COP30: Belém delivers finance, dodges fossil fuels and leaves a fractured legacy - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Final COP30 text omitted any explicit commitment to phase out fossil fuels[1] Negotiators agreed to increase adaptation finance, effectively tripling current goals by 2035[2] At least 29 nations threatened to block the text unless fossil fuel language was included[3] The final decision was pushed through after marathon talks and overnight negotiation sessions[4] Major environmental groups said the outcome underdelivers on fossil fuel action[5] Colombia and the Netherlands announced an independent conference on phasing out fossil fuels[6]

The COP30 summit in Belém closed with a compromise package that increased funds for adaptation but conspicuously avoided explicit fossil fuel commitments.

Negotiators approved a text that ramps up money for vulnerable countries while omitting a clear roadmap to phase out the fuels that drive warming. ^[1]

The deal was finalised after late night sessions and extended negotiations that tested the patience of many delegations. ^[4]

Officials described the outcome as pragmatic, while critics called it inadequate and tone deaf to the science. ^[5]

The compromise commits richer countries to at least triple finance for adaptation by 2035, a significant upward revision of current targets. ^[2]

Yet that financing pledge was bracketed with timelines and indicators that some negotiators say weaken its near term impact. ^[2]

Delegations from small island states, parts of Latin America and climate justice groups left Belém frustrated that fossil fuel language had been excised. ^[3]

The final text does include mechanisms for future work on energy transitions, but those mechanisms stop short of a binding fossil fuel phase out at the UN level. ^[1]

What the final decision actually says

The COP30 decision focuses on scaling up adaptation finance and refining indicators to measure progress in vulnerable countries.

The text calls on developed countries to substantially increase support for adaptation and resilience. ^[2]

The language on mitigation and energy is intentionally generic, asking “actors” to accelerate action rather than naming fossil fuels. ^[4]

COP30 presidency documents indicate a commitment to follow up work on energy transition pathways outside the main decision text. ^[1]

Why fossil fuels were removed from the text

Opposition from major oil, gas and coal producing countries and from states that rely on fossil revenues prevailed during the final drafting. ^[4]

Negotiators described a political split in which some delegations pushed for explicit phasing language while others warned of economic and energy security consequences. ^[1]

The result was a middle path that delivered finance commitments rather than a direct fossil fuel roadmap at the UN level. ^[2]

Voices from the floor

Several delegations, including Colombia and a bloc of at least 29 countries, threatened to hold up the text unless fossil fuel transition language was included. ^[3]

Those delegations argued that a decision that cannot name fossil fuels is inconsistent with the science and with countries’ own commitments. ^[1]

Environmental groups said the final package “underdelivers” on what is required to keep 1.5 degrees within reach. ^[5]

At the same time, several developed nations welcomed the finance package as a pragmatic step in a geopolitically fragmented moment. ^[4]

Practical consequences and next steps

Practically, the decision increases money channelled to adaptation projects that protect communities from heat, flood and crop failure. ^[2]

The COP30 presidency said it will advance a separate fossil fuel transition proposal, but that proposal will not carry the same status as a COP decision. ^[1]

Some countries signalled they will pursue parallel diplomatic and regional initiatives to craft concrete fossil fuel phase out pathways. ^[6]

Colombia and the Netherlands announced plans to co-host an intergovernmental conference focused on a just transition away from fossil fuels in April 2026. ^[6]

Assessment

Belém delivered more money and a promise of further work, but it stopped short of the decisive fossil fuel language many scientists and negotiators said was essential. ^[5]

The final bargain exposed a diplomatic reality in which finance pledges can be agreed, while energy system transformations remain politically fraught. ^[4]

The outcome makes clear that the UN process will share space with new forums where willing countries and subnational actors attempt to draft operational phase out plans. ^[6]

What to watch

Watch the follow up work streams promised by the COP30 presidency and the April 2026 conference in Santa Marta for whether technical and financial pathways for a just phase out emerge. ^[6]

Also watch whether the newly tripled adaptation funding target is implemented in full, and how quickly money reaches communities on the front line. ^[2]

References

1. COP30 seals uneasy climate deal that sidesteps fossil fuels | Reuters
2. UN climate talks end with deal for more money to countries hit by climate change | AP News
3. Cop30 draft text omits mention of fossil fuel phase-out roadmap | The Guardian
4. COP30 deal urges more funds for poorer countries, omits fossil fuels | Al Jazeera
5. STATEMENT: COP30 Delivers on Forests and Finance, Underdelivers on Fossil Fuels | WRI
6. Governments of Colombia and The Netherlands Announce Co-hosting First International Conference on the Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels | Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative

Back to Top

Wisdom of the elders - Julian Cribb

Surviving the 21st Century - Julian Cribb

Imbecility of the rich

AUTHOR

Julian Cribb AM is an Australian science writer and author of seven books on the human existential emergency. His latest book is How to Fix a Broken Planet (Cambridge University Press, 2023)

As human civilization pursues its relentless march to oblivion, it is time to reflect on the many wise voices who have forewarned of it – and the many foolish ones that are inviting it.

“Right now, we’re facing a manmade disaster of global scale. Our greatest threat in thousands of years,” said British science broadcaster David Attenborough, 99, in his final warning to humanity.

“If we don’t take action, the collapse of our civilizations and the extinction of much of the natural world is on the horizon. But the longer we leave it, the more difficult it’ll be to do something about it.”

“There’s a chance for us to make amends, to complete our journey of development, manage our impact, and once again become a species in balance with nature. All we need is the will to do so.”

Pioneer primatologist Jane Goodall, who died on Oct 2, 2025, said in her last message: “If you want to save what is still beautiful in this world, if you want to save the planet for the future generations, your grandchildren, their grandchildren, then think about the actions you take each day.

“We’re not only part of Mother Nature. We depend on nature for clean air, water, food, clothing—everything.

