New approach narrows uncertainty in future warming and remaining carbon budget for 2 °C

A new study narrows down the range of estimates for future warming and the remaining carbon budget for limiting warming to 2 °C

National Institute for Environmental Studies

FacebookXLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

 

image: 

To achieve the 2 °C target, the total amount of carbon that can still be emitted by human activities is limited. This total allowable carbon emission—called the remaining carbon budget—is illustrated as an hourglass in the left panel. Previous studies, based on Earth System model projections with large uncertainties, estimated the remaining carbon budget at 352 billion tons of carbon (uncertainty range: 2–702 billion tons; black bar on the right panel). By accounting for the degree of agreement between model simulations and observations, the present study refines this estimate to 459 billion tons (uncertainty range: 251–666 billion tons; green bar on the right panel), substantially reducing uncertainty and improving projection accuracy.

view more 

Credit: NIES

How much the planet warms with each ton of carbon dioxide remains one of the most important questions in climate science, but there is uncertainty in predicting it. This uncertainty hinders governments, businesses and communities from setting clear emission-reduction targets and preparing for the impacts of climate change. The changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and surface temperatures are shaped by complex feedback between land, ocean, atmosphere and ecosystems, and this feedback can either amplify or mitigate warming. Reducing this uncertainty is critical to keeping the international goal of limiting warming to 2 °C within reach.

The team of researchers in Japan has developed an innovative approach to improve projection accuracy by combining climate model projections with observational data. The analysis was conducted using the results of numerical experiments on 20 state-of-the-art Earth System Models note 1 that participated in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5 and CMIP6), which contributed to the Fifth and Sixth Assessment Reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The team examined not only how climate models respond to rising carbon dioxide concentrations but also how human carbon dioxide emissions affect atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations — a process governed by the Earth’s carbon cycle. This involves how much of the emitted carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere versus how much is absorbed by forests, soils and oceans.

The analysis revealed that many models overestimate global warming relative to past carbon dioxide emissions. By bringing observations into the picture, the researchers narrowed the uncertainty in projected 21st-century warming and refined estimates of the remaining carbon budget—the total carbon dioxide that can still be emitted while keeping warming level below 2 °C.

Previous studies that did not account for the degree of agreement with observations estimated the remaining carbon budget for limiting warming to 2 °C at about 352 billion tons of carbon, with a wide uncertainty range of 2–702 billion tons note 2. By taking into account the degree of agreement between the Earth system model and observations, the analysis refined this estimate to a mean of 459 billion tons with a narrower uncertainty range of 251–666 billion tons, thereby substantially improving projection accuracy (Figure 1).

Figure 2 illustrates how taking into account the degree of agreement between model results and past observations leads to more accurate projections. In climate research, models that better reproduce the observed global temperature rise (horizontal pink bar) are considered more reliable for future predictions note 3. By giving greater weight to such models, the analysis reduces the spread of estimates for the remaining carbon budget (vertical green bar) compared with the full model range (vertical black bar), thereby improving prediction confidence.

This study sheds light on why estimates of future warming shift when emissions are used instead of concentrations. In the real world, not all of the carbon dioxide we emit stays in the air — much of it is absorbed by forests, soil and oceans. How models represent this “airborne fraction” and the split between land and ocean sinks strongly influences their projections. In many simulations, models warmed the planet too quickly and underestimated how much carbon the land and oceans could take up. By comparing these processes with observations, the researchers showed that some of the most extreme warming projections are less likely, which tightens the range of outcomes (Figure 3). Previous studies have not been able to improve the accuracy of Earth system models’ predictions of both land and ocean carbon dioxide uptake and temperature change. This study is the first to achieve such improvement using the approach illustrated in Figure 2.

These results strengthen the scientific foundation for climate policy by narrowing the range of future warming and the remaining carbon budget. More reliable projections give governments clearer guidance for setting emission-reduction targets, reinforce the credibility of net-zero pledges, and help communities prepare for climate impacts. Beyond the immediate policy relevance, the new framework also offers a valuable tool for future climate assessments, including the upcoming IPCC AR7, where it can be extended to other components of the Earth system.

