COP29 agreed that rich countries should deliver $300 billion annually to developing nations by 2035, with a target of reaching $1.3 trillion annually by the same year.
Developing countries, particularly India, called the deal a 'travesty of justice,' arguing that $300 billion annually was inadequate compared to the $1.3 trillion they initially requested.
The EU Commission of Climate Change argued that the $300 billion deal was the maximum feasible given global financial constraints and could help spur more investment in climate action.
Fossil fuel companies have made $1 trillion annually in profit for the past 50 years, and recent profits have been even higher due to high energy prices. This contrasts sharply with the $300 billion climate finance pledge.
The discussions on phasing out fossil fuels resulted in a deadlock. Saudi Arabia and its allies tried to weaken the commitment, leading to a decision to revisit the issue at the next COP meeting in June.
COP30 in Brazil is expected to be better run due to Brazil's diplomatic and organizational capabilities, as opposed to Azerbaijan's lack of experience. Brazil is also more committed to climate action, despite being a significant oil and gas producer.
Madeleine Finlay hears from the Guardian’s environment editor, Damian Carrington, about the controversial climate finance deal that brought Cop29 negotiations to a close in the early hours on Sunday morning in Baku, Azerbaijan. Developing countries asked rich countries to provide them with $1.3tn a year to help them decarbonise their economies and cope with the effects of the climate crisis. But the final deal set a pledge of just $300bn annually, with $1.3tn only a target. Damian tells Madeleine how negotiations unfolded, and what we can expect from next year’s conference in Brazil. Help support our independent journalism at theguardian.com/sciencepod)