
‘Backsliding': most countries to miss vital climate deadline as Cop30 nears
Despite the urgency of the crisis, the UN is relatively relaxed at the prospect of the missed date. Officials are urging countries instead to take time to work harder on their targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions and divest from fossil fuels.
Simon Stiell, the UN's top climate official, said in a speech in Brazil on Thursday: 'Because these national plans are among the most important policy documents governments will produce this century, their quality should be the paramount consideration … Taking a bit more time to ensure these plans are first-rate makes sense, properly outlining how they will contribute to this effort [to tackle the climate crisis] and therefore what rewards they will reap.'
New national plans on emissions cuts are urgently needed because current targets are dangerously inadequate. The world must cut carbon by about half this decade, relative to 1990 levels, to have a chance of limiting temperature rises to 1.5C above preindustrial levels, the important threshold that scientists fear is already out of reach.
Governments are working to blueprints set out four years ago that would result in temperature rises of 2.6C to 2.8C by the end of the century, according to the UN's environment programme. Poor countries want to see far faster action from the G20 group of the biggest developed and emerging economies, which are responsible for about 80% of global emissions.
Ilana Seid, Palau's ambassador to the UN and the chair of the Alliance of Small Island States, said: 'It is essential that the G20 and other large emitters exhibit their leadership with new [national plans] that show ambitions and tangible progress. We need deep, rapid and sustained reductions commensurate with the 1.5C goal. In this time of unprecedented climate crisis, more than ever we need enhanced international cooperation to truly move the dial forward.'
Ali Mohamed, the chair of the African Group of Negotiators and Kenya's special envoy for climate change, said: 'It is unacceptable that this devastation [that we are seeing] is caused by the pollution of just a few countries, specifically the G20, and they must take responsibility for their actions.'
Given the climate emergency – temperatures exceeded 1.5C above preindustrial levels for a whole year in 2024 for the first time – any delay to the deadline would usually be regarded as a crisis. But this year the world is facing a more immediate potential disaster in the US presidency of Donald Trump. Not only has he withdrawn the country from the Paris agreement, he has also embarked on a trade war with the imposition or threat of heavy tariffs on imports.
This has thrown important trading relationships, including that with China, into disarray. The disruption to geopolitics, already in turmoil after the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the conflict in Gaza, has alarmed climate diplomats. Many privately believe putting off the publication of national plans, at least until Trump's initial flurry of activity has died down, is preferable.
Under the 2015 Paris climate agreement, every five years countries must submit detailed plans – called nationally determined contributions (NDCs) – with clear targets on cutting emissions, or curbing them in the case of poorer countries. These are then discussed at a 'conference of the parties' (Cop).
Last time, the deadline was in effect extended by a year: the Cop26 conference in Glasgow was postponed from November 2020 to 2021 because of the Covid-19 pandemic. This time, the deadline is technically 10 February – nine months before the Cop30 summit in Brazil this November – but with only a handful of countries so far having submitted plans, it looks likely that most will miss it.
Stiell has urged countries to file their submissions before September, when experts will prepare an official 'synthesis report' showing whether the aggregated plans are sufficient to meet the 1.5C limit.
Among the dozen or so countries that have submitted their NDCs so far are Brazil, the host of Cop30; the United Arab Emirates, the host of Cop28 in 2023; and the UK, which under the new prime minister, Keir Starmer, has promised to show climate leadership.
One of the last acts of Joe Biden as US president was to submit a new NDC, but that is now largely symbolic. It will stand as a benchmark for those US states, local governments and businesses that maintain their climate commitments in defiance of the federal government.
Given the impetus in the US behind renewable energy, electric vehicles and other low-carbon technologies, its emissions trajectory may not alter much under Trump for some time. But the impact of his return will be felt far beyond the country's borders: petrostates and economies that have been laggards in cutting emissions may take cover from his shredding of climate commitments.
Paul Bledsoe, a former Clinton White House climate adviser now with American University's Center for Environmental Policy, warned: 'Tragically, Trump's re-election will not only mean the temporary curtailment of US climate ambition, but it will take some pressure off China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and other major traditional scofflaw emitters, who are likely to offer less ambitious NDCs than had Democrats won last November.'
China holds the key to Cop30: it is the world's biggest emitter by a wide margin and responsible for almost a third of global carbon output – more than all of the developed countries combined. It has invested heavily in renewable energy, and the past two years have broken records in additional clean power generation capacity, with that pace likely to continue this year.
Yet emissions are still rising, albeit at a much slower rate. To meet the global carbon budget would require China to cause its emissions to peak this year, then fall by about a third by 2035. Such drastic cuts are possible, experts say. Li Shuo, the director of the China climate hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said: 'We believe China is very well positioned to achieve that goal, based on its very rapid low carbon development.'