“As we destroy one ecosystem after another, as we create worse climate change, worse loss of diversity, we must do everything in our power to make the world a better place for children today and those who will follow.”

The caveats of pioneer climatologist James Hansen, 84, who first warned the world of the risks of global overheating in 1988, have proven correct time and again. Recently Hansen tabled proofs that the climate crisis is worse, and moving much faster, than most people – including the IPCC – imagine.

His latest study, to evaluate climate sensitivity and the forces that underly climate change, found the world’s climate to be far more sensitive to a doubling in atmospheric CO2 that previously estimated, whereas the contrary cooling effect caused by atmospheric sulphate aerosols may have been overestimated.

The Earth’s oceans, our planet’s primary life support system, are now in crisis due to overheating and overfishing, and are perilously close to tipping into collapse, according to pioneer oceanographer Sylvia Earle, 90.

“What are you willing to put into this goal of securing a habitable planet? To me, it’s our highest priority,” says Dr Earle.

“Nothing else matters. We are experiencing a meltdown of our life support system. I can hold up the mirror and say, here are the problems and here are the solutions. Nobody can do it all, but everybody can do something.”

Eminent Canadian geneticist Dr David Suzuki, 89, has stated bluntly is that it is already too late to halt climate change. The question is what we can do next in the face of unfolding climate chaos – and politicians who cannot tell the truth about what is really happening.

“We’re in an emergency just now. We passed +1.5 degrees in 2025 and we are heading for record carbon emissions this year.”

Suzuki argues that the key flaw in our current system is the exclusion of nature from economic thought, leading to irrationality in how we value assets. “Nature, the air, the water, the soil, the biodiversity that allows us to live (are) not in the economic system.”

Underlining his point, he explains the Amazon, the greatest terrestrial ecosystem on the planet, has no economic value until it is logged, mined, dammed or used to grow soybeans and beef.

As far back as 2010, planetary biologist James Lovelock – late author of the Gaia theory that the Earth functions as a self-regulating organism, wrote in The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning: “The Earth’s population will be culled from today’s 6.6 billion to as few as 500 million, with most of the survivors living in the far latitudes – Canada, Iceland, Scandinavia, the Arctic Basin.”  

The figure of 6.6 billion people applied to 2010, the time when Lovelock was writing. That number rose to 8.25 billion in 2025, and is projected by the UN to reach 9.8 billion in 2050. Unless there is a collapse.

In 1992 the Union of Concerned Scientists warned: “Human beings and the natural world are on a collision course. If not checked, many of our current practices put at serious risk the future we wish for human society and the plant and animal kingdoms.

“We may so alter the natural world that it will be unable to sustain life in the manner we know.”

In 2017, ecologist William Ripple and 15,000 colleagues repeated the warning: “We are jeopardizing our future by not reining in our intense material consumption and by not perceiving continued rapid population growth as a primary driver behind many threats.

“By failing to adequately limit population growth, reassess the role of an economy rooted in growth, reduce greenhouse gases, incentivize renewable energy, protect habitat, restore ecosystems, curb pollution, halt defaunation, and constrain invasive alien species, humanity is not taking the urgent steps needed to safeguard our imperilled biosphere

In 2020 they added: “We declare, with more than 11,000 scientist signatories from around the world, clearly and unequivocally that planet Earth is facing a climate emergency.”

In the 2023 State of the Climate report, the scientists said: “We warn of potential collapse of natural and socioeconomic systems in a world where we will face unbearable heat, frequent extreme weather events, food and fresh water shortages, rising seas, more emerging diseases, and increased social unrest and geopolitical conflict,”

Despite such repeated admonition by learned and responsible individuals on a colossal pile of hard evidence and proof, countries, corporations and political leaders have remained largely deaf, blind and heedless to the predicament facing humanity and the planet.

The influence of obscene wealth and selfish power over politics and government has never been plainer. It transcendence over the fate of humanity was never more complete.

The wisdom of these elders stands in strident contrast to the unsated lust of the world’s ‘richest’ individuals, oligarchs, families and corporations for a substance that exists nowhere in the Universe outside the human imagination. Money.

That’s right, the art of being a billionaire is to own more of nothing than anyone else in the cosmos. If humanity lost confidence in the value of money, their ‘wealth’ would simply evaporate, as in the Weimar and Argentine hyperinflation episodes.

Yet these creatures who lust after a delusion hold their shallow insights into the human predicament superior to those who have devoted lifetimes to its study.

Inveterate fabulist Donald Trump informed the United Nations “This ‘climate change,’ it’s the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world, in my opinion.”

Arab prince Mohammad bin Salman Al Saud, sneakier than Trump but just as dangerous, pledged $2.5 billion for ‘climate action’. Yet his country has led the fight in the COP conferences to block, sabotage, and delay global climate action.

Global plutocrat Elon Musk, who in 2023 declared AI as the greatest threat to civilisation has lately swivelled to targetting women, stating that declining global fertility rates “will lead to mass extinction of entire nations.” (And thus, presumably, to lower profits for billionaires.)

But what do these Tech Bros actually think they know about the coming collapse of civilisation? Apparently, what terrifies them most of all is not so much climate catastrophe or nuclear holocaust – as AI apocalypse... they very thing they are building so profitably.

Consequently, like a bevy of little Hitlers, the Tech Bros are also busy excavating luxury hardshell bunkers in the remotest corners of the planet, costing $400m or more. (Or, as Stephen Klein eloquently puts it, ‘digging their own graves’.) Companies like SAFE (Strategically Armoured & Fortified Environments), Atlas Survival Shelters and SubStructure Solutions are arising to cater to the boom in timorous oligarchy.

The irony, of course, is that the end of the world is being engineered with our money. In easy monthly payments, tens of millions of gullible clients worldwide are forking over their hard-earned cash for the very AI products that are enriching the Tech Bros and which, they themselves fear, could end our civilisation.

