Six climate action reframes as we head into COP29
After another tumultuous year of devastating flooding, regional conflict, geopolitical uncertainty, and more than half the world voting in elections, the climate community will convene at the 29th Conference of the Parties (COP29). The recent UN Emissions Gap Report shows soaring emissions with little expectation for a decline this decade. As leaders head to Baku, they should consider six essential reframes to catalyze climate action.
1. Moving from geopolitical fragmentation to climate coalition building
With geopolitical fragmentation deepening, climate action is now advancing through different fora and constellations, depending on the solutions. Emissions reductions have emerged as a key outcome governments agree on. Yet, it is the process – the timelines, solutions sets, and costs – where discussions fracture.
One example is the Kazan Declaration from the latest BRICS meeting. Climate featured prominently in the discussion. Azerbaijan is the fourth BRICS-associated country in a row to convene the COP. COP30-host Brazil will chair BRICS in 2025. The Declaration highlights that “different national conditions, possibilities, and development levels with respect to national strategies and priorities in line with national legislation” should dictate the approach to climate action. Indeed, different country coalitions with distinct energy and resource economies have emerged to back certain solutions via pledges and announcements. This includes efforts such as the Carbon Management Challenge, The Net Zero Nuclear Pledge and the corresponding financing pledge signed by banks, the Global Methane Pledge, and the tripling renewables and efficiencies pledges.
The success of these programs will depend on mobilizing resources alongside credible policies and financing mechanisms and the COP should evolve into a true annual forum for accountability on these critical agenda items. For that, we must build specific accountability frameworks around such action-agenda items. Moreover, we must also move past the limitations of uniform pathways and timelines and lean into diverse approaches to achieve the most effective climate outcomes.
2. Moving to reality-based financing strategies to meet climate goals
Most climate finance discussions today focus either on high-level targets or specific projects, glossing over the infrastructure and energy realities in developing countries. For truly realistic policy and infrastructure planning and effective implementation, finance discussions must be informed by granular, country, and region-specific data.
In the lead-up to COP29, CATF released a study challenging how the cost of capital is used in policy planning through a comprehensive assessment of 48 African countries and five sub-Saharan regional groupings. Currently, lenders use a 10% uniform value, though the actual weighted average cost of capital is much higher and is expected to drop from 18% to 13% through 2070, while varying widely by region. Such prohibitive capital cost risks further deepening climate action inequity and debt burdens, all while further undermining investment in capital-intensive clean energy projects.
Previous CATF analysis highlights that more than 90% of research on African decarbonization has been published after the 2015 Paris Agreement. It also remains a new field largely disconnected from regional development goals. Moreover, most modeling focuses heavily on renewable energy like wind and solar, with clean firm power sources like nuclear energy and pollution control technologies like carbon capture rarely considered.
3. Prioritizing fast action to slow the rate of warming
How fast we warm the planet matters; actions that slow the rate of warming will provide time to transform the global energy system while avoiding tipping points. Along these lines, reducing methane emissions is the best way to put the brakes on the current rapid rate of warming. As the world is expected to further expand gas consumption, tight methane controls are key, in addition to CO2 abatement along the value chain.
2024 saw key regulatory innovation and progress with the finalization of the EU methane regulation, including the first global methane import standard, highlighting the power of buyers to set climate expectations. Since COP26, methane has been prominent on the COP action agenda, with multiple billion-dollar investments in methane mitigation announced.
At Climate Week in New York City, CATF and the Climate and Clean Air Coalition launched the Fossil Fuel Regulatory Programme (FFRP) to support low- and middle-income countries in reducing methane emissions from fossil fuels. The FFRP will provide regulatory guidance, infrastructure support, and capacity building for up to 20 countries eligible for development assistance from 2024 to 2027, helping these nations meet the Global Methane Pledge.
