from 2035, 250 billion dollars per year for poor countries

For the first time since the climate summit began in Azerbaijan, there is an amount on the table that countries must negotiate: 250 billion dollars. The chairman of the conference has proposed that rich countries will give that amount of climate aid to poor countries every year from 2035. It is related to public and private money.

In one earlier draft proposal the letter ‘X’ still appeared where it was necessary to say a sum. Although $250 billion is a solid amount, it is still significantly less than what developing countries want. With the support of scientists, they previously reached an amount of 1000 billion or more. Yesterday they asked rich countries to give at least $500 billion by 2030.

Below you can see how many developing countries want compared to what could be agreed:

This year’s summit in Baku will focus heavily on climate finance and is also known as the money summit by experts. The countries had agreed in the Paris climate agreement (2015) to create a new funding target. The old funding target, $100 billion annually from 2020, was not reached for the first time until 2022.

So the target announced in the latest draft text has more than doubled compared to the 100 billion dollars raised annually so far. But that will be a bitter pill for developing countries. The amount is well below what they consider necessary.

“That 250 billion by 2035 is a slap in the face for developing countries,” says climate finance expert Pieter Pauw from TU Eindhoven. He says the previous target (100 billion) would now be up to 150 billion dollars after adjusting for inflation. “100 billion more in 11 years, while the climate crisis is already causing hundreds of billions in damage across the world, very low,” he reckons.

The table below shows how many billions were raised each year for developing countries. From 2020, rich countries are obliged to donate $100 billion annually, but this was only achieved for the first time two years later.

Pauw also says that nothing concrete has been said about the new sources of money. “It is not about countries that contribute, there is nothing about, for example, a tax on flying billions. ” He also sees that the previous references to changing the financial system have been removed from the text. “And nothing more about scrapping fossil fuel subsidies or carbon taxes.”

The stated amount of 250 billion dollars immediately led to angry reactions from (environmental) groups. Oxfam expressed their anger at the Azerbaijani president. It would be a “disgraceful failure of leadership”.

During the summit, the NGOs argued for a sum of more than 1 trillion dollars. The lion’s share of this should be donations. Greenpeace called the proposed amount “inadequate”, “divorced from the reality of the consequences of climate change” and “far below the needs of developing countries”.

The draft proposal calls for all countries (rich and poor) to raise $1,300 billion by 2035. Developed countries must take the lead in this regard, is the call in the text. In addition to financial support, the proposed text also deals with climate change. For example, countries are reaffirming some of the agreements made in Dubai last year. The most famous example of this is the tripling of renewable energy generation by 2030.

But it is surprising that the commitment to “move away” from fossil fuels has not been directly repeated. During the negotiations, it was said that the Arab countries in particular opposed the repetition of these goals. The EU, the poorest countries and the low island states do not want to back down.

In the text there is a proposal to do more for mitigation, ie limiting climate change. This goal would require the world to invest a lot of money in expanding and strengthening power grids.

In addition, there would be a target to connect super batteries to the power grid. The idea is that more solar and wind power can be added and used on the power grid. In this way, countries can say goodbye to oil, gas and coal faster.

Minister Hermans for Climate and Green Growth believes that the latest proposal is an improvement compared to yesterday’s proposal. “However, a lot of work is still needed. There are better references to previous agreements to combat climate change as much as possible, with reference to last year’s agreements. But not to enough. There is still work to be done on the climate finance proposal.”