Having digested this abomination, please return to the first part of this article and review the wisdom of the elders, their care, their caution and ultimately, their conviction that hope is not dead. Provided we lose the monetary, energy systems and selfish people that are destroying our world.

And then reflect that the ultra-rich have one destination - and one alone.

To line their pockets with the blood of your grandchildren.

Links

• David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet – Transcript
• Dr. Jane Goodall’s Final Message To The World
• Seeing the Forest for the Trees
• Earth’s oceans are ‘perilously close’ to tipping point, marine biologist says
• Dr. Sylvia Earle marine biologist, oceanographer, explorer, writer, and lecturer
• Dr David Suzuki Canadian academic, science broadcaster, and environmental activist
• David Suzuki: The Brutal Truth About Climate Change
• Dr James Lovelock independent scientist, environmentalist and futurist
• The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning
• World Scientists Warning To Humanity
• William Ripple Professor of Ecology Oregon State University
• World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice
• World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency
• the 2023 State of the Climate report
• $2.5 billion for ‘climate action’
• Gore points finger at Saudi blocking tactics at UN COP30 climate summit
• AI as the greatest threat
• Elon Musk Issues Birth Rate Warning: ‘Mass Extinction’
• The Silicon Valley Billionaires Who Have Designed Our World Have Planned Their Escape
• Inside the $478 million luxury bunker only the rich can seek shelter from apocalypse
• Atlas Survival Shelters

Back to Top

Pacific Islands on the Edge: Climate Change and the Rising Struggle for Survival - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Pacific Islands are vulnerable to sea-level rise and coastal hazards.1 Social disruption includes forced migration and mental health strain.2 Economies face risk across farming, fishing, and tourism.3 Coral bleaching, water scarcity, and biodiversity loss reshape island ecologies.4 Cultural identity, language, and belonging are threatened by displacement.5 Pacific leaders champion global ambition and climate justice.6

Pacific Island nations are at global warming ground zero.

They are facing climate-driven disruptions to land, seas, and society.¹

Sea-level rise, accelerating faster than global averages, brings inundation, flooding, and erosion to already fragile atolls.²

Communities are seeing homes and schools threatened by saltwater intrusion, storm surges, and disappearing coastlines.³

The social fabric is tested as families move, sometimes permanently, disrupting deep-rooted cultural and kinship ties.⁴

Economically, livelihoods built on fishing, farming, and tourism are jeopardised by shifting rainfall, ocean warming, bleaching reefs, and extreme weather.⁵

Cultural identities are at stake as sacred sites, traditions, and even languages face the prospect of being lost with the land.⁶

Despite these burdens, Pacific leadership remains steadfast, pushing for ambitious global action, fair adaptation finance, and a voice for islanders at the main table of climate negotiations.⁷

Adaptation and resilience now define the region’s future, requiring innovation, support, and global solidarity.⁸

Geographic Vulnerability in the Pacific

Pacific Islands are among the world’s most climate-vulnerable places, with many nations rising just a few metres above current sea levels.⁹

Rising seas outpace global averages in the region, placing infrastructure, agriculture, and freshwater at immediate risk.¹⁰

Saltwater contaminates groundwater, undermining clean water access and crop production.¹¹

Many islands experience more frequent and intense storms while changing El Niño and La Niña cycles cause unpredictable rainfall, droughts, and cyclones.¹²

The World Meteorological Organization reports marine heatwaves nearly twice as frequent here as globally, compounding ecosystem losses.¹³

These biophysical risks cut across every domain of island life, creating a cascading series of challenges.¹⁴

Low-lying atolls such as Kiribati, Tuvalu, and the Marshall Islands face an existential threat as climate change outpaces adaptation.¹⁵

Geography itself becomes destiny under rising global temperatures, affecting national security, health, and development.¹⁶

Social Impacts and Community Resilience

Pacific societies are shaped by kinship, community, and a deep connection to ancestral land, all tested by climate-induced disruptions.¹⁷

In some nations, planned relocation has already begun; over 80 communities in Fiji have been earmarked for movement due to climate threats.¹⁸

The process is emotionally painful, with families uprooted from home, history, and spiritual places.¹⁹

Health complications rise as clean water becomes scarce, food insecurity increases, and diseases spread in the wake of floods or droughts.²⁰

Mental health strains are reported widely, as climate anxiety and trauma from sudden disasters leave scars that may persist for generations.²¹

Pacific resilience traditions—like sharing food and resources—remain strong, but climate change now tests those bonds in ways they have never experienced.²²

As movement becomes more common, communities must also learn to keep cohesion and culture intact.²³

Economic Effects: Agriculture, Fisheries, and Tourism

Changes in rainfall, temperature, and ocean chemistry destabilise core sectors of Pacific economies.²⁴

Shifting rainfall patterns cause crop failures, especially for root crops like taro and cassava vital for local diets.²⁵

Farming yields decline further as saltwater intrusion ruins coastal and riverbank fields.²⁶

Ocean acidification and warming seas reduce fisheries’ productivity, threaten food security, and weaken income for artisanal fishers.²⁷

Coral bleaching devastates marine life relied on by local communities for livelihoods and tourism.²⁸

Tourism—the economic backbone for some—suffers from degraded coral reefs, beach loss, and increased cyclone risks.²⁹

Disaster recovery costs and adaptation investments are mounting, outstripping in-country resources and increasing Pacific dependence on international aid and remittances.³⁰

Ecological Consequences and Biodiversity Loss

Coral reefs in the region bleach and die under marine heatwaves and acidification, undermining fisheries and storm protection.³¹

Mangroves—essential for biodiversity and shoreline protection—decline under salinisation and development pressure.³²

Biodiversity loss accelerates, threatening food security and traditional hunting practices.³³

