&w=3840&q=100)
Moody's says updated climate goals may miss 2°C Paris Agreement aim
Puja Das
Implementing updated national carbon emissions reduction goals is still likely to fall short of the Paris Agreement's objective of limiting global warming to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels, Moody's Ratings has warned.
The warning assumes significance as the latest carbon reduction goals submitted by governments ahead of the 2025 UN Climate Change Conference (COP30) in November reflect heightened ambition. Credit implications, however, will depend on the pace and rigour of implementation.
Achieving absolute global emissions cuts will remain difficult. Should emissions rise following the exit of the US — the world's second-largest emitter — from the Paris Agreement, other advanced economies (AEs) would need to increase their mitigation efforts. This has not been reflected in nationally determined contributions (NDCs) to date, Moody's noted in a report on Tuesday.
'We expect that forthcoming emerging market (EM) emission reduction goals will remain more modest than AE submissions, reflecting their share of global emissions, financing obstacles, the need to address pressing social issues, support the agricultural sector and sustain industrialisation as economies grow. Even if fully implemented, it is unlikely that the updated NDCs would achieve the Paris Agreement goal of limiting global warming to well below 2.0°C,' the agency said.
Over 20 countries, including major emitters like Brazil, the US, Canada, Japan and the UK — which together account for one-fifth of global emissions — have submitted updated NDCs. India, along with several other member countries, is yet to submit its third-round NDC or climate action plan to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The revised deadline is now September, ahead of COP30 in November.
The UK has submitted one of the most ambitious NDCs; if implemented, it would place the country on track to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. Other submissions have come from nations with minimal emissions but high climate vulnerability, such as Saint Lucia, the Marshall Islands and the Maldives.
As national ambitions grow, more sectors will face exposure to policy, technology and demand risks stemming from the carbon transition. Moody's noted that mitigation activities outside the boundaries of national plans could also increase credit risks in some countries.
India, the world's third-largest emitter, faces significant challenges in meeting its climate commitments while continuing to grow economically. On a per capita basis, India's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity is well below that of the US or China, according to European Commission data.
India's overall emissions intensity had fallen by 55 per cent compared to 2005 levels as of 2023 — surpassing its 45 per cent reduction target for 2030. However, emissions could rise again due to growing middle-class demand for electricity and carbon-intensive products and services, alongside further industrialisation. Like many EMs, India's targets are conditional on receiving technological and capacity-building support from AEs, Moody's cautioned.
The 2023 global stocktake found that fully implemented second-round NDCs project warming between 2.1°C and 2.8°C.
The UNEP Emissions Gap Report last year warned that achieving the 1.5°C target would require up to six times the current levels of mitigation investment and a significant redirection of international climate finance to EMs.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2023 stated that, to keep the 1.5°C target within reach, global emissions must fall by 60 per cent by 2035. Few of the world's highest-emitting countries have raised their 2035 targets to above that threshold.
Moody's also flagged that the conditionality of many EM NDCs on external financial, technological or capacity-building support could hinder their implementation. Additional uncertainty from geopolitical tensions affecting trade and financing may further dampen national ambitions and create new obstacles to delivery.
Pointers:
Credit implications will depend on the pace of implementation
Updated NDCs unlikely to achieve Paris goal of staying below 2.0°C
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Time of India
15 hours ago
- Time of India
Xi Blasts 'U.S Protectionism' As Trump Blinks On China Tariffs; Revealing 60-Min Call With Lula
Brazilian President Lula da Silva held a high-stakes call with Chinese President Xi Jinping amid rising trade tensions with the U.S. The hour-long discussion focused on strengthening Brazil–China ties, resisting U.S. protectionism, and coordinating BRICS positions. Xi expressed full support for Brazil's sovereignty, while Lula emphasized solidarity within the Global South. The leaders also discussed the Ukraine war, climate cooperation ahead of COP30, and tech partnerships. This comes just days after the U.S. President Donald Trump imposed harsh tariffs on Brazilian goods, while easing restrictions on China.#Lula #XiJinping #ChinaBrazil #BRICS #GlobalSouth #TradeWar #Geopolitics #COP30 #USChina #BrazilNews #ChinaNews #Tariffs #BilateralTies #XiLula Read More


Time of India
16 hours ago
- Time of India
India's carbon market potential: Why transparency and quality are key to EU deals
KOLKATA: The European Commission's proposal to buy carbon credits to help achieve EU's 2040 climate target is a major boost for countries like India with rich agricultural and natural resource bases, which serve as carbon banks with immense potential, experts and analysts said. At a glance, this also looks mutually beneficial — countries like India will help developed nations achieve their environmental goals, and in return, they get additional funds for climate change mitigation. This would help increase demand for carbon credits as well. But it comes with a few riders — for India to benefit, the quality of the carbon credits it delivers is crucial. The idea is not just to remove carbon from the environment but to benefit the communities involved. Higher the benefits from the projects, better the quality of the credits. You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata India will also have to make sure that the credits that are sold in the international market are not double counted for its domestic compliance. EU's proposal is not entirely a novel concept, though. Earlier, under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) defined in the Kyoto Protocol, industrialised countries were allowed to purchase Certified Emission Reduction (CER) credits (a type of carbon credit) from emission reduction projects in developing countries to meet part of their emission reduction obligations. 