Whether China grasps those opportunities will be a political decision. Within Beijing's top echelons of power, tumultuous arguments rage between those who want to push harder still for the burgeoning green economy, and the advocates of coal. Calculations of the impact of Trump, and his tariffs, will fuel those disagreements further.
'The US backsliding is definitely not good news for China's climate ambition and global climate action,' Shuo said. 'But China is at the very forefront of the low-carbon economy, which is already yielding a lot of benefits. And China wants to project stability and predictability, on the international stage.'
China was at a similar crossroads nearly a decade ago: in early 2016, analysts estimated that China's emissions may have already peaked. Instead, the country made a sharp reversal by returning to coal-fired power. That process began before the election of Trump in November 2016 but was confirmed by his anti-China stance. Could Trump's second ascendancy trigger a similar retrenchment? 'I would not rule out a return to coal,' Shuo said.
Sign up to Down to Earth
The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential
after newsletter promotion
Bernice Lee, a senior adviser at Chatham House, said: 'With Trump's return, there will inevitably be voices – even in China – pushing back against clean energy or arguing against faster decarbonisation. But China has made major investments in clean energy, and its economy is no longer driven solely by coal interests. The signals so far suggest it plans to stay the course.'
India, the world's fifth largest economy and third biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, will also be closely watched. After the gavel came down at Cop29 in November, India's negotiator criticised the $1.3tn climate finance deal agreed there as a 'travesty of justice' and 'betrayal' of developing countries.
Solar and wind power are thriving in India, which is the world's third biggest producer of renewable energy. B, b but the powerful coal lobby enjoys favour with the authoritarian prime minister, Narendra Modi, who argues that developed countries must take responsibility for cutting emissions while the developing world should expand its carbon footprint.
Climate diplomats told the Guardian it was likely India would frame its targets in terms of emissions intensity rather than absolute cuts to carbon – that is, reducing the amount of carbon per unit of GDP.
For most of the past two decades, the EU has led the world on climate ambition. This year, however, with a populist backlash across the continent threatening the environmental consensus, the two biggest champions – France and Germany – are in the throes of political crisis, and several other governments have taken a rightwing and anti-climate turn. The bloc is not expected to reach agreement on its NDC until this summer.
Japan's prospective NDC has been criticised by campaigners as too weak but it has not yet been submitted. Canada is facing elections after the resignation of Justin Trudeau, and Australia is also gearing up for political fights over climate in the long run-up to its election.
There is little hope of strong NDCs from two of the biggest climate influencers among the G20: Russia and Saudi Arabia. Neither country is likely to commit to significant cuts, although both are nominally signed up to a net zero target.
Even if China, India, the EU and some other G20 states come forward with relatively strong NDCs, the chances that they will add up globally to the drastic emissions cuts needed to keep the 1.5C target safe are small. Rachel Kyte, the UK's climate envoy, said: 'When you add up all the NDCs, my expectation is they may not get us back on track.'
But this need not be the disaster it might appear, she added, as the NDCs could be negotiated and updated. For instance, some NDCs were likely to contain a range of possible targets, some of which might be conditional on countries receiving finance or other support. 'These are not static [documents], and the targets are floors, not ceilings,' she said.
Quite how dynamic countries are prepared to be is up for debate. At Cop26, countries – in theory – agreed that NDCs should be updated more often than every five years. But since then, few have increased the level of ambition in their plans.
Even if ambition is lacking on the core carbon targets in NDCs, properly focused plans could offer the world a breathing space by going beyond carbon to other greenhouse gases – chiefly methane. Global emissions of methane, which comes from agriculture and escapes from fossil fuel extraction sites, have been rising strongly in recent years, to the increasing concern of scientists, as methane is roughly 80 times more powerful at trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide.
Cutting methane yields big rewards: halving methane would avoid a 0.25C rise in temperatures by 2030, one study found. Durwood Zaelke, the president of the Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development, said: 'Methane is the emergency brake that can slow down warming enough to keep us from going over the cliff of irreversible tipping points. All countries need to target methane in their NDCs.'
Some countries already had policies on methane, which should be strengthened, and those without must put them in place, he said. 'Our window to act is the next five years, 10 tops. If we don't cut methane now, we'll see the rate of warming continue to accelerate, and we'll soon be past the first series of irreversible tipping points.'
NDCs are detailed documents, going far beyond the headline emissions targets. Experts also want them to address the global imperative to 'transition away from fossil fuels', agreed at Cop28. All countries are supposed to be tripling their renewable energy generation and doubling energy efficiency, but so far those targets are being missed.
Kyte said governments should see NDCs as an economic opportunity. 'NDCs should be investable plans,' she said. 'And investable plans for sustainable development can be NDCs.'