Groundwater resources are contaminated with saltwater, pushing some communities to rely on rainwater collection or imported bottled water.³⁴

Environmental changes happen faster than nature or communities can adapt, risking ecosystem collapse in worst-case scenarios.³⁵

Cultural Dimensions, Heritage, and Identity

Loss of ancestral land disrupts more than homes; it unravels ties to stories, customs, and the land’s sacred meaning.³⁶

Studies in Fiji and elsewhere show climate relocations can accelerate language attrition and the loss of traditional ecological knowledge.³⁷

Youth increasingly express climate anxiety over the future of their islands, fearing not just loss of land, but loss of identity.³⁸

For communities forced to leave, cultural survival becomes bound to the preservation of oral history, ceremony, and collective memory.³⁹

Ensuring culture and knowledge are passed on is now a core pillar of climate adaptation for Pacific societies.⁴⁰

Political Challenges and Leadership

Pacific Island leaders have forged a clear global voice on climate advocacy, calling for 1.5°C-aligned action and loss and damage support.⁴¹

Conclusion: Adaptation, Resilience, and Hope

Pacific Island nations are determined to survive and adapt, but require global solidarity, ambition, and justice to secure a future for all islanders.⁸

References

1. Adapting Coastal Cities and Territories to Sea Level Rise: Pacific Regional Report – Ocean-Climate.org
2. Climate Change Transforms Pacific Islands – World Meteorological Organization
3. Climate Change and Pacific Island Countries – United Nations CC:Learn
4. Reconsidering Sovereignty Amid the Climate Crisis – Carnegie Endowment (2025)
5. Islands on the Edge: The Pacific’s Struggle for Climate Justice – AIIA
6. Pacific Community Climate Adaptation and Resilience Report – PCCS
7. Understanding Cultural Losses and Damages Induced by Climate Change – Pacific Region, Fiji Case Study
8. New Report Reveals Pacific Leadership on Climate – UNFCCC
9. Climate Change and Pacific Islands: Indicators and Impacts – Reef Resilience (PIRCA)
10. WMO State of the Climate in the South-West Pacific 2023 Report
11. Climate Action Urged as Leaders Gather, Pacific Islands Forum – SPREP
12. Why the Pacific Islands Forum Matters for Australia and Climate Action – Climate Council
13. Climate Forecasts Warn of Economic Risks – APIBC (2025)
14. Understanding and Responding to Climate-Driven Non-Economic Loss in the Pacific Islands – ScienceDirect
15. Climate Change and Pacific Island Food Systems – University of Wollongong
16. Climate Change, Vulnerability, and Cultural Loss – Tandfonline (2025)
17. FAO Report: Impacts of Climate Change on Pacific Fisheries and Agriculture
18. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report: Climate Impacts on Small Island States
19. NOAA Coral Reef Watch – Coral Bleaching Outlooks
20. WHO: Climate Change and Human Health in Pacific Islands
21. ADB: Economics of Climate Change in the Pacific
22. Tuvalu’s Leadership and Advocacy for Pacific Climate Ambition – PINA
23. COP28 Official Pacific Delegations Statements
24. World Health Organization: Climate Change and Health Factsheet
25. Pacific Islands Climate Outlook Forum (PICOF) #6 Summary
26. Climate-Induced Migration in the Pacific – Journal Environmental Management
27. USP Studies on Traditional Knowledge and Eco-Adaptation
28. UNESCO: Ocean Acidification and Fisheries in the Pacific
29. The Conversation: Bleaching Hits Pacific Islands
30. World Bank: Climate Change and Pacific Economies
31. SPREP: Climate Change and Freshwater in the Pacific
32. International Maritime Organization: Net Zero Shipping Framework
33. Climate Analytics: Analysis of Global Climate Finance Disparities
34. Pacific Climate Change Portal: Adaptation Funding Projects
35. Journal of Cultural Heritage: Climate Change and Cultural Loss
36. Pacific Islands Development Forum: Climate Justice and Diplomacy
37. SDG Progress Reports in the Pacific Region – United Nations
38. Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade: Pacific Engagement on Climate
39. The Conversation: Pacific Islanders Push New Adaptation Models
40. Environmental Research Letters: Socioeconomic Impacts on Small Island States
41. International Court of Justice: Advisory Opinion on States’ Climate Obligations

Back to Top

Australia’s Bid to Host COP31 Collapses Amid Deadlock with Türkiye - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Australia ceded COP31 hosting to Türkiye after a diplomatic deadlock. 1 Under the deal, Chris Bowen will lead negotiations despite Türkiye hosting. 2 Pacific nations and environmental groups expressed frustration at losing a global platform. 3 Adelaide businesses are disappointed, estimating a potential economic loss of over A$500 million. 4 Delay and uncertainty hampered Adelaide’s logistical preparations. 5 Despite losing hosting, Australia retains influence via presidency role and Pacific-focused arrangements. 6

Australia has officially withdrawn its bid to host the COP31 climate summit in Adelaide, conceding the event to Türkiye. ¹ 

In a rare compromise, Australia will retain the presidency of the negotiations while Türkiye hosts the formal conference. ² 

The deal reflects deep diplomatic challenges, including a deadlock over UN consensus rules and tensions with Pacific island nations. ³ 

The loss is widely seen as a blow to both Adelaide’s economy and Australia’s ambition to centre Pacific leadership in global climate diplomacy. ⁴ 

At the same time, the arrangement preserves significant leverage for Australia in shaping COP31’s agenda. ⁶ 

Key questions now emerge about how this outcome affects Australia’s reputation as a renewable energy leader and its influence in the Pacific region.