Solid waste management is a significant source of greenhouse gases, producing about 11% of global methane emissions, mainly from decomposing organic waste in landfills, making it the third largest source of anthropogenic methane emissions. At COP29, the Presidency will call on Parties to join the Declaration on Reducing Methane from Organic Waste to reduce methane in waste and food systems. This is an important step to widen the focus on methane mitigation across additional sources of emissions, for fast action.
4. Expanding power decarbonization solutions to achieve energy security
Electricity demand is expected to soar over the next years. As more people gain access to energy, electrification accelerates, extreme temperatures drive heating and cooling demand, and hyperscale computing pushes energy demand to new limits in advanced economies, diverse sources of clean energy generation will be essential. Embracing clean firm power that generates electricity on-demand with minimal greenhouse gas emissions, regardless of the weather or time of day, will be critical to matching energy demand and security with climate ambition.
In fact, modelling continues to show that a more robust electricity system can be created through technology diversity. Such a system would be less exposed to extreme weather risks due to a smaller share of renewables, would use less land, and require fewer critical minerals. For example, modeling commissioned by CATF shows that Europe’s decarbonized power system may require significantly more clean firm generation capacity than commonly assumed, in light of challenges like seasonal variability, land constraints, and long-term supply constraints materialized. The analysis demonstrates the sensitivity of optimal power generation portfolios to changing risks and expectations, with a general trend toward increased need for clean firm options to manage risks without increasing total cost.
Technologies such as nuclear fission, fusion, and superhot rock geothermal are gaining more attention as governments and the private sector look to complement strong renewable capacity additions. Nuclear energy alone, which constitutes 10% of electricity generation globally, has seen renewed intertest in the West. CATF, alongside EFI Foundation and the Nuclear Threat Initiative, launched the Nuclear Scaling Initiative at Climate Week in New York City to foster a new nuclear energy ecosystem capable of delivering over 50 gigawatts of clean, safe, and secure nuclear power each year by the 2030s. This ambitious goal represents a tenfold increase over the current rate of nuclear deployment.
As a next step, governments should strengthen support for clean firm power deployment to generate learnings and reduce cost through scaling.
5. Moving from individual climate projects to climate as an infrastructure problem
While clean energy generation and application technologies are vital, they only reach their full potential when integrated into a comprehensive, system-wide transformation strategy. Connecting infrastructure, such as transmission or pipelines, must be built in lockstep while prioritizing land-use efficiency and sustainable materials. Strategically placing clean energy projects and tapping existing resources, such as onshore CO2 storage and brown sites, can drive significant cost reductions. For example, the cost of carbon management infrastructure in Europe could be halved with the efficient use of onshore CO2 storage and pipelines. With a Green Energy Zones and Corridors Pledge expected on the COP29 action agenda, policymakers must prioritize a clear vision for the connecting infrastructure needed to deliver on ambitious targets, including the pledge to triple nuclear and renewable capacity and address the carbon management challenge.
6. Moving from target-setting to pathway planning
Historically, governments and the COP process have been overly focused on lofty targets with deadlines like 2030, 2040, 2050. These discussions often take up more political capacity and time than the actual pathway planning needed to build infrastructure. For example, raising the EU’s 2030 target from 40% reductions to 55% took over a year, and another recent effort to update the EU’s Nationally Determined Contributions to -57% failed.
While climate ambition is important, planning for the infrastructure that can actually deliver emissions reductions is even more important, yet continues to be neglected. To date, only 11 European Union Member state National Energy and Climate Plans, which should function as key planning tools, have been submitted. This is now months after the mid-2024 deadline.
Navigating complexity for lasting climate solutions at COP29
Addressing a long-term problem as complex and multi-facetted as mitigating climate change will require actors to be inherently flexible learning through trial and error, as the climate community seeks to cement permanent systemic change. As leaders head to Baku amidst division and fragmentation, reframing core problems of the climate challenge may open doors to overcoming differences through considering novel research and approaches – across governments and stakeholders alike.