Yet the broader message is one of urgency: even with refined estimates and a somewhat larger remaining carbon budget, current emissions of about 11 billion tons of carbon per year would still deplete the budget for limiting warming to 2 °C within just a few decades. Our results demonstrate the imperative to take urgent action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Notes
1 Earth System Models are advanced computer simulations that capture the complex interactions among the atmosphere, ocean, land, and biosphere. They are essential for understanding how human activities affect the planet, reconstructing past environmental changes, and projecting future climate conditions. Models developed under the international Coupled Model Intercomparison Projects (CMIP5 and CMIP6) played an important role in the IPCC’s Fifth and Sixth Assessment Reports.

2 The uncertainty range of future projections indicates the range that covers most results. Specifically, it indicates the range of predictions that corresponds to the bottom 5% to the top 5% of predictions obtained by multiple Earth System models.

3 The method used in this study, emergent constraint, aims to reduce uncertainties in future climate projections. It relies on statistical relationships that link differences in models’ historical behavior to their future projections and compares these relationships with observations to refine the uncertainty range.

 

---

Journal

One Earth

DOI

10.1016/j.oneear.2025.101526 

Method of Research

Data/statistical analysis

Subject of Research

Not applicable

Article Title

Narrowed uncertainty in future global temperature and remaining carbon budget

Article Publication Date

5-Dec-2025

ALT. FUELS

Third LCO2 Carrier to Launch Europe’s Largest Carbon Capture Project

The third vessel will be used starting in 2026 to transport CO2 for Yara in the Netherlands for storage in Norway (Yara)

Published Dec 3, 2025 7:08 PM by The Maritime Executive

Norway’s Northern Lights project, along with Japanese ship operator “K” Line (Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha), marked the delivery of the third commercial liquefied CO2 transport vessel. The ship named Northern Phoenix will join the operation in 2026 and be part of Europe’s largest carbon capture project.

The ship is a sister to the first two Northern Lights’ vessels, which were delivered in late 2024 and began the commercial CCS program in 2025. It is the first commercial carbon capture project transporting the liquified gas cross-border and preparing and storing it more than 2.6 kilometers (1.6 miles) beneath the seabed on the Norwegian continental shelf. 

The vessels, with a capacity of 7,500 cubic meters of LCO2, are being built by Dalian Shipbuilding Offshore Co., a division of China State Shipbuilder Corp. The Northern Phoenix was officially handed over on December 2 and is registered in Norway. It is expected to depart China shortly. Northern Lights reports the ship will conduct testing and optimization of its energy-saving devices during the repositioning voyage. Once it arrives at the company’s terminal in Øygarden, it will start mechanical commissioning and training before starting its operations.

The first three vessels are each being operated with bareboat charter contracts and time charters with “K” Line Energy Shipping based in London. In addition to their unique capability to transport LCO2 (maximum pressure of 19 bar(g) and minimum temperature of -35 degrees C), the ships are fueled with LNG and have a wind-assist rotor sails and air lubrication under the hull. 

Commercial operations began in 2025 with Northern Lights under contract to transport and store CO2 from two Norwegian industries, Heidelberg Materials’ cement factory in Brevik and the Hafslund Celsio’s waste-to-energy plant in Oslo. Northern Lights has already announced plans to increase its operations to an annual capacity to handle a minimum of five million tonnes of CO2.

The third vessel will be dedicated to the transport of CO2 from Yara’s flagship ammonia and fertilizer plant in the Netherlands. Yara reports it will begin to capture and liquify up to 800,000 tons of CO2 annually at the plant. It expects to remove approximately 12 million tons of CO2 from its production at the plant in Sluiskil over the next 15 years.

Yara has invested in the facilities at the plant, which include an on-site storage capacity of 15,000 tons of CO2. The plan calls for two shiploads per week to be transferred to the Northern Lights’ vessel for delivery to the receiving station in Norway. From there, it is pumped to the storage site.