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


The Sun
7 minutes ago
- The Sun
Putin begins journey to Alaska for Trump war talks – but keeps up Ukraine onslaught as Doomsday Radio bursts into life
Scroll down to read our live coverage of today's meeting TYRANT EN ROUTE Putin begins journey to Alaska for Trump war talks – but keeps up Ukraine onslaught as Doomsday Radio bursts into life VLADIMIR Putin is on his way to Alaska to hold crucial war talks with Donald Trump. The tyrant has continued to order barbaric attacks on Ukraine just hours before he is expected to be pressured into agreeing to a peace deal. 4 Vladimir Putin's huge team started their journey across to the US today as they sped through the shabby streets of Magadan Credit: East2West 4 Dozens of civilians in Sloviansk woke up to their homes being bombed in Russian drone strikes just hours before the meeting Credit: Getty 4 Ukrainian drones hit a residential building in Kursk in a last message to the Kremlin ahead of the talks Credit: East2West 4 Putin is on his way to Alaska to hold crucial war talks with Donald Trump Credit: Reuters Putin's huge team started their journey across to the US today as they sped through the shabby streets of Magadan before boarding a jet to Alaska. Trump is expected to leave Washington later today with the pair officially starting peace talks at around 8:30pm UK time. The US President has been adamant the bloodshed in Ukraine must end but a merciless Putin is yet to relent. He continued to launch aerial bombs in Dnipropetrovsk region overnight with his troops edging forwards on the frontline. Putin is expected to ask to keep hold of all the land he has managed to illegally seize since starting the conflict in February 2022. The continued assaults were met with the Kremlin's "Doomsday Radio" which blurted out strange coded messages as the despot started his travels. The station is known to send out strange messages during tense times for Russia with experts saying it is likely linked to the Kremlin's nuclear defence forces. Today the signals NZHTI 88751 MAREL 5057 6881 and NZHTI 03649 STOKOTON 2751 2830 were broadcasted with no explanation. The same mysterious codes were sounded only six weeks before the start of Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine. Kyiv launched their own warning shots at Russia as they sent a final message to the Kremlin ahead of the talks. They are believed to have downed Putin's £32 million Su-30SM fighter close to Ukrainian-controlled Snake Island in the Black Sea. Russia was also hit by heavy Ukrainian bombardment on the Olya port in Russia's Astrakhan region. The port has been used to import military goods for Putin's war machine from Iran via the Caspian Sea across the past three years. Ukraine also exploded Syzran Oil Refinery with a major drone swarm which triggered deafening explosions and sparked two major blazes.


BBC News
7 minutes ago
- BBC News
Global deal to tackle plastic pollution fails again
Global talks to develop a landmark treaty to end plastic pollution have once again UN negotiations, the sixth round of talks in just under three years, were due to end on Thursday but countries continued to negotiate into the night in the hopes of breaking a remained a split between a group of more than 100 nations calling for curbs on production of plastic, and oil states pushing for a focus on in the early hours, Cuban delegates said that countries had "missed a historic opportunity but we have to keep going". The talks were convened in 2022 in response to the mounting scientific evidence of the risks of plastic pollution to human health and the the benefits of plastic to almost every sector, scientists are particularly concerned about potentially toxic chemicals they contain, which can leach out as plastics break down into smaller have been detected in soils, rivers, the air and even organs throughout the human had an original deadline to get a deal over the line at the end of December last year, but failed to meet this. The collapse of the latest talks means they fall further behind. Speaking on behalf of the island states, the northern Pacific nation of Palau, said on Friday: "We are repeatedly returning home with insufficient progress to show our people.""It is unjust for us to face the brunt of yet another global environmental crisis we contribute minimally to," it added. The core dividing line between countries has remained the same throughout: whether the treaty should tackle plastics at source – by reducing production – or focus on managing the pollution that comes from largest oil-producing nations view plastics, which are made using fossil fuels, as a vital part of their future economies, particularly as the world begins to move away from petrol and diesel towards electric group, which includes Saudi Arabia and Russia, argue that better waste collection and recycling infrastructure is the best way of solving the problem, a view shared by many of the producers themselves."Plastics are fundamental for modern life - they go in everything," said Ross Eisenberg, president of America's Plastic Makers, a trade association for the plastic production industry in the United States."Focusing on ending plastic pollution should be the priority here, not ending plastic production," he added, warning that attempts to substitute plastics with other materials could lead to "unintended consequences".But many researchers warn that this approach is fundamentally flawed. Global recycling rates are estimated at only about 10%, with limits on how far that can rise."Even if we manage to boost that over the next few decades to 15, 20, 30%, it would remain a substantial amount that is polluting the environment and damaging human health," said Dr Costas Velis, associate professor in Waste and Resource Engineering at Imperial College London."Therefore, we do need to improve recycling… but we cannot really hope that this is going to solve all the aspects of plastic," he production has already risen from two million tonnes in 1950 to about 475 million in 2022 – and it is expected