November 6, 2025 • 28 mins
World leaders are gathering in Belem, Brazil, for the COP30 climate negotiations, but what will be achieved? Brazil hasn’t given much indication of what it hopes will emerge from the negotiations, other than implementing the many promises of previous COPs. This week on Zero, Akshat Rathi sits down with COP30 President, André Corrêa do Lago, to try and figure out how the negotiations might turn out.
Explore further:
- Find all the latest news from COP30 here: https://www.bloomberg.com/latest/cop-climate-summit
- Listen to our previous conversation with Andre Correa do Lago: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-11-21/cop29-brazil-s-plans-for-next-year-s-cop30-in-belem
Zero is a production of Bloomberg Green. Our producer is Oscar Boyd. Special thanks to Eleanor Harrison Dengate, Siobhan Wagner, Sommer Saadi and Mohsis Andam. Thoughts or suggestions? Email us at zeropod@bloomberg.net. For more coverage of climate change and solutions, visit https://www.bloomberg.com/green.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to zero. I am Akshatrati. This week a conversation
with the COP thirty president. It is the sixth of
November and I have made it to Brazil where today
world leaders are gathering in Berlin to kickoff COP thirty,
(00:24):
the annual United Nations Climate Conference.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
It is a.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
Strange year to be hosting a COP meeting. On the
one hand, it's a year to celebrate the tenth anniversary
of the Paris Agreement, the signature achievement of these climate negotiations.
On the other hand, the US, the world's second largest emitter,
said in January that it would withdraw from the Paris Agreement,
though the formal exit won't happen till twenty twenty six.
(00:51):
The US has also said that they will be sending
no major government representatives to Berlin. To add to the troubles,
recent ultilateral climate negotiations at the International Maritime Organization and
during the Plastics Treaty conversation have fallen apart in spectacular fashion,
mainly driven by the US that is making concerted efforts
(01:14):
to direct climate policies globally. In the phase of that,
it's been frustrating for many climate advocates that Brazil hasn't
given any real indication of what it hopes to achieve
from COP thirteen negotiations, other than saying it would like
to focus on implementing the many promises that countries have
made at previous corps. So to try and get a
(01:38):
better understanding of what will take place over the next
two weeks, I sat down with COP thirty President Andre
Korea the Logo for a live conversation at Bloomberg neef's
summit in San Paolo. I wanted to know what he
hopes this COP can achieve, how Brazil plans to work
around a belligerent US government, and what is the viable
(02:00):
to increase climate finance to developing countries.
Speaker 3 (02:06):
How are you feeling fine? Well, Andre, welcome to this
Bloomberg and EF event and welcome to a live taping
of the Zero podcast. This will be my fifth COP
and before we come to what needs to be delivered
at this COP, let me just recognize that it's going
to be a marathon. It's two weeks of non stop talking,
(02:29):
non stop negotiation, and a lot less sleep. So what
are your tips and tricks to survive COP?
Speaker 2 (02:37):
Well, my first COP was in two thousand and two.
So let's say that I've seen a few, not all
of them. Don't think that I go every year to
that very special experience. But I believe that this is
going to be really a very different cop because in
(02:59):
the preparation of the cop, what we call the mobilization period,
I think that most people agreed and realized that cops
have been much more successful than people think. We have
approved so many things, we can already do so many things,
we have mandage to do so many things that this
(03:20):
cop can truly be the first cop that effectively is
an implementation cop. So I think that this is what
is driving some optimism in all of us that we
are going into a cop not as the usual cop.
Speaker 3 (03:36):
So I want to spend a lot of our time
talking about deliverables. But before we come to the deliverables,
I understand there are still delegations looking for accommodation at Blean.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
Is that the case, I don't think so. I believe
that the accommodation issue in Berlin was first to have
rooms for all affordable rooms for all the delegations, because
we need everybody to go, and this has been already confirmed.
Now that people are seeing that the prices are going down, etc.
(04:07):
Et cetera. I think that some delegations are growing, which
I think is great. They are going to discover the
amazing food of Bilaying and the many charms of Bilay,
and so they are most welcome, and I believe that
they will find some ice rooms.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
So we spoke last year in Baku, and you'd give
me a big pitch of you of what COP thirty
would be. You're here now, your COP president is going
to start. We all know this COP is going to
be a little different. It's ten years since the Paris
Agreement was signed. All the rules that needed to be
agreed in the Paris Agreement that required negotiations, quite testing
negotiations at times, they've all been done. The one thing
(04:48):
that COP thirty needed to achieve by the time countries
even came here was to make sure that countries submit
their climate plans. You have spent a lot of your
year trying to get countries to submit more climate plans,
and yet so far only about sixty countries have done.