'The system and expertise are very much there, with over 5,000 projects registered under CDM in India,' said Manish Kumar Shrivastava, senior fellow and associate director, earth science and climate change, TERI. But the CDM came with its own issues that led to its failure. The developed countries ended up claiming mitigation benefits for projects that were relatively cheaper, leaving the poorer developing countries to finance the more expensive and effective mitigation projects. At present, most projects registered under Indian schemes won't automatically qualify for EU-aligned compliance markets, said Sapna Nijhawan, founder of Sustainiam, a firm working in the clean tech sector. 'For us to qualify, we need to adopt internationally recognised baselines, ensure environmental and social integrity, and establish a transparent system for 'corresponding adjustments' under Article 6.2,' she said. And we are moving in that direction, said Manish Dabkara, chairman & MD of EKI Energy Services. 'The govt's efforts through the carbon credit trading scheme (CCTS) and the Bureau of Energy Efficiency's offset mechanism indicate a shift,' he said, while acknowledging the gaps in the system. But it might not be a smooth road ahead. Relying on the EU for demand for domestic carbon credits is risky, pointed out Krithika Ravishankar, senior analyst in the Climate, Environment and Sustainability sector at CSTEP. 'The EU had previously allowed international credits to be integrated into the EU Emissions Trading System (EUETS) but subsequently banned this allowance as it caused a significant price crash owing to an oversupply of credits, many of which were of subpar quality,' she said. The quality of the carbon credits will be paramount. 'A high-quality credit isn't just about carbon—it must deliver social and environmental co-benefits,' said a spokesperson from Verra, a non-profit that certifies carbon credits globally. Communities cannot be afterthoughts, Nijhawan said. India can draw on its experience with the Forest Rights Act, ensuring that carbon rights and benefit-sharing are clearly outlined, she said and added, 'Projects should provide livelihood co-benefits, not just carbon offsets—this could mean agroforestry models, water conservation co-benefits, or women-led biomass enterprises.' Carbon credit frameworks in Peru, Kenya and Indonesia already include mandatory consultations, community representation in decision-making and legally binding revenue-sharing agreements. 'These models show that when local communities are included, carbon projects become more resilient, transparent and impactful," said Dabkara. Besides quality, the issue of double counting is a major problem. There needs to be a clear distinction between carbon credits for domestic compliance and those for international trade. The same credit should not be counted for India and then sold to the EU as well. This is where the need for a transparent national registry assumes importance. 'The whole purpose of a registry is to avoid double-counting and greenwashing,' said Srivastava. Once a carbon credit is geotagged and its carbon dioxide equivalent is registered, it can be 'retired' from the registry, according to marine scientist Abhijit Mitra. 'But everyone needs to be very precise,' he said. While the climate sector evolves every day, awareness across the spectrum remains a major deficit. There is an urgent need for awareness across the spectrum. 'There needs to be awareness about the voluntary market, cap-and-trade policies, existing Indian policies, green credits versus carbon credits, implementing agencies, who can be donors, who can be recipients, and the criteria,' said Mitra. If there is awareness, there is trust, and coupled with a proper mechanism, it can build a robust network that will benefit communities at the grassroots level as well. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.


Hindustan Times
a day ago
- Hindustan Times
Trump and the art of war
President Donald Trump is practising a new art of war with trade as the weapon in his second term. US Foreign policy initiatives reflects this into a complex interplay of assertive nationalism, strategic diplomacy, and decisions supported by his base. Some actions seem aimed to strengthen US interests, while others draw significant criticism and raise questions about their long-term implications. He is making radical policy shifts executing bold ideas — such as withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, suspending foreign aid, or proposing radical solutions for Gaza and pushing territorial ambitions with regard to Canada and Greenland. Sun Tzu, Chanakya, John Boyd, Clausewitz and Machiavelli would marvel at this practice of the art of war. Donald Trump (Bloomberg) Trump views alliances and diplomacy through a business and trade lens, but now he is more overtly pursuing transactional goals, be it trade benefits, security deals, or foreign policy influence. This is nothing but a cold war in a different dimension. He has strengthened US-Saudi relations by broadening investments and trade to enhance economic cooperation; this helps influence oil prices. His strategic realignments follow a transactional approach to traditional alliances, for example, demanding that NATO to increase defence spending. His aggressive trade policy aims to protect American industries but raise concerns about potential economic repercussions. His policies also aim to realign strategic interests of so-called autonomous countries. Pakistan adeptly plays China and the US against each other—securing military aid, economic support, and diplomatic backing from both at different times. Pakistan has positioned itself as a strategic pivot, for the US (counter-terrorism) and for China for economic benefits (CPEC Corridor). Pakistan has long pursued strategic goals in India and Afghanistan using non-State actors, allowing plausible deniability while bleeding opponents indirectly. Pakistan