which it argues are necessary to reduce operational emissions in line with national climate commitments. Ministers have, so far, denied this request.