Climate Repair at COP30

Fire, fruit, and... still fossil fuels. The Centre for Climate Repair saw the highs and lows of COP30 in Brazil across the two weeks. Here's some of what we got up to.

The struggle to be heard

We’re happy to shout about climate repair, but this took it to the extreme.

Day one of COP30, in which the Ocean Pavilion had yet to receive power for lights, screens, or microphones, saw Shaun Fitzgerald and other panelists yelling over the noise of the air conditioning around us and the thunderstorm above.

This was the first of a few events on marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR) and, perhaps, reflected the level of commitment needed to get approaches like these on the table.

On Wednesday, Johan Rockström was quoted in The Guardian arguing that we need to remove 10bn tonnes of carbon dioxide need to be removed from the atmosphere every year to limit global warming. The World Energy Outlook’s new report suggested the same thing. Marine CDR (mCDR) is a subset of this action, but it could prove immensely useful.

As a panelist in a later event pointed out, it is right that mCDR does not yet have a place in Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) as we need to build our understanding of the science first; in order to do that, however, a lot of work needs to be done to enable research to happen ethically and effectively.

In this first panel, Kalina Grabb, from CONVERGE-CDR, shared insights on local engagement and what we can learn from people already working with the oceans, like fisheries. Ken Buesseler shared the experience and research of Exploring Ocean Iron Solutions (ExOIS) on the role of small-scale research to give us insight into next steps. Shaun Fitzgerald outlined SEAO2-CDR's mission to investigate the options with an open mind.

Over the rest of the week, Shaun spoke on panels covering research, industry involvement, international insights, and governance of mCDR. Some takeaways:

• We are stunted by scientific communities not talking to each other. We talk a lot about the need for multidisciplinary collaboration, which is vital, but we also need to work with those outside of the climate space entirely.
• Field research is needed to test, not validate, model research. It must be dispassionate and objective.
• In terms of our understanding and readiness, we are “late”. It is becoming increasingly clear that some forms of these approaches will be a vital part of climate action plans, but there is much to do to be ready for that.
• Framing matters. What are the benefits beyond climate? And how are these different around the world? Co-benefits could be a key driver of implementation.
• At the same time, the climate crisis is a bigger and more direct issue than many perhaps realise. Catalina Reyes, founder of Ocean Innovation Hub, shared than when she speaks to communities about mCDR, she is often asked, “Why should I care about carbon dioxide removal when people have nothing to eat?”. The answer, she said, is that the climate crisis is aggravating food issues and needs to be tackled - removing CO2 could help.
• And as María José Urrutia Rivas remarked, we have a lot to learn from people and places often excluded from the conversation; Chile, she says, should be on the CDR map.

Perhaps the first battle at COP30 - the struggle to be heard. As the week progressed, although the air conditioning and thunderstorms remained a challenge, CDR got its moment to speak.

As well as the first-ever Carbon Dioxide Removal pavilion, there was the first-ever national platform for a discussion on mCDR. Singapore's Deputy Director of Energy and Climate Policy, William Liew, hosted a panel with an inspiring curiosity, asking what steps his country could take to better understand these approaches.

"This is an inflection point," he remarked. "The steps we take now will shape the frameworks for the future."

You can watch the discussion on their website. These are exactly the kinds of conversations we need to be having - not just led by those in the field, but provoked by those simply curious to know more.

There are many, many things to discuss at COP30, but we’re really pleased CDR got a chance to be heard.

Not inconvenient

Other voices were also crucial, both inside and outside the venue. Protests may look, on the outside, to be a concerning disruption - but they were one of the most encouraging parts of this year’s COP. Addressing the protests blocking the entrance on Friday morning, one speaker pointed out: "Disruption may feel inconvenient, but the children and mothers there often hold a more powerful message than what happens in these rooms."

The comment came at the LCIPP Annual Dialogue for Indigenous Peoples later that day - one of the handful of official consultations over the two weeks. These were helpful sessions, but unfortunately we were some of the few outsiders who came to listen in.

Nonetheless, Janene Yazzie opened the session with a clear reminder of the value of such conversations.

"We have an obligation not just to the Paris agreement," she said, "but also to the world and people and animals that will live in it in future generations."

Intergenerational knowledge and care was a key theme across the Dialogue; "we are not just thinking about our own community, but the universe", said one contributor.

"Climate action without indigenous input,” Yazzie stated, “will fall short and waste time."

The following Wednesday, the Indigenous Peoples’ Pavilion launched the new strategy and website for the “Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities Engagement Forum”. When they opened the floor for feedback, many attendees shared their concerns about carbon markets; one speaker from Fiji recounted how they had been ripped off by a lack of transparency about prices.

