At this years Conference of the Parties (COP), which has been taking place in Baku, Azerbaijan, oil, gas and industrial agriculture advocates have been at the forefront of the summit. A report outlines that at least 1,773 coal, oil, and gas lobbyists have not just been granted access, but special privileges at the annual summit. Around 123 oil and gas bosses and staff invited as guests by Azerbaijani government have been given special host badges, which denote their importance as attendees.
Climate Finance Deal
A key agenda point for this years summit is the agreement of a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG). This is a provision for climate finance that aims to serve emerging and developing countries. Money would be redistributed from countries in the Global North to those situated in the Global South. According to the Energy Transitions Commission – another think tank – it would cost around $3.5tn a year between now and 2050 to suitably transform energy systems on a global scale. Though a hefty price to pay, as this year is set to be the hottest year on record, activists are pointing to the fact that countries in the Global South are likely to be left to pick up the pieces. Richer nations do indeed contribute disproportionately to carbon emissions specifically, as they are responsible for around 79 percent of historical emissions.
The presence of those who seek to delay the process has left a bad taste in the mouth of activists, however. OPEC – a fossil fuel cartel consisting of 12 of the world’s most oil rich nations – had a presence at this years COP. OPEC reps spoke of unproven climate mitigation strategies such as carbon capture as a means of mitigating climate change. Mohamed Hamel, Secretary General of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum, also reinforced this ethos at the summit: “The outcome of COP 29 should facilitate financing for natural gas projects and scaling up cleaner technologies such as carbon capture, utilization and storage.”
Such groups are viewed as shifting the conversation away from mitigation strategies and financial reparations for vulnerable nations and are delaying action. But COP29 has received much of the same criticism from activists and scientists as the summit has years prior. This year, activists from a cross-constituency of climate groups, including Oxfam and Fridays for Future Uganda dressed as fossil fuel executives. During the stunt, activists were photographed shoving ‘money’ into a ‘Loss and Damage Fund’, highlighting the need for rich countries to contribute financially to mitigating climate change.
The Presence of Big Agribusiness
Hundreds of lobbyists for industrial agriculture also attended the climate conference. The world’s largest and most controversial global food company, Nestlé also sent delegates. Nestlé has previously come under intense humanitarian scrutiny for their choice to ignore WHO guidelines and include sugar in infant formula provided to poorer nations. Moreover, the Brazilian government was responsible for bringing along 35 agriculture lobbyists, including more than 20 representatives of animal protein companies.
Moreover, powerful industry groups such as the Association of Brazilian Beef Exporters were also present at the conference. This is despite Brazil’s animal protein industries being responsible for some of the worst destruction of the Amazon rain-forest and the Cerrado Savannah in Eastern Brazil. This may seem poorly thought out, as many indigenous activists and tribal representatives were present at COP26 in Glasgow – many of whom are directly affected by the impact of ranching on their communities and local environments.
Criticisms were also levied towards the conference by climate group Plant Based Treaty. The group posted a video from the summit on November 13, which showed vendors charging almost $3 more for plant milks in hot drinks – which have been shown to have a much lower climate impact than that of cows milk. The group stated, “this is a climate conference, and the dairy industry is destroying the planet, so it’s really disappointing that it costs extra to get plant-based milk.” This may be seen by activists and climate scientists as a tacit endorsement or greenwashing strategy on behalf of environmentally destructive industries.
A Brighter Future?
The UN Secretary-General António Guterres spoke of, “an appetite for agreement,” in the air as the conference drew to a close. He emphasised that there was an ongoing need for a robust climate finance package, and insisted that failure to implement one would not be an option. There were strong calls to action from the Secretary-General to the decision makers present, as he seemed ambitious about the conference’s ability to pull people together in order to deliver a comprehensive package that would strengthen the resilience of nations most impacted by extreme weather events.
Many hopeful indigenous and women’s rights representatives were present at this years conference, which suggests that the conversation about how different groups will be impacted by climate change is an active and ongoing one.
Feature Image Credit: Marie Jacquemin
MA International Journalism, with a passion for animal, climate and political issues