Origins of the Bid and Diplomatic Impasse

Australia launched its bid to host COP31 in Adelaide with the backing of Pacific island nations, hoping to leverage the summit as a platform for climate-vulnerable states. ³ 

Under UNFCCC rules, the host must be agreed by unanimity within the “Western Europe and Others” (WEOG) group of countries. ¹ 

Australia claimed “overwhelming” support from most WEOG members but could not compel Türkiye to withdraw. ¹ 

Türkiye, which also submitted a bid in 2022, remained firm in its resolve. ⁶

The diplomatic stalemate persisted through months of high-level negotiations. ⁴ 

Australia’s climate minister, Chris Bowen, pressed Türkiye for a compromise, but any joint-hosting offer ran into UN rules. ⁴ 

The Turkish government reportedly declined shared venue proposals and resisted back-down, arguing for its own capability and highlighting its geographic advantages. ⁷

Turning Point: The Compromise Deal

At COP30 in Belém, Brazil, Australia announced a deal: Türkiye will host COP31 in Antalya, while Minister Bowen will assume “COP president for negotiations.” ¹ 

According to Bowen, this gives Australia full control over negotiating text, co-facilitators, and drafting the summit’s “cover decision.” ²

Australia also secured a promise for a pre-COP leaders’ meeting in the Pacific, intended as a special pledging event for a Pacific resilience fund. ³ 

The arrangement gives Canberra significant soft power, even if it relinquishes the role of host nation.

Why the Bid Collapsed: Key Factors

The primary driver was Türkiye’s steadfast refusal to give way. ⁶ 

Though Australia had broad support, UN rules require unanimity. ¹ 

Without Türkiye’s withdrawal, Australia could not secure the bid.

Internal Australian government fragmentation also played a role. Officials from Foreign Affairs and Trade reportedly clashed with climate-change campaigners within the bid team. ¹ 

Observers noted that not all senior leaders consistently backed the effort. ⁸

The UN’s opaque decision-making process compounded frustration. Australia’s inability to break the impasse exposed structural flaws in how host countries are selected. ³ 

Climate advocates also argued that Türkiye’s late-stage resistance demonstrated how prestige plays a role, regardless of technical capacity.

Ramifications for Australia as a Renewable-Energy Leader

The failure to host COP31 in Australia is a reputational setback for Canberra’s renewable-energy ambitions. Hosting a global climate summit could have symbolised Australia’s transition from fossil fuels to clean energy. ⁴ 

Instead, Türkiye will gain visibility, while Australia implicitly shifts from centre-stage host to behind-the-scenes broker.

On the other hand, securing the negotiation presidency gives Australia a powerful role in shaping the outcome. Bowen’s control over the text and decision documents means Australian priorities—especially on Pacific resilience and just transitions—could carry weight.

For Australian clean-tech businesses, the lost opportunity in Adelaide may feel bitter. Local investors and companies were gearing up for international showcas­es. That said, Australia’s climate diplomacy narrative remains intact, albeit refocused.

Economic and Political Impact on Adelaide

Adelaide, which had prepared for a major economic windfall, now faces disappointment. ⁴ 

Hotels and local retailers had forecast tens of thousands of delegates and roughly A$511.6 million in economic activity. ⁴

The South Australian government had earmarked about A$8 million for COP31 preparations. ² 

Some of these funds have already been spent on security planning and venue readiness. ⁵ 

With the bid lost, questions now swirl about how to redirect these resources.

Still, Premier Peter Malinauskas suggested Adelaide could bid again in the future, citing the city’s raised international profile. ² 

For local business, the COP campaign has provided a platform even if the summit itself won't come.

Implications for Australia’s Regional Role

Australia framed its COP31 bid around Pacific leadership, promising co-hosting with Pacific island states and a visible platform for their climate vulnerability. ³ 

Losing the bid complicates that promise, and some Pacific leaders expressed disappointment publicly. ³

Yet the deal struck allows for a Pacific-focused pre-COP event and potentially a major resilience-finance campaign. ³ 

In effect, Australia may still amplify Pacific voices—even without hosting.

However, the optics may matter. Not hosting in the Pacific region itself undermines Australia’s symbolic commitment as a partner for island nations. 

It could weaken trust among some countries that had hoped for more than diplomatic influence.

Global Climate Diplomacy and Policy Implications

The compromise sets a precedent: a bidder may forgo hosting but retain the negotiation presidency. 

This may become a model for future summits when consensus is difficult. Australia’s deal sends a signal that influence can be separated from venue.

For global climate governance, Australia’s role as negotiator rather than host may allow it to punch above its weight. If Bowen uses his presidency well, Australia could drive ambitious language on fossil-fuel phase-out, adaptation finance, and Pacific resilience.

Critics argue that conceding the venue is a loss of soft power. Hosting COP brings prestige, media attention, and business opportunities. Australia now gives that stage to Türkiye, which may leverage it for its own geopolitical ambitions.

Long-Term Economic and Strategic Consequences

Economically, Adelaide loses out on tourism, business deals, and international exposure. The potential A$500 million-plus boost evaporates, potentially reducing job growth in hospitality, logistics, and clean-tech sectors. ⁴

Strategically, Australia may face criticism for lacking the unity and diplomatic sophistication required to host a global summit under tight timeframes. ¹ That could affect future bids for international events.

On the flip side, by focusing on negotiation leadership and Pacific resilience, Australia may rebuild trust in regional diplomacy and climate finance. Its role could shift from host to broker—a transformation that aligns with long-term policy goals in clean energy and climate justice.

Conclusion

Australia’s failure to secure COP31 hosting in Adelaide reflects a complex mix of diplomatic deadlock, internal divisions, and strategic trade-offs. ⁹ 

While losing the venue is undeniably a blow to Adelaide and to Australia’s symbolic standing, the negotiated deal gives Canberra meaningful leverage over the summit’s agenda. ² 

The outcome underlines the limitations of UN consensus diplomacy but also suggests a new model: yielding the stage but keeping the pen. 