It is not enough just to listen to indigenous people; their involvement in climate action is both necessary and eminently beneficial.

The elephant in the room

"Mr President, my humble request to you is to give us a reason to celebrate."

Later that day, the Presidency hosted a consultation called “United in celebration of the tenth anniversary of the Paris Agreement”.

Amidst a series speeches praising the successes of the Paris Agreement and calling on the need to continue, Fiji's representative gave one of the more striking comments:

"The stark reality is that 10 years on, we are still not on track," they said. "Even the pledges fully met would lead us to 2.6+ degrees of warming. Some of us are already out of time. In Fiji, we are losing 1.8% of GDP annually due to sea level rise."

"Paris gave us the compass, but we are not walking the path it directs."

Likewise, Santa Lucia pointed out that, for them, "every fraction of a degree of warming means irreparable loss".

ENGO received the loudest applause after calling out developed nations for not acting tough enough on fossil fuels and finance: "the longer you [developed countries] delay, the higher your bills become."

Their sentiments were echoed by another Observer: "While some people in this room may want to look away from the elephant in the room, there are billions of people outside of it who do not have that luxury. They are just hoping not to get trampled."

As the conference draws to a close, the elephant in the room remains. While there was hope for a fossil fuel roadmap, the draft as we left the venue excluded it entirely. But it’s complex. Midway through, Shaun attended a meeting on the Just Transition:

“One woman,” he recounted, “who spoke incredibly passionately and eloquently, said ‘Who is going to put their economy at risk by stopping fossil fuels? Our (credit) rating will be decimated. There is no international agreement - we need to build a system.’”

No way through this was agreed, but we’re hopeful that the determination of the more than 80 countries who insisted on the phase-out will persevere. They must.

What else can we do?

Even if we do cut all emissions tomorrow, the world will continue to warm. Greenhouse gas removals will help, but we’re also researching additional measures to keep a lid on temperatures to buy us time.

As ever, Hugh Hunt - deputy director of the Centre for Climate Repair - brought along his napkin diagram to the COP for Week 2. Or rather, he set up production with whatever papers he could find; the venue’s napkins were not up to the task.

The diagram provided a 101 on climate repair’s three stages:

1. The imperative to get off fossil fuels
2. The need for greenhouse gas removals to further lower projected temperatures
3. The potential opportunity of solar radiation management (SRM) to avoid overshoot while we sufficiently meet stages 1 and 2.

On Hugh’s first morning at COP30, we attended a meeting hosted by the Global Youth Leaders' Initiative which sought to bring along young people from the Global South to discuss SRM. It was an enlightening session - many had never heard of it before, but they raised interesting questions on impacts, the need for research, and the likelihood that it may be needed in the future. These conversations - with young people very aware of the challenges ahead - were a refreshing alternative to many we have had.

The following morning, we had the opportunity to share some real-world research happening in Australia. Dan Harrison Zoomed in from Southern Cross University, and Clara Botto and Leonardo Valenzuela Peréz joined us in person.

Technology for Marine Cloud Brightening is being tested over the Great Barrier Reef, with the involvement of First Nations and local people. Their world-first, small-scale, experiments are providing the first direct evidence that clouds can be deliberately brightened.

After the presentation, the panel discussed the wider scope of SRM and how we talk about it, as well as the power and necessity of youth involvement.

Let’s keep talking

Across the two weeks, we had lots of conversations about climate repair both on and off camera.

With Kilaparti Ramakrishna (Director of the Marine Policy Center & Senior Advisor to the President on Ocean and Climate Policy at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution), we discussed marine carbon dioxide removal, balancing action vs inaction, and the need to bring the public and local communities on board.

Sue Biniaz, former US Lead Negotiator, spoke to us about the importance of showing up, her hopes for COP30, and the need for research on SRM.

With many more we chatted about potential approaches, their work to engage communities and youth, and their hopes for the future. Many of these are available to watch on our LinkedIn page.

On Monday 1st December, we’ll be chatting with Piers Forster and others about their first reflections on COP30.

We'll ask: what really happened? What was agreed, and what was left unspoken? And after all these years, what do we do next?

Prof Piers Forster, former interim chair of the UK's Climate Change Committee, will be joined by:

• Dr Natalie Jones, International Institute for Sustainable Development
• Dr Joanna Depledge, Centre for Environment, Energy and Natural Resource Governance
• Prof Emily Shuckburgh, Cambridge Zero
• Sienna Bassi, Cambridge Climate Society

The event will be chaired by the Centre for Climate Repair's Prof Jerome Neufeld.

Join us at the Department of Engineering to have your questions answered. Refreshments will be provided afterwards.