In December 2023, Northern Lights announced an agreement to build a fourth vessel. It will be owned and operated by Germany’s Bernhard Schulte Group. Northern Lights signed a long-term time charter party for the cross-border transport of CO2 and now says the vessel will be delivered in 2026. It reports that the vessel will permit it to expand operations with new customers, including Stockholm Exergi.

Design for Large Ammonia-Powered Containership Achieves Key Milestone

MSC is building on its partnership with the Chinese shipbuilders to develop next-generation ships (Zhoushan Changhong International Shipyard)

Published Dec 3, 2025 3:44 PM by The Maritime Executive

 

Classification society DNV reports that it has awarded an Approval in Principle (AiP) to an emerging design for a 21,700 TEU ammonia-powered mega-boxship. This key step, which confirms the feasibility of the design and ensures no major technical hurdles to meeting class, comes as the shipping industry continues to flirt with ammonia as an emerging alternative power source. 

The design for the vessel was developed by a joint consortium of MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company, shipbuilder Zhoushan Changhong International, and CIMC ORIC. MSC has a long-standing relationship with the Chinese shipbuilder, which has built some of the company’s largest containerships currently in service.

“We are proud to see our 21,700 TEU ammonia-dual fuel design recognized with DNV’s AiP,” said Yin Xunbin, General Manager of CIMC ORIC. “This vessel concept offers shipowners an option for a high-capacity, energy-efficient, zero-carbon container ship as part of the next-generation sustainable global liner services. This milestone validates our commitment to providing future-ready vessels that meet global trade demands while reducing emissions.”

DNV reports the proposed 21,700 TEU container ship integrates the latest-generation of ammonia dual-fuel main engines alongside oversized C-type ammonia tanks. The hull design, with a new vertical bow, optimized stern, and hull lines, alongside low-resistance coatings, high-efficiency propellers, and energy-saving hydrodynamic features, targets improved fuel efficiency. Validation of the design was undertaken through CFD simulations and model tests.

The design has also been optimized for a high load-to-capacity ratio and efficient hold utilization. In addition, the twin-island deck layout and foredeck design allow additional 40-foot container bays to increase cargo capacity while maintaining port and operational compatibility. 

“Ammonia-dual fuel options are firmly in the decarbonization race,” says Norbert Kray, DNV Senior Vice President and Maritime Regional Manager for Greater China. “We have gone from concept to orders, and soon will see the first deliveries. The AiP demonstrates that the design is in line with industry’s leading safety and design standards, reinforcing confidence in ammonia as a viable fuel for large container vessels.”

The design reaches this key step in the process as the first ammonia combustion engines are poised to enter the commercial market. As the project develops, the consortium will proceed towards more detailed design and safety analyses, including ammonia mitigation and gas handling, and integration into the fuel system.

Norsepower Extends Wind Rotor Installations to Japanese Newbuild VLCCs

Norsepower has its first contract to install wind rotors on a newbuild VLCC and its first newbuild in Japan (Idemitsu Tankers)

Published Dec 3, 2025 8:54 PM by The Maritime Executive

 

Wind-assisted propulsion continues to make advancements into more segments of the shipping industry, with Norsepower reporting it has signed its first contract for newbuild VLCCs and its first newbuilds in Japan. The company offers a modernized, data-driven evolution of the century-old Fletter rotor, a spinning cylinder that uses the Magnus Effect to create a propulsive force that lowers engine power and fuel consumption.

Idemitsu Tanker Co., Ltd., the shipping arm of Idemitsu Kosan, which reports it has one of the world's largest fleets of tankers, has been developing a next-generation design to increase efficiency and reduce emissions. The company has more than a dozen VLCCs under charter as well as additional managed ships. The concept incorporates efficiency for the vessels and prepares them for future low-carbon fuels such as methanol.

Norsepower reports that it signed the landmark deal the the tanker company for the installation of its wind-assisted propulsion technology. The vessels will be built by Japan Marine United Corporation (JMU) and Nihon Shipyard Co. Each will be delivered with two 35x5 meter (115x16.5 foot) explosion-proof Norsepower Rotor Sails. The first vessel is scheduled for delivery by the end of 2028.