So why has it been so hard to convince countries
to put forward their climate plans for twenty thirty five?
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Yeah, this was not expected because the deadline, the original
deadlines for the NDCs, which are those nationally determined contributions,
was February. But the truth is that countries have realized
how complex it is to do a good NDC, and
(05:32):
now that much more people are watching it and that
you have the structures of some verification of support, etc.
Countries want to present NDCs that are credible and they
have to negotiate inside the country to make sure that
they are proposing something that is doable. So we had
(05:53):
lots of consultations in Brazil, but we did it in
advance because we knew we were going to preside the
cop and we had to represent our NDC and represented
our NDC in Baku. But I think it's very much
linked to the fact that the NDCs are a very
serious issue. Now what do we do by having much
(06:16):
less than we should? First we have some consequences, is
that the reports that we were supposed to receive from
the NDCs that would have brought a more informed debate
at the Cup, these reports could not be done the
(06:37):
way they were supposed to. But since this report which
was presented, I think shows where we're going and tomorrow
will have the gap report from a unipp that will
also work on the numbers that are available, But it
is true that it is something that was quite unexpected.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
The numbers we do have, and there are some analysis
have come with numbers, is that we are heading towards
the world that is two point seven to point eight
degrees celsius of warming. The Paris Agreement goals are two
degrees celsius, ideally one point five degrees celsius. Now that
gap has been reducing since the Paris Agreement, it was
about four degrees celsius. It has been falling, but that's
(07:19):
that fall has now slowed down. And one of the
goals that you were hoping if these NDCs, if these
climate plans had come in time, is that you would
at COP thirty come up with a way to try
and narrow that gap, to try and accelerate the speed
of decline for that higher temperature end. Given where we
are right now, how do you think you're going to
(07:40):
achieve that at COP thirty, Well, it's complex.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
I think that there is a recognition of the necessity
of lowering to the expectation to one point five. But
I think that you you mentioned something that is essential
is that Paris worked because when we were negotiating Paris,
who were going towards at least four degrees. So Paris worked.
(08:12):
Now it didn't work in the way that was expected
if you ask developing countries, is because there was not
enough financing. Because it's true that most of the renewable revolution,
for instance, is happening in developed countries and in China,
and there is an incredible potential in developing countries. So
(08:34):
the point of developing countries is quite logical. If there
was more financial resources, this revolution could have happened in
other countries too. Sometimes developed countries talk about ambition and
things like that, but ambition we've seen from developing countries'
point of view is ambition both in finance and in
(09:00):
so the two things have to go together. Now the
cost is high, but the returns are enormous too. We
are seeing that China recognizes that a considerable part of
its growth of its GDP has been linked to the
agenda of combating climate change. Many jobs also have been
(09:20):
created thanks to that. So we have a demonstration that
this is something that works very well in a developing country.
And I believe that we end up coming back to
finance as a key issue, which it is since we
negotiated the Climate Change Convention nineteen ninety two.
Speaker 3 (09:40):
So I want to come to finance, But let me
come to one important topic before we come to finance.
So we know in the national climate plans, there are
lots of plans that are differing speed different contexts. Developing
countries have different commitments in their climate plans. Developed countries
have different commitments. But we also have some big goal
goals that countries had set, like tripling renewables or stopping deforestation.
(10:04):
One of those goals, which was signed off at COP
twenty eight in Dubai, was to start to phase out
fossil fuels. Now, none of the sixty climate plans that
have been submitted so far have any language about stopping
the production of fossil fuels. You talked about China. Now,
China is a country that is clearly building what many
(10:25):
call an electro state, a country that is exporting clean tech.
But even their own submission of a climate plan is
much weaker than anybody expected. We had Wukahukstra from EU
saying no, they wanted China to reduce their emissions by
twenty percent, maybe thirty percent by twenty thirty five, but
the commitment is ten percent. So what do you think
(10:47):
you can do at COP thirty to try and get
countries to start to phase out fossil fuels.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
Yeah, it's very easy to have an opinion about the
other countries. So China has many opinions about the EU
reduction of emissions also and about financial resources. So I
think that we have to concentrate on what the countries
can really do among themselves. And in fact, what we
agreed in Dubai was to transition away from fossil fils.
(11:16):
That's the word thing that allowed the jest to be approved,
and in Brazil's NDC we mentioned it. In our NDC
we say that we welcome a discussion on how we're
going to do this transition away. And the transition away
(11:38):
is agreed by all, but it's going to be different
according to each country, and that was something also that
was in the presentation. We're going to have different transitions,
and I think that this is an extremely important debate.