Whether this marks a setback or a savvy pivot depends on Australia’s ability to deliver on its promises to the Pacific, drive ambition at COP31, and convert diplomatic influence into concrete climate action.

References

1. Australia hands COP31 to Türkiye but Chris Bowen to lead negotiations
2. Hotels 'disappointed' by COP31 loss, but SA Premier suggests future bid
3. Turkey to host 2026 climate summit, in defeat for Australia
4. Adelaide businesses reeling after losing COP31 bid
5. Delay in choosing COP31 host city poses challenge to Adelaide's preparations
6. Australia’s Cop31 bid teeters as rival Turkey refuses to withdraw
7. Australia hoped hosting a Cop climate summit was a done deal. But one nation still stands in the way
8. Australia’s failed bid to host Cop31 looks like a mess – but it might actually be the best result possible
9. Türkiye maintains COP31 bid as Australia rejects co-hosting proposal

Back to Top

Pope Leo XIV Demands Bolder Climate Action as World Leaders Falter - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Pope Leo XIV urges “concrete actions” to tackle climate change.1 He warns that political will, not agreements, is failing.2 Leo XIV rejects climate change denial and criticism.3 He continues Pope Francis’ environmental legacy.4 Pope highlights disproportionate impact on the poor.5 Religious and political leaders respond positively.6

Pope Leo XIV has issued a call for urgent, coordinated action to combat climate change as world leaders gather for critical negotiations.

The pontiff’s comments, delivered via video at the United Nations climate summit in Brazil, stress the need for “concrete actions” over empty promises and aspirations.¹

Warning that the Earth “is crying out in floods, droughts, storms and relentless heat”, Leo XIV places moral responsibility squarely on governments and individuals alike.²

He criticises the lack of political will that has hampered progress since the landmark Paris Agreement was signed a decade ago.

Pope Leo condemns climate change denial as well as attempts to shift the blame for environmental harms onto the world’s most vulnerable people.³

Building on the legacy of Pope Francis, Leo XIV identifies care for the environment as a central tenet of Catholic social teaching.

The reaction from faith leaders, environmentalists, and politicians has been largely supportive, echoing his call for solidarity and urgent action.⁶

His intervention raises the stakes ahead of key decisions at the climate talks, putting moral and political leaders under new pressure to act decisively.

Pope Leo’s Stand on the Climate Crisis

Pope Leo XIV’s recent interventions on climate change mark a defining stance for his papacy and the Catholic Church’s global agenda.

In his latest address, he tells nations that their progress to date is “not enough”, insisting that God’s creation demands urgent protection.¹

He links environmental damage directly to human decision-making and insists that “only then will it be possible to mitigate the damage done to the environment.”

Leo XIV, as the first American pope, has shown a willingness to connect the moral teachings of the Church to global policy debates.

At the United Nations climate summit in Belém, Brazil, he argued that the Paris Agreement remains the world’s “strongest tool for protecting people and the planet” but that it is the failure of political will, not flawed agreements, that is holding back real change.²

This call for new political momentum comes exactly ten years after the adoption of the Paris climate agreement, when governments pledged to limit warming to well below 2°C.

Current emissions trends now put the world on track to overshoot this goal, raising fears of devastating climate impacts.

Condemnation of Denial and Indifference

Pope Leo has sharply criticised climate change denial and the mockery of those fighting global warming, renewing the Vatican’s firm opposition to misinformation.³

At Castel Gandolfo, marking a decade since “Laudato Si’”, he spotlighted those who “choose to deride the increasingly evident signs of climate change, to ridicule those who speak of global warming, and even to blame the poor for the very thing that affects them most.”

He speaks “inspired by unity and togetherness”, asserting that there is “no room for indifference or resignation” regarding the climate emergency.⁴

The Pope’s words are widely read as a challenge to powerful leaders who either deny climate science or undermine global cooperation.

The Moral and Social Context

Pope Leo invokes a deep sense of moral responsibility to care for creation, drawing on Catholic theology and social doctrine.

He stresses that “God will ask us if we have cultivated and cared for the world that he created for all and for future generations.”⁵

Climate change, he warns, disproportionately affects the poorest and most vulnerable, further entrenching inequalities.

The pontiff underscores that faith communities can play a pivotal role by mobilising citizens to demand action from their leaders.

He backs practical measures, like the Vatican’s commitment to solar power and sustainable transport, providing a model for governments and institutions worldwide.

Response and Repercussions

Leo XIV’s intervention comes at a critical time, as negotiators at COP30 in Brazil strive for tougher climate action and increased funding for developing nations.⁶

The Pope’s address has drawn praise from other religious and political figures, including environmental campaigners who see his leadership as a force for unity and hope.

Catholic leaders such as Bishop John Arnold echo the pontiff’s emphasis on international cooperation, while former California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has lauded Leo XIV’s work as “action hero” leadership.⁴

Officials at the United Nations climate summit have welcomed the Pope’s call for bolder commitments and greater attention to those most at risk from global warming.²

As the climate summit continues, Pope Leo’s message is likely to resonate far beyond the Catholic Church, challenging both policymakers and ordinary citizens to rethink their roles in the fight against climate change.

With the world’s eyes on Brazil, the forceful intervention by the new Pope raises expectations for a major step forward—if leaders are willing to follow through.¹

References

1. Pope Leo XIV Calls for Collective Action to Save the Planet
2. Pope Leo Urges Concrete Action on Climate at COP30
3. Pope Leo condemns climate change critics
4. Pope Leo XIV makes first major statement on climate change
5. Pope to bishops at COP30: We are guardians of creation
6. What Pope Leo XIV has said about climate change - ABC News

Back to Top

Planet Under Pressure: Australia's Role as Global Warming Accelerates - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

2025 is projected to be among the warmest years on record1 Australia's warming trend continues at twice the global rate2 Global greenhouse gas concentrations have reached record highs3 The Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C target will likely be temporarily exceeded within years4 Urgent emission cuts and rapid expansion of clean energy are required now5 Overshooting 1.5°C will deepen inequalities and inflict irreversible damage6

Global warming is accelerating in 2025, with this year highly likely to rank among the top three hottest ever recorded worldwide¹.