“By equipping our new VLCCs with the Norsepower Rotor Sail™, we are not only investing in fuel savings and emission reductions but also taking a decisive step towards the decarbonisation of long-haul shipping,” said Idemitsu Tankers.

According to Norsepower, the project demonstrates how integrating the intelligent, data-driven rotor sails into purpose-designed vessels can deliver exceptional performance gains. Depending on wind patterns, routing, and vessel operations, the company reports Norsepower Rotor Sails typically reduce fuel use by 5–25 percent — and even higher when conditions are favorable.

The installation is supported by advanced digital control systems that optimize performance in real time. According to Norsepowe, it ensures the sails operate at peak efficiency in every condition. By reducing reliance on engines, the system cuts both fuel consumption and emissions.

With the maturity of wind propulsion, Norsepower had found strong interest in the tanker segment. It reports it has 22 units in operation in this segment, with its systems installed on tankers ranging from smaller chemical tankers, LCO? carriers, MR, LR, VLGC, and now, for the first time, on VLCCs.

COP30 Was Underwhelming, But a Path Away From Fossil Fuels Still Exists

Daphne Wysham – Trina Chiemi

 December 3, 2025

FacebookTwitterRedditBlueskyEmail

Clifty Coal Plant, Madison, Indiana. Photo: Jeffrey St. Clair.

It appeared to be a grim déjà vu when the final gavel dropped in Belem, Brazil and the COP30 text once again avoided naming fossil fuels.

But this apparent diplomatic failure obscured something more consequential: after hours of fraught, last-minute negotiations, countries reaffirmed the “United Arab Emirates consensus” from COP28 — the only UN agreement to date to reference a fossil-fuel phaseout. And the pathway it implies is already taking shape. In April, Colombia and the Netherlands will convene governments in Santa Marta, Colombia for the first global summit dedicated explicitly to the transition away from fossil fuels.

Tripling Renewable Energy, Doubling Efficiency, and Cutting Methane

At COP28 in Dubai, governments committed to tripling renewable energy and doubling energy efficiency by 2030. Combined with deep cuts to fossil methane, these pledges form a powerful trio. According to the Climate Action Tracker, fully implementing them would reduce projected warming by about 0.9°C this century, from 2.6˚C to 1.7˚C — enough to determine whether Paris Agreement targets remains within reach. If delivered, they would do more to collapse fossil-fuel demand than any language missing from the COP30 outcome text.

The energy system is already shifting. In the last two years, China has driven an unprecedented solar surge — adding more capacity in 2024 alone than the rest of the world combined, now hosting roughly half of global installed solar power, and exporting ultra-cheap panels that are flooding markets globally. As solar prices plunge, renewables are undercutting coal and gas markets globally. Doubling energy efficiency, if it can be achieved, cuts demand at a scale equivalent to adding vast new clean-power capacity, but without the economic and environmental burden of new plants.

Deep cuts to fossil methane — the primary component of gas, and a climate pollutant roughly 80 times more powerful than CO₂ over 20 years — require producers to eliminate leakage, venting, and routine flaring. These measures raise compliance costs, increase saleable gas, and make new fossil expansion harder to justify. Taken together, these commitments amount to a key part of the de facto fossil-fuel phaseout pathway.

But voluntary pledges alone won’t get us there. The Global Methane Status Report 2025 finds that despite over 150 countries endorsing the Global Methane Pledge, methane emissions continue to rise.

And even when we look beyond voluntary pledges to the domestic laws, regulations, and policy measures that represent a plan of action — as reflected in countries’ Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and National Methane Action Plans — the gap remains enormous. Fully implementing all NDCs would cut global methane emissions by only about 8 percent below 2020 levels by 2030. That is far short of the 30 percent Global Methane Pledge goal and well below the 45 percent cut UNEP associates with keeping 1.5°C within reach.

The EU Leads the Way on Methane Regulation

The missing ingredient is enforcement — and the most important development on that front is not the Global Methane Pledge but the EU Methane Regulation.