uses its nuclear arsenal to offset India's conventional superiority, enabling the space for grey zone tactics without full-scale retaliation. Practising narrative warfare, it invests in shaping global perceptions using diplomacy, diaspora, and media to portray itself as a victim of terrorism, while distancing itself from supporting certain militant groups. India, even though viewed as a natural partner of the US, has irked Trump for being strategically autonomous. Washington wants India to be a part of his vision-which will translate into less dependence on defence and energy ties with Russia, without understanding India's short- and medium-term compulsions. US firms face regulatory friction in India due to disagreements on data, tariffs, or protectionism. Trump proclaims India's economy as dead, yet feels it enriches Russia to fight Ukraine. This is indeed a conundrum. Trump's reinstatement of the maximum pressure campaign on Iran, aims to compel Tehran to negotiate a new nuclear agreement. This policy included heightened economic sanctions and then, forgetting the 'peace feather' bombs Iran for supporting terror, looking the other way in the case of Pakistan. Trump has a calculated and strategically measured approach to diplomacy and power projection yet featuring impulsive tweets and unpredictable moves as part of his manoeuvre. Trump is more legacy-conscious and recognises the cold war in play where China is asserting itself as a hegemon. He is also intent on proving his critics wrong, making his second term a mission of redemption for the western world. He is tougher and less tolerant to opposition. Policies are rolled out faster, with a new class of policy makers who do not believe in diplomatic softening or their agenda. Trump's cabinet and advisors are more ideologically aligned, creating a tighter, less contested decision-making circle as he now dominates the Republican party completely, allowing more freedom with fewer checks. Donald Trump's tariff pressure strategy, reflects key principles primarily from both Sun Tzu and Chanakya (Kautilya). Trump's art of war is influenced by Sun Tzu in his principle—'the supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting'. Trump uses tariffs as an economic weapon, avoiding direct military conflict, especially with China. His aim is to force negotiations and shift trade balances in America's favour through economic pressure, not warfare. Trump targeted sectors where the US had leverage (viz tech, agriculture) and where China was vulnerable (viz exports, supply chains) by following Sun Tzu's principle—'know the enemy and know yourself, and you need not fear the result of a hundred battles'. He understood US consumer power and tried to use it strategically. He uses surprise and disruption with sudden tariff announcements to unbalance opponents, creating unpredictability — a Sun Tzu tactic 'to gain psychological and negotiating advantage'. China first faced a minimum tariff rate of 145% and then it was dropped to 30 %, India was next in line with a first volley of 50% tariff fired at it. Trump has also selectively used Chanakya's influence in theArthashastra—'Sama, Dana, Danda, Bheda' (persuasion, gifts, punishment, division). Trump's tactics mirrored this principle: Sama - initially seeking negotiation (e.g., trade deals) along with Dana by offering incentives (e.g., better access for allies). Then shifting to Danda by imposing tariffs and economic penalties. He ultimately, moves to Bheda--dividing the allies and rivals (e.g., EU vs China and Pakistan vs India and China vs India). With Pakistan, he stopped at the first step of Sama as it became fully compliant promptly. Chanakya in his principle of strategic manipulation and deterrence advised kings to project strength and punish economically to force compliance. Trump weaponised tariffs to alter the behaviour of trading partners. Chanakya emphasised national interest over idealism. Trump too followed a blunt, transactional approach (America First), pushing US advantage above global consensus. Trump used Machiavelli making his bold, sometimes divisive in tactics echoed the Prince, valuing results over popularity and using fear as a tool of control and influence. He turns Clausewitz, which is military-oriented in his idea of 'war as continuation of politics by other means'. The US is using diversion by 'barking aloud at Russia with an eye to bite China'--a primary rival due to its economic heft that challenges the US. In combination with military expansion, also in the Indo-Pacific, China threatens US dominance in Asia. From Artificial Intelligence to quantum computing and semiconductors, the US sees China as a hegemon in the making through trade as its weapon and a tech competitor. Russia, on the other hand, is a mere disruptor—especially in Europe (Ukraine, energy blackmail, hybrid warfare). Its military threat is immediate, but long-term strategic competition is limited due to economic and demographic weaknesses. Trump's tariff strategy isn't random, it aligns with Sun Tzu's indirect warfare; Chanakya's multidimensional statecraft and Machiavellian pragmatism. His approach combines economic leverage, strategic pressure, and psychological tactics to reshape global trade relations — reflecting the timeless principles of classical strategists. In summary, Trump in his second term is a more determined, legacy-driven, and assertively nationalist leader. He is less interested in optics and more focused on shaping outcomes that reflect his definition of American strength. The real strategic competitor of the US today is China, though Russia remains a major adversary—especially in military and geopolitical terms. India is a strategic partner, but gets caught in the frictions of great power politics and domestic perceptions in the West. India's challenge is to stay autonomous, will have serious repercussions on India's economy. India is in the same position as in the past where India chose to be non-aligned. It now deserves to be a global power and to achieve it will require extremely deft handling. Economics and national security go hand in hand. India needs to refrain from rhetoric and act in the best interests of our masses, build strength first before reaching the pinnacle of power. This article is authored by Lt Gen PJS Pannu, former deputy chief, Integrated Defence Services.