How are we going to organize in each one of
the countries this process. Now, some countries have completely different circumstances.
(12:01):
So now we have, for instance, here in Brazil we
have asked some think tanks and universities too to develop
some ideas on how can we transition away, and we've
also asked sectors of Brazil and economy to present their
way of looking at how this transition can happen. And
I think this exercise is extraordinary and somehow that's why
(12:25):
we have to trust and believe that these cops are useful.
I'm highly suspicious, obviously because I'm going to preside one.
But the fact is that if it was not for
the cops, we would not have developed many of the
technologies that we have now. We would not know about
so many things that we know and all these statistics
(12:48):
that allow us to understand what we need to do,
what we can do, and what we have still to invent,
because unfortunately there are things in that direction too.
Speaker 1 (13:05):
Join us after the break for more of my conversation
with COP thirty president Andre Corea. The logo and if
you're enjoying this conversation so far, please take a moment
to write a review on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.
Speaker 2 (13:17):
Thank you.
Speaker 3 (13:29):
So. Coming to finance. At COP twenty nine, there was
a commitment to come up with a roadmap called the
Baku tablean roadmap, and you're supposed to present that roadmap now. Now,
roadmap says.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
It's a roadmap.
Speaker 3 (13:41):
It's going to tell you what our idea is to
try and unlock climate finance as much as one point
three trillion dollars every year. What should we expect in
the roadmap that would be concrete, what that could convert
into real money for developing countries.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
Well, I wish I could give you a very exciting
news that we found one point three trillion a year
by twenty thirty five. I believe that we have to
understand better what is climate finance, to understand better the numbers,
where it comes from, how it is used. And so
(14:21):
the roadmap that the Presidency of Coup twenty nine and
the Presidency of Brazil are going to present, I believe,
translate in a very straightforward way the difficulties that we
may face. And there are many things that we have
(14:41):
to do. But obviously there is no super bullet, so
we have to work on many of the directions that
we are already exploring. The good news is that we
are already exploring probably all the possibilities to get these resources.
The second thing is that we have to take the
pandemic as a reference. Nobody would think that we would
(15:03):
be able to raise as much money that was possible
for the pandemic in the time that this happened. So
there is money. There is enough money. And by the way,
it's quite interesting because one of the numbers that was
presented here is that the cost of climate change is
already one point four trillion a year, so one point
(15:24):
four one point three trillion, So it already costs one
point four trillion. So the numbers are there, the resources
are there, but we really have to correct many things
that may look small, but together they become a barrier
to this finance objective. But as we put it in
(15:46):
the in the report, we are optimistic because it is possible.
Speaker 3 (15:51):
So in that chart of one point four trillion, there's
one big.
Speaker 2 (15:55):
Blue one point three don't exaggerate.
Speaker 3 (15:58):
In the dam chart, yes, on the one point four
trillion dollars of annual climate damages, there was a big
blue bar and that was the US, and that was
about eight hundred billion dollars of climate damage in one year.
And we need to talk about the US. You have
been a diplomat all your life and it must be
(16:20):
recognized what happened at the International Maritime Organization in October.
There was a meeting where countries were very confident that
they'd worked on years to try and come to a
global carbon tax on shipping. They were confident that a
majority of countries would vote on it. And then we
saw something that lots of diplomats have come to us
(16:40):
and told us was extraordinary, something that they had never
seen in a multilateral forum before, where the US first
made public threats and then made private threats towards individuals
to revoke their visas or put sanctions to tell them,
if you vote for this proposal, you're going to be
(17:00):
in trouble. And that kind of bullying, as one expert
put it, has lots of countries worried. Now you are
going to be at a COP where the US is
still a part of the COP. Right by next year
they won't be, but right now they're officially a part
of the COP. What is your plan to deal with
(17:21):
the US at COP, especially if they become so disruptive.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
So you told me, I'm an experienced diplomat, and I'm
a diplomat, and you want me to talk about the US,
So okay, let me try well, I heard similar reports
about the negotiation in London. Yeah, it is. Let's say
(17:48):
that it is not the definition of diplomacy what happened there.