Adopted in 2024, the EU rules apply not only to methane emitted within Europe but also to imported fossil fuels. Because the EU is the world’s largest importer of oil and gas — and its suppliers account for roughly 30 percent of global oil and gas methane emissions — these rules may do more to cut global methane than any voluntary pledge ever could. For the first time, countries exporting gas and oil to Europe must meet strict leak-detection, monitoring, and venting and flaring requirements. Non-compliant fuels can effectively be shut out of the EU market.

This is regulatory gravity: when the world’s largest buyer sets a standard, producers must adapt or lose access.

Some already have. Companies like ConocoPhillips have set near-zero methane-intensity targets by 2030 and earned top-tier marks for emissions reporting — clear signals that they intend to compete under strict import regimes. Meanwhile, fossil-fuel trade groups are lobbying aggressively to weaken the EU rules, arguing they threaten U.S. LNG exports. Investors disagree: in October, asset managers representing over €4.5 trillion urged the EU not to dilute nor delay its methane law, highlighting methane as a material financial risk.

The deeper truth is that the EU methane rules are already going beyond the Global Methane Pledge and achieving reductions in fossil-methane emissions across borders, backed by market access and legal penalties rather than voluntary promises.

Science points in the same direction. The International Energy Agency concludes that methane from fossil-fuel operations could be cut by around 75 percent by 2030 using technologies available today. Combined with renewable and efficiency pledges, these reductions undermine the economic case for expanding fossil-fuel production. New LNG terminals, oil fields, and long-lived gas infrastructure would rapidly become uneconomic — stranded assets in the making.

Pledges Are Not a Plan

Methane is responsible for roughly a third to a half of today’s warming, and because it is short-lived, rapid reductions can deliver measurable cooling within a decade. Without binding limits on fossil methane, the world cannot meet its climate goals, no matter how fast renewable energy grows.

This is the real lesson of COP30: pledges are not a plan. Tripling renewables, doubling efficiency, and slashing methane can transform global energy systems — but only if they are backed by binding rules, border measures, and enforcement. The EU methane regulations represent the first serious attempt at such enforcement.

The next opportunity to broaden that effort will not come at COP31, but in April 2026, when Colombia and the Netherlands co-host the First International Conference on the Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels in Santa Marta.

It will be the first global summit to center the production side of the climate crisis. And it exists because grassroots movements made it unavoidable: years of pressure from youth organizers, Indigenous land defenders, and frontline communities pushed governments and companies toward positions once dismissed as radical — including today’s mainstream demand for a fair, full fossil fuel phaseout. Santa Marta is happening not as a symbolic gesture, but because people insisted on real action.

If COP30 could not bring itself to state that fossil fuels must be phased out, Santa Marta can. And it can ground that commitment in the tools governments have already endorsed: accelerated renewables, deep efficiency gains, and enforceable methane standards — led, in practice, by the EU.

For the United States, the moment is defining. Federal methane rules are being dismantled. But U.S. states need not wait. Colorado, New Mexico, and California already have some of the strongest methane rules in the world. By aligning with Europe’s approach — and sending governors or senior officials to Santa Marta — they can help build a transatlantic coalition for binding methane limits and an orderly fossil-fuel phase-down.

The path from COP30 requires fewer pledges and more enforceable governance. Countries already know what must be done. The task now is to turn an implicit roadmap into a binding framework capable of delivering the cuts that matter most — starting with methane in the oil and gas sector.

This first appeared on FPIF.

Daphne Wysham is CEO of Methane Action and coordinates the Methane Emergency Brake campaign. Trina Chiemi is founding co-chair of Fast Action on Climate to Ensure Intergenerational Justice (FACE).

Environmental Crisis: It’s All About the Money

David Rosen

December 2, 2025

FacebookTwitterRedditBlueskyEmail

Photograph Source: Lula Oficial – CC BY-SA 4.0

For regular viewers of Amy Goodman’s Democracy Now! Program, she and her team recently reported from the COP30 conference in Belém, Brazil.  This COPS spotlighted Indigenous people, and the program had numerous interviews with not only representatives of different Indigenous groups but also environmental activists challenging fossil-fuel hegemony.

The Money

Sadly, none of the well-meaning people interviewed mentioned that the global oil-and-gas cartel garnered $5.9 trillion in revenues for 2024. And the U.S. coal industry accounts for an additional $16.4 billion.