to keep rising without extra 100 countries, which include the UK and EU, had been pushing for curbs to production in the treaty and more consistent design globally to make recycling easier. This could be as simple as requiring plastic bottles to be one colour - when dyes are used the products only fetch half the value of clear approach was supported by major plastic packagers, including Nestle and Unilever, who are part of the Business Coalition headed up by the Ellen McArthur Coalition also said countries should better align their schemes to add a small levy on plastic products to help pay for recycling efforts, known as extended producer responsibility. The group estimates that could double revenues for countries to $576bn (£425bn) between now and 2040. Talks were due to end on Thursday but countries continued to negotiate into the night in the hopes of breaking a chair, Luis Vayas from Ecuador, did produce a new text which seemed to align more closely with the request of the UK at the final meeting the EU delegation he said: "We see the outcome of this session as a good basis of future negotiations."However, the oil states remained deeply unhappy. Saudi Arabia said it found the process of negotiating "problematic" whilst Kuwait said its views were "not reflected".But many environmental groups, reacting to the collapse, railed against what they see as prioritisation of profit by oil states over the health of the Forbes, Greenpeace head of delegation to the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations, said: "The inability to reach an agreement in Geneva must be a wakeup call for the world: ending plastic pollution means confronting fossil fuel interests head on."The vast majority of governments want a strong agreement, yet a handful of bad actors were allowed to use process to drive such ambition into the ground." Sign up for our Future Earth newsletter to keep up with the latest climate and environment stories with the BBC's Justin Rowlatt. Outside the UK? Sign up to our international newsletter here.

Western Telegraph
an hour ago
- Western Telegraph
Negotiators in Geneva remain deadlocked on plastic pollution treaty
Nations were meeting for an 11th day at the United Nations office in Geneva to try to complete a landmark treaty to end the plastic pollution crisis. They remain deadlocked over whether the treaty should reduce exponential growth of plastic production and put global, legally binding controls on toxic chemicals used to make plastics. The negotiations at the UN hub were supposed to be the last round and produce the first legally binding treaty on plastic pollution, including in the oceans. But just like at the meeting in South Korea last year, they are leaving without a treaty. Luis Vayas Valdivieso, the chairman of the negotiating committee, wrote and presented two drafts of treaty text in Geneva based on the views expressed by the nations. The representatives from 184 countries did not agree to use either one as the basis for their negotiations. Mr Valdivieso said on Friday morning as the delegates reconvened in the assembly hall that no further action is being proposed at this stage on the latest draft. Delegates are still meeting and have not decided on next steps yet. Representatives of Norway, Australia, Tuvalu and others nations said they were deeply disappointed to be leaving Geneva without a treaty. European commissioner Jessika Roswall said the European Union and its member states had higher expectations for this meeting and while the draft falls short on their demands, it is a good basis for another negotiating session. 'The Earth is not ours only. We are stewards for those who come after us. Let us fulfil that duty,' she said. Saudi Arabia said both drafts lacked balance, and Saudi and Kuwaiti negotiators said the latest proposal takes other states' views more into account and addressed plastic production, which they consider outside the scope of the treaty. Activists stage a protest during the talks (Martial Trezzini/Keystone via AP) That draft, released early on Friday, did not include a limit on plastic production, but recognised that current levels of production and consumption are 'unsustainable' and global action is needed. New language had been added to say these levels exceed current waste management capacities and are projected to increase further, 'thereby necessitating a co-ordinated global response to halt and reverse such trends'. The objective of the treaty was also revamped to state that the accord would be based on a comprehensive approach that addresses the full lifecycle of plastics. The biggest issue of the talks has been whether the treaty should impose caps on producing new plastic or focus instead on things such as better design, recycling and reuse. Powerful oil and gas-producing nations and the plastics industry oppose production limits. They want a treaty focused on better waste management and reuse. Every year, the world makes more than 400 million tons of new plastic, and that could grow by about 70% by 2040 without policy changes. About 100 countries want to limit production. Many have said it is also essential to address toxic chemicals used to make plastics. Thursday was the last scheduled day of negotiations, but work on the revised draft continued into Friday. Science shows what it will take to end pollution and protect human health, said Bethanie Carney Almroth, an ecotoxicology professor at Sweden's University of Gothenburg who coleads the Scientists' Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty. The science supports addressing the full lifecycle of plastics, beginning with extraction and production, and restricting some chemicals to ensure plastics are safer and more sustainable, she said. 'The science has not changed,' she said. 'It cannot be down negotiated.' Environmentalists, waste pickers and indigenous leaders and many business executives travelled to the talks to make their voices heard. Some used creative tactics, but are leaving disappointed. Indigenous leaders sought a treaty that recognises their rights and knowledge.