Australia’s climate mirrors this global pattern, exhibiting warming at a rate roughly twice the global average².

Rising greenhouse gas concentrations have driven the surge in temperatures, outpacing earlier projections and contributing to extreme weather events and long-term ecological impacts³.

The Paris Agreement’s landmark goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels faces an imminent challenge, with scientific consensus now indicating a temporary overshoot is increasingly likely within the next decade⁴.

Without urgent and coordinated global action, these trends threaten not only environmental integrity but also the economy, health, and security, particularly in vulnerable regions like Australia⁶.

The United Nations and leading scientists are calling for rapid cuts to fossil fuel emissions and a fast-tracked deployment of renewable energy worldwide⁵.

This article examines the latest climate evidence, its implications for Australia, the status of the Paris Agreement, and what must be done to mitigate the risk of dangerous temperature rises.

The future will be determined by the speed and scale of collective response.

Latest Global Warming Trends

2025 is projected to be either the second or third warmest year ever, continuing a streak of remarkable temperature increases observed since the beginning of the century¹.

World Meteorological Organization data shows global average temperatures between January and August 2025 ran 1.42°C above pre-industrial levels¹.

This marks the 11th consecutive year of record warmth, putting additional pressure on ecosystems already near breaking point¹.

Experts attribute this heat to record-high greenhouse gas emissions, mainly from fossil fuel consumption³.

Carbon dioxide emissions from global fossil fuel use are projected to rise 1.1 percent in 2025 despite international climate pledges³.

So far, 2025 has seen all-time warm temperatures for January and the second or third warmest months for February through June⁵.

Marine heatwaves, intensified storms, and loss of ice are cascading consequences linked to this warming, with major losses for biodiversity and human livelihoods¹.

Australia: On the Frontlines of Climate Change

Australia’s warming trend outpaces much of the world, recording average annual temperature increases over 1.5°C since 1910².

This rate has roughly doubled since the turn of the millennium, raising urgent questions about the country’s resilience to climate shocks².

Researchers have noted extreme heat events, prolonged bushfire seasons, and severe drought aggravated by rising atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations⁸.

Recent years have seen record-breaking temperatures, with increasingly frequent events scaling above historical norms⁵.

Australia’s position as one of the world’s largest coal and gas exporters amplifies its impact and responsibility in the global climate effort¹⁰.

Experts warn that climate-related hazards are likely to intensify, producing growing losses for agriculture, marine ecosystems, public health, and infrastructure⁸.

Paris Agreement: 1.5°C Target Under Threat

The Paris Agreement, signed by nearly 200 countries in 2015, aims to keep global temperature rise “well below” 2°C, pursuing efforts for the safer 1.5°C threshold⁹.

Current evidence points to a likely, though temporary, overshoot of the 1.5°C threshold in the coming years¹.

This is largely due to insufficient collective action since 2015, including missed targets and persistently high fossil fuel emissions⁴.

Scientists now estimate that annual global temperatures may briefly exceed 1.5°C, but reference to the Paris Agreement typically involves 20-year averages, which have not yet breached this line⁵.

Despite legal and scientific imperatives, global progress lags, making it increasingly unlikely that emissions will fall sharply enough by the required deadlines to avoid an overshoot⁴.

Only the most ambitious pathway, with full-scale shifts to renewables and swift emissions cuts, could now limit peak warming to about 1.7°C, dropping back below 1.5°C before 2100⁴.

The Paris Agreement remains the backbone of international climate response, but global ambition must accelerate to match the scale of the crisis⁴.

What Must be Done: Pathways to Urgent Action

UN leaders and scientists call this a decisive moment for climate action, emphasising the need to slash emissions and phase out fossil fuels with speed and scale unprecedented in history¹.

The top priority is a rapid transition to renewable energy, particularly solar and wind, which are now the world’s cheapest forms of power⁴.

Other urgent steps include boosting energy efficiency, protecting and restoring natural carbon sinks, and deploying negative emissions technologies¹.

Australian experts highlight the need to adapt infrastructure, strengthen disaster planning, and reduce vulnerability in regional and Indigenous communities⁸.

Global emissions must peak by 2025 and fall by at least 43 percent by 2030 to keep hopes alive for the 1.5°C goal⁹.

Ambitious climate policy, international cooperation, and public engagement are crucial to overcoming the delays and gaps that threaten future stability⁴.

Reaction and Analysis: Risks of Overshoot

The projected overshoot of the Paris target spells increased risks, particularly for those least equipped to recover from disasters or adapt to cascading changes⁶.

Economic inequalities are widening as climate change intensifies, with low-income regions and marginalised groups disproportionately exposed to harm⁶.

Many ecosystem losses, from melting polar ice to coral die-offs, may be irreversible over human timescales once warming exceeds critical thresholds¹.

Australia, with its exposure to drought, fires, and heatwaves, is a focal point for these hazards, underlining the need for robust action both domestically and as part of international climate strategy².

The window for meaningful change remains open, but will close rapidly without immediate, comprehensive action across all sectors¹.

Conclusion: The Imperative of Now

Consensus has emerged that temporarily exceeding 1.5°C is almost certain, but this does not make the Paris Agreement’s ambitions obsolete or unattainable⁴.

Leaders are urged to double down, making the overshoot as brief and limited as possible, so temperatures can fall back below the safety threshold before century’s end¹.

The planet’s future depends on urgent emission reductions, expansion of clean energy, and just transition strategies that leave no one behind⁵.

Australia’s pivotal role requires bold policymaking, sustained investment, and tough choices to secure ecological, economic, and social well-being in a warming world².