Most disturbing is Wikipedia revealing breakdown of the oil & gas revenues for individual companies by country for 2022.  Its comprehensive list is drawn from data for S&P Global Commodity Insights Top 250 Global Energy Company Rankings, along with Statista and Sovereign Wealth Fund Institute.

The Wikipedia list reminds readers that Brazil’s oil-and-gas companies are relatively small companies compared to, say, those in the U.S. or Saudi Arabia.  It identifies the following with 2023 revenues:

• Brazil’s three companies as YPFB ($8.1/b), Petrobras ($124.4/b) and Ultrapar ($27.8/b).

• In the U.S., it identifies 31 companies, including Chevron Corp. ($246.2), ExxonMobil ($413.6), Marathon ($179.9), Philips 66 ($175.7/b) and Valero Energy ($176.3/b).

• Saudi Arabia there are Bahri ($2.2/b) and Saudi Aramco ($604.3/b) – the world’s largest oil and gas company.

Most troubling, the Council on Foreign Relations reports, “The United States is the world’s top producer of oil and natural gas.” It adds, “The country’s economy runs on these fossil fuels, but producing and burning them releases greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change.”  And the American Petroleum Institute (API) claims it represents 600 members who produce, process and distribute its products.  It adds, “America’s oil and natural gas industry supports 10.3 million jobs in the United States and nearly 8 percent of our nation’s Gross Domestic Product.”

According to Resources for the Future (RFF), a Washington-based nonprofit group, “Compared with 10 years ago, US oil and gas employment has fallen by about 40 percent while production has increased by about 60 percent for oil and almost 50 percent for natural gas.”

Going further, the FRR warns “the economic outlook for US oil and gas-producing regions is highly variable.” Among the “uncertain factors will shape those regions’ economic futures” are (i) fast-growing and emerging technologies (e.g., solar, batteries, enhanced geothermal, advanced nuclear); (ii) the potential for climate and environmental policies, both at home and abroad, to reduce demand for hydrocarbons; and (iii) the potential for low-cost producers in the Middle East to respond to expected demand declines by “opening the taps” to capture market share.

Trump and the Saudis

More troubling, money buys power and power secures influence.  This was no clearer exhibited than in the recent get-together between Donald Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman [MBS].  Not only did Trump host a lavish, black-tie dinner for the prince, but in a poorly orchestrated news conference he insisted that the prince “knew nothing” about the 2018 assassination – and dismemberment — of Jamal Khashoggi, a Washington Post columnist and Saudi dissident.

At the time, the Post reported: “A team of 15 Saudi agents flew to Istanbul on government aircraft in October and killed Khashoggi inside the Saudi Consulate, where he had gone to pick up documents that he needed for his planned marriage to a Turkish woman.”

Trump is America’s foremost let’s-make-money transactional president and, as part of MBS’s visit, the White House announced, “that Saudi Arabia will be increasing their investment commitments in the United States to almost $1 trillion ….”   The original deal was for $600 million but at the press announcement, T$ Trump pushed the total to $1 trillion.  For this, the Saudis will get F-35 fighter jets, tanks and other military equipment.

For Trump, his family and organization, relations with the MBS and other Saudis are all about the money.  White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said, “Neither the President nor his family has ever engaged, or will ever engage, in conflicts of interest.” Sure.

The New York Times recently reported on “at least four Trump-branded developments in Saudi Arabia.” These deals include:

• Diriyah: this is a $63 billion project in which “a Trump-branded property” would be part of what the Times calls “one of Saudi Arabia’s largest government-owned real estate developments.”

• Trump-branded projects: including a $1 billion Trump tower planned for Jeddah and two projects for Riyadh, the Saudi capital.

• Golf: the Saudi-backed SLIV Golf will host tournaments at the Trump National Doral Golf Club near Miami.

And there is Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who’s become a virtual cash register for Saudi money. The Times notes, its “sovereign wealth fund has contributed $2 billion to an investment fund run by Jared Kushner … who cultivated close ties to Prince Mohammed during the president’s first term.” Together, the Saudis and Kushner’s firm took over the video game publisher Electronic Arts private around $55 billion.

