Closing summary
We’re now closing the blog for the day. Cop29 has got off to a bit of a rocky start, with severe delays for the opening plenary, but the hosts will claim that getting the draft decision on article 6 approved is an early win. Environmental campaigners will feel otherwise.
The key events today were:
Diplomats greenlit key rules that govern the trade of carbon credits, breaking a years-long deadlock over contentious carbon markets
The year 2024 is on track to be the warmest year on record after an extended streak of exceptionally high monthly global mean temperatures, the World Meteorological Organisation said
US climate envoy John Podesta said the climate fight will not stop under new president Donald Trump.
Windfall ‘superprofits’ from oil companies totalled half a trillion dollars in a single year
A hyperrealistic “dead beached whale” drew attention in Baku
UN climate chief Simon Stiell told the conference: “What inspires me is human ingenuity and determination. Our ability to get knocked down and to get up again over and over again, until we accomplish our goals.”
Updated
A press conference by the presidency that had been scheduled to take place after the opening plenary has been pushed back to tomorrow morning, so that’s likely to be the last we’ll hear from Babayev and the hosts today.
However, critical reaction to the article 6 will continue – Erika Lennon, a senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law, has said:
Today, states allowed this rogue move from the supervisory body to prevail in the quest to start Cop29 with a ‘win’. But this is hardly a win for people or the planet. Approving these carbon market rules without discussion or debate, sets a dangerous precedent for the entire negotiation process. This is very concerning from a procedural standpoint: it bypasses states’ ability to even discuss, much less revise the standards before they go into effect. States’ oversight is all the more critical as the supervisory body’s efforts to get this done has resulted in risky rules that will lead to human rights violations and environmental harm.
While states won’t be able to undo this move, they can still partially correct the wrong by giving strong guidance to the supervisory body that ensures further rules are adopted in line with science, human rights, and international law.“