But I believe that at COP thirty we're going to
have a different circums. The US already announced it out
and it's just waiting for the formality of waiting one
year to live formally in January. So I think it's
(18:14):
different than the US acting in two negotiations that they
believed were going to affect them. As you know, the
Paris Accord is much less binding than many of the
other agreements, and so the US maybe believes that with
the Paris Agreement, just leaving the Paris Agreement will solve
(18:37):
the problem they have with the Paris Agreement. But nevertheless,
it was two very interesting negotiations, both Plastic and the IMO,
because they showed in a very clear way how all
these negotiations have become essentially economic. So when people think
(18:58):
of COP thirty as an environment to negotiation, it's because
they haven't seen how it has evolved. It touches so
many sectors of the economy that countries really have to
be very careful because no country in the world is
ready for the transition, every country will have to sacrifice
(19:18):
some sectors or will have to invest very heavily for changes.
So what you see is that somehow we are touching
some nerves in the sense that these negotiations are reaching
something because they are provoking a reaction. That is some
(19:40):
would say, not me, I'm a diplomat over reaction.
Speaker 3 (19:44):
You say it is an economic conversation. But if you
and there have been analysis done of the global carbon
tax on shipping, it would raise the price of somebody
buying something at a supermarket by zero point one percent
of the price. Right, It's a very very small increase
because shipping is only the transport cost of the good
(20:07):
that is being brought to you. And so it was
less economic and clearly more ideolgical the battle that's being waged,
so to speak, on the diplomacy front right now in
the US. So if it was economic, you could look
at the charts that we just saw and you could
make the case that clearly, rationally people should be acting
(20:27):
for climate action. But this is not about rationality.
Speaker 2 (20:34):
Let me tell you, when we like two years ago,
when we were discussing the IMO issue, we had some
strong indications that it would increase significantly the cost of
shipping for some Brazilian products because Brazil is an important exporter,
(20:54):
but we're out of the usual routes, so we had
the next onomic concern about it. But we discussed, we
said the problems that we had, et cetera, et cetera,
and so the negotiation adjusted to incorporate the concerns of
countries like Brazil. That is what negotiations is about. You
(21:17):
you have to be careful because sometimes it will affect
your country in a very negative way. I think that
there was I wouldn't call ideological. I think it it
is a reaction against the previous government that had a
different perception of this, so they had they had no
(21:37):
time to come back to the level of the negotiations before.
So I think that today I've been trying to I
think many people agree that today you cannot anymore use,
you know, fake scientific data to discuss claim change. So
(22:00):
now there is a new stage in the debates about
climate change, which is the economic logic of the fight
against climate change. So the economic logic of this fight
on investing in renewables, on transitioning away from fossil fuels,
and so many other solutions, development of new technologies. I
(22:23):
think this is what is being debated. And in every
country in the world, the most conservative groups which are
concerned about the negotiations are the most active groups with
the governments because they are afraid to lose something. And
so somehow every country arrives at the COP very much
(22:46):
influenced by the sectors of their economy that are more concerned.
So I think there is just an increase in lack
of subtlety of some of the arguments.
Speaker 3 (23:00):
So in this fracturing of geopolitics, one reason that you
have articulated in the past, that President Lula has articulated
is that you want COP thirty to be the showcase
that multilateralism is still working. One way, and this is
a little technical part of COPP. One way in which
that is done is that towards the end, there is
a statement, sometimes many pages of PDF long, that all
(23:25):
countries sign off on, typically called a cover decision. We've
had a cover decision in Glasgow called the Glasgow pat
and Charmel Shake, called the Shamalchak Implementation Plan. One way
in which you could show that multilateralism is working, that
would be through showing countries making a commitment towards climate
action through this cover decision? Is that a tool that
(23:47):
you're going to use? If not, what tool?
Speaker 2 (23:49):
Now? It is a tool. It's a legitimate tool because
it's in the rules of the negotiation. But in the
more diplomatic Brazilian tradition, we praise transparency above everything. So
there are some actors that are telling us we need
(24:10):
to cover decision, etc. I prefer to try to use
the negotiations that we have already included in the agenda
and try to find the place for all these concerns
in the decisions that are going to be negotiated. Now,
there may be a movement of countries, of a very
(24:33):
large number of countries that say, look, we are in
a situation that only a covered decision can solve the situation.
So I don't know if we are going to reach
that moment, but I believe that for the moment, I
prefer not to work with the idea that in the
last minute we're going to come with something. Let's try
(24:55):
to work with the elements we have in the most
transparent possible way. I think that we can reach a
good result that way. But let's see, because you know,
all cops are a bit strange, and I think that
this one will also be a little.