At his January 2025 inauguration address, Trump came to power recalling former Maryland Lt Gov Michael Steele slogan ranted at the 2008 Republican convention, “drill, baby, drill!”  Shortly after taking office, he declared in an Executive Order (14153), “Unleashing American Energy,” that it “is thus in the national interest to unleash America’s affordable and reliable energy and natural resources.  This will restore American prosperity —- including for those men and women who have been forgotten by our economy in recent years.”  It added, “It will also rebuild our Nation’s economic and military security, which will deliver peace through strength.”

To fulfill this goal, Trrunp has pushed for increased oil and gas lease sales.  The Bureau of Land Management raised over $38 million in oil and gas lease sales for 23 parcels in Montana and North Dakota.  It did this by, as one source reports, “significantly improved well economics through three-mile lateral drilling technology in the Bakken and Three Forks formations of eastern Montana.”

Most recently, Trump mandated at least 36 oil and gas lease sales for federal waters, including 30 in the Gulf and six in Cook Inlet, Alaska. A U.S. Congressional report notes, Revenues from oil and natural gas leases on onshore federal lands totaled $8.497 billion in FY2023 ….” Another source notes, “Robust offshore oil and natural gas development could generate over $8 billion in additional government revenue by 2040.”

So, when thinking about the ongoing environmental battle, don’t forget in addition to saving the planet and life on this planet, it’s also all about the money.

David Rosen is the author of Sex, Sin & Subversion:  The Transformation of 1950s New York’s Forbidden into America’s New Normal (Skyhorse, 2015).  He can be reached at drosennyc@verizon.net; check out www.DavidRosenWrites.com

The climate coalition fractured at COP30 –

 but a new alliance could turn the tide

Mike Buckley 

1 December, 2025 

Left Foot Forward 


The result was a COP where the foes of ambition were emboldened, its proponents frustrated, and in which countries which could have shown leadership, such as China and India, refused to step up.

A lost opportunity

COP30 was meant to be a game changer. Hosts Brazil framed the event as the “COP of Truth”, a pivotal moment in which years of negotiation would come to fruition in ambitious, meaningful roadmaps to cut fossil fuel use and deliver on climate finance, deforestation, and Indigenous rights.

Yet despite the efforts of COP30 president, André Corrêa do Lago, to deliver, the final agreement – dubbed the Global Mutirão (or ‘collective efforts’) – offered merely a non-binding “mechanism” to help ensure a “just transition”, and a set of measures to track climate-adaptation progress.

Even the most welcome development – a commitment from wealthy nations to triple the amount of money to help poorer nations adapt to the effects of climate change – remains inadequate given it will only be reached in 2035, five years later than developing nations wanted.

No-one left COP30 believing enough had been done to keep the world on track to keep global temperatures below 1.5C or even the higher ‘safe’ limit of 2C above pre-industrial temperatures.

“Cop30 gave us some baby steps in the right direction, but considering the scale of the climate crisis, it has failed to rise to the occasion,” warned Mohamed Adow, director of the Power Shift Africa thinktank.

Corrêa do Lago admitted his frustration at the lack of delivery. The consensus nature of the talks “slow down action,” he said. A single, obstructive nation could block discussions, or a group of countries would block progress by repeating long-held, often valid, positions.

None of this was a surprise. COPs are by design global gatherings where decisions are made by consensus, not by majority vote. The hope has been that by keeping all countries on side meaningful, ambitious global progress can, eventually, be made.

But COPs are not divorced from geopolitical or economic realities. The US is led by a man who denies the climate crisis exists. Russia is at war with Europe and survives economically by selling fossil fuels. Saudi Arabia and others are also dependent on selling such fuels, and have no intention of giving up yet. They may not deny the science, but they refuse to bow to it.

Michael Jacobs, a veteran of climate diplomacy, described this group as an “axis of obstruction” which is creating “an increasingly bitter conflict at the heart of global climate politics between those who accept that the world must wean itself off fossil fuels; and those who are actively resisting in pursuit of short-term energy interests”.