Restoring hope and stability in the climate system demands unwavering commitment from every nation, sector, and community¹.

The time to act decisively is now.

References

1. 2025 set to be second or third warmest year on record, World Meteorological Organization
2. Climate change in Australia, Wikipedia
3. Global carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels rise in 2025, CSIRO
4. Global Update - November 2025 - Little change in warming projections, Climate Action Tracker
5. State of the climate: 2025 on track to be second or third warmest year on record, Carbon Brief
6. UN chief urges world leaders to drive down global warming, UN News
7. Climate Change – Science Snapshot 2025, Australian Institute of Company Directors
8. The Paris Agreement, UNFCCC
9. Global Carbon Dioxide Emissions From Fossil Fuels Rise In 2025, CSIRO

Back to Top

climate change,australia,global warming,paris agreement,greenhouse gases,renewable energy

An impressionist-surrealist landscape illustrating a sun-scorched Australian bush with shimmering heat, bleeding colours, and melting clocks hanging from wilting eucalyptus branches, symbolising accelerating climate change impacts.

Coalition's New Climate and Energy Policy: Cost-First Approach Sparks Debate - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Coalition prioritises affordable energy over mandated emissions targets1 Net zero target and Labor’s 2030 and 2050 emissions targets rejected2 Supports balanced energy mix including coal, gas, renewables and nuclear3 Opposes premature coal power plant closures and renewables mandates4 Proposes measures to secure Australian gas supply and infrastructure5 Critics say policy stalls emissions progress amid growing climate urgency6

The Australian Federal Coalition has unveiled a new climate and energy policy focused sharply on affordable energy and sustainable costs for families and businesses.

The policy rejects legally binding emissions targets, including scrapping the current government's 43 per cent emissions reduction target for 2030 and the net zero by 2050 goal.

Instead, it proposes a gradual emissions reduction approach, aligned with year-on-year improvements and technological progress without imposing mandates or interim targets.

The Coalition emphasises restoring communities to the centre of energy decision-making while supporting a balanced energy mix, including coal, gas, renewables, and nuclear.

The party pledges to prevent premature closure of coal-fired power plants and to unlock investment in Australian gas supply and infrastructure.

The new policy frames its approach as responsible and achievable, positioning itself as a corrective to what it calls Labor’s costly and arbitrary mandates.

Critics argue the policy risks stagnating Australia's climate progress and undermining international commitments amid intensifying climate risks.

This article explores the Coalition’s policy details, reactions from experts and stakeholders, and implications for Australia’s climate future.

Policy Overview: Affordable Energy First

The Liberal-National Coalition’s latest policy places affordable energy at the forefront of its climate strategy.

It commits to reducing emissions "on average year on year" over the duration of Australia's Nationally Determined Contributions, but without legislated mandates or interim targets.¹

The Coalition will remove the net zero target from policy and scrap Labor’s 43 per cent 2030 and net zero 2050 targets if elected, prioritising household budgets and economic strength over ambitious targets.¹

The party challenges the feasibility and cost of Labor’s emissions targets, citing estimates of up to $530 billion in additional investment and high costs to Australian households.¹

Energy Mix and Infrastructure Commitments

The new policy advocates for a balanced energy mix that includes coal, gas, renewables, and specifically, lifts prohibitions on zero-emission nuclear energy.¹

Coal-fired power plants are guaranteed protection from premature closure under the proposed framework.¹

Measures to secure Australian gas include unlocking new supply and infrastructure investment, streamlining regulations, and backing an east coast gas reservation scheme conditional on consumer protections.¹

The policy signals a removal of certain regulatory measures like the Gas Code but strengthens the Australian Domestic Gas Security Mechanism as a last resort.¹

Community and Market Focus

The Coalition promises to restore communities to the centre of decision-making through a new Code of Conduct for electricity infrastructure developers linked to federal funding access.¹

This Code will also be embedded into State Energy Deals, aiming to prioritise consumer interests such as price, quality, safety, reliability, and supply security.¹

The party plans to scrap Labor’s 82 per cent renewables by 2030 target and review contracts under existing schemes to focus on affordability and reliability.¹

Reactions and Analysis

Energy experts and climate advocates have been critical, warning that removing binding targets risks stalling emissions reductions efforts amid a global urgency to address climate change.⁶

Critics argue the policy's heavy reliance on fossil fuels and opposition to renewables mandates could hinder progress and keep power costs high.⁶

The Coalition counters that their policy is practical, focused on technologies and markets, avoids costly mandates, and maintains a commitment to the Paris Agreement.¹

It remains unclear how this policy would align with Australia's broader international climate commitments without firm emissions targets.³

Implications for Australia’s Climate Future

Coalition’s policy signals a major pivot from the current Labor government's approach, placing cost and economic considerations above aggressive climate goals.¹

This approach may appeal to voters concerned with energy affordability and economic stability but risks criticism for insufficient climate ambition.

International observers and environmental groups are likely to scrutinise how Australia can meet the Paris Agreement goals without clear interim targets or mandated pathways.

Ultimately, the policy frames its emissions strategy as a matter of responsibility, affordability, and technological progress without enforced targets.¹

References

1. The Liberal Plan for affordable energy and lower emissions (liberal.org.au, 12 Nov 2025)
2. Coalition cements climate policy: no net zero, more fossil fuels (sbs.com.au, 16 Nov 2025)
3. Coalition plans to strip climate from energy operator's role (abc.net.au, 15 Nov 2025)
4. ‘Fighting against gravity’: Coalition’s energy policy lashed (thenewdaily.com.au, 16 Nov 2025)
5. The Liberal Plan for affordable energy and lower emissions (liberal.org.au, 12 Nov 2025)
6. Energy expert lashes Coalition’s new policy (thenewdaily.com.au, 16 Nov 2025)

Back to top