The result was a COP where the foes of ambition were emboldened, its proponents frustrated, and in which countries which could have shown leadership, such as China and India, refused to step up.

COP sceptics have long argued that consensus offers only a road to ruin – a guarantee that a small number of nations will always pull the handbrake even as a majority seek speed and ambition.

Perhaps the sceptics have finally won, as the end of COP30 saw the beginning of an independent coalition of the willing, a group of nations ambitious to go further and faster to cut emissions, protect forests and provide essential climate finance to enable poorer nations to both adapt to the climate crisis, and to invest in renewable technology to curb their own emissions.

Corrêa do Lago, unwilling to walk away, will divorce his ambitious roadmap plans from the COP and UN process, establishing them on a voluntary basis outside the formal UN regime. Brazil, he said, would spend the next year overseeing two separate road map initiatives, each for fossil fuels and deforestation. He nonetheless hoped the outcomes would be adopted at a future COP.

He also announced a trade and climate body independent of both the UN climate process and the World Trade Organization to deal with tensions fuelled by measures such as the EU’s pioneering carbon border tax, which comes into effect in January.

The Netherlands and Colombia will separately host what is being billed as the first international conference on the transition away from fossil fuels in April.

Fragmentation: friend or foe?

The hope is that a more fragmented process enables swifter action towards emissions reductions, greater help for developing nations to invest in renewable energy and climate adaptation, and more protection for forests, other biodiversity and indigenous peoples.

Under new leadership or fearing diplomatic, trade or economic isolation ‘petrostates’ like the US, Russia and Saudi Arabia may eventually come onside. Given their size and – in particular for the US – their influence, a long term solution without them seems all but impossible.

But ambitious nations must also work with COP30’s third group of countries, which may hold the key to a step change in progress on emissions and adaptation.

This third group are neither blockers nor opposed to multilateral action, but are unified by a belief that their country’s needs are not addressed in current climate plans. These are mostly middle- and low-income countries, acutely aware of extreme weather and the climate crisis, but just as aware that they must balance their need to develop with climate action.

They believe their call for adequate climate finance from the world’s rich nations, for tariff removal on green technology, and for technical assistance to enable them to grow sustainably, has not been heeded. Their refusal to join with ambitious nations in building roadmaps is not so much a refusal to act – but a protest at what they see as unfair treatment.

They are also ambitious to develop, and to do so as quickly and cheaply as possible. Struggling with debt, low investment and the politics and expense of lifting people out of poverty, even though renewable technology is proven and available, for many governments fossil fuels are still more readily available and swiftly brought online, and hence offer the quickest route to development.

India’s environment minister Bhupender Yadav summed up their frustration: Climate finance, he said, must be counted in “trillions, not billions”, and rich countries need to bring forward their own net zero dates instead of lecturing others.

Small island states and least developed countries, meanwhile, have received almost none of the money they were promised. A recent UN assessment found that only around 1% of global climate finance reached small island developing states over the last decade.

In addition, affordable, accessible climate technology must be free from restrictive intellectual property barriers, argues Yadav. Only with adequate finance and access to renewable technologies free of excessive licence payments or tariffs can the world move to net zero quickly, sustainably and fairly.

A way forward

What happens next will depend on whether the ambitious bloc — especially the UK, EU, Canada and Australia — recognises that the middle group holds the key to unlocking real progress. These countries are not resisting climate action; they are demanding fairness.

That means climate finance must be delivered, and the 2035 date brought forward five years. It means opening access to clean technology, easing debt burdens, reforming trade rules and investing at scale in renewable infrastructure. It means recognising the deep links between the climate transition and international development; for some nations, including the UK and Germany, it will mean a recommitment to development as a policy priority.

If the UK and EU lead a genuine partnership with this third group — listening to their priorities and matching ambition with resources — the coalition for action will grow dramatically, enabling swifter progress and isolating the remaining petrostates. By COP31, a far broader, more united front could finally start driving the urgent transition the world needs.

Mike Buckley is the director of the Independent Commission on UK-EU Relations and a former Labour Party adviser