Speaker 3 (25:13):
Last question for you. So cop over the years have
grown in size, but also in importance and in attention
that they gathered from the world. One of the ways
they gather that attention is there's a headline at the
end saying this is what we achieved. You are now
saying there are many things that we've achieved. This is
about actually implementing them. But you want the leaders who
(25:35):
will be coming here to Brazil to go back home
and say why it is worthy of still working on
the paras agleement. What is it that you think they
can get from this cop and what is the message
that you would hope leaders would take back to their
own countries.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
Well, as you said, cops have grown enormously and cops
have a huge impact on the economy, on social issues,
on so many themes. So it's very difficult to imagine
one thing at the COP that would please everybody. The
other thing is that many times conferences like that you
(26:11):
only see the real impact of the results after a
certain time. All these things that I'm saying is to
be a diplomatic and say that I don't know what
I want at the end of the coup. But the
point is that we indeed many results of the coup
because we have many layers at the COP that we
(26:32):
have to satisfy. I mean, we need business to be satisfied,
science to be satisfied, civil society to be satisfied, developed
countries to be satisfied, developing countries to be satisfied. So
I think that this is what makes a successful COP
is when you have united people and not when you
(26:52):
have achieved one result that is appreciated by one sector
more than others. It's a very difficult balance. It's a
very difficult balance. But we've been listening to countries. We've
been listening to civil society, to science, to business, and
I hope that we are going to be able to
(27:14):
have a COP that brings true results to all of
them because I think that this is what is going
to bring back trust in multilateralisms, is not the capacity
of having an agreement in the last minute on something
that people didn't have so much time to read. So
let's try to do it. Because again I think that
(27:37):
we have to convince people that it's worthwhile to continue
to negotiate climate and convince people, also that we have
negotiated enough to act.
Speaker 3 (27:49):
Thank you and good luck.
Speaker 2 (27:50):
Thank you, I need that.
Speaker 1 (28:03):
Thank you for listening to zero. If you like this episode,
please take a moment to rate and review the show
on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. This episode was produced by
Oscar Boyd with additional help from Anna Mazarakis. Our theme
music is composed by Wonderly Special Thanks to Samarsadi, Moses
Andam Laura Milan and Sharon chan i'm Akshadrati back soon.
Welcome to zero. I am Akshatrati. This week a conversation
with the COP thirty president. It is the sixth of
November and I have made it to Brazil where today
world leaders are gathering in Berlin to kickoff COP thirty,
(00:24):
the annual United Nations Climate Conference.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
It is a.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
Strange year to be hosting a COP meeting. On the
one hand, it's a year to celebrate the tenth anniversary
of the Paris Agreement, the signature achievement of these climate negotiations.
On the other hand, the US, the world's second largest emitter,
said in January that it would withdraw from the Paris Agreement,
though the formal exit won't happen till twenty twenty six.
(00:51):
The US has also said that they will be sending
no major government representatives to Berlin. To add to the troubles,
recent ultilateral climate negotiations at the International Maritime Organization and
during the Plastics Treaty conversation have fallen apart in spectacular fashion,
mainly driven by the US that is making concerted efforts
(01:14):
to direct climate policies globally. In the phase of that,
it's been frustrating for many climate advocates that Brazil hasn't
given any real indication of what it hopes to achieve
from COP thirteen negotiations, other than saying it would like
to focus on implementing the many promises that countries have
made at previous corps. So to try and get a
(01:38):
better understanding of what will take place over the next
two weeks, I sat down with COP thirty President Andre
Korea the Logo for a live conversation at Bloomberg neef's
summit in San Paolo. I wanted to know what he
hopes this COP can achieve, how Brazil plans to work
around a belligerent US government, and what is the viable
(02:00):
to increase climate finance to developing countries.
Speaker 3 (02:06):
How are you feeling fine? Well, Andre, welcome to this
Bloomberg and EF event and welcome to a live taping
of the Zero podcast. This will be my fifth COP
and before we come to what needs to be delivered
at this COP, let me just recognize that it's going
to be a marathon. It's two weeks of non stop talking,
(02:29):
non stop negotiation, and a lot less sleep. So what
are your tips and tricks to survive COP?
Speaker 2 (02:37):
Well, my first COP was in two thousand and two.
So let's say that I've seen a few, not all
of them. Don't think that I go every year to
that very special experience. But I believe that this is
going to be really a very different cop because in
(02:59):
the preparation of the cop, what we call the mobilization period,
I think that most people agreed and realized that cops
have been much more successful than people think. We have
approved so many things, we can already do so many things,
we have mandage to do so many things that this
(03:20):
cop can truly be the first cop that effectively is
an implementation cop. So I think that this is what
is driving some optimism in all of us that we
are going into a cop not as the usual cop.
Speaker 3 (03:36):
So I want to spend a lot of our time
talking about deliverables. But before we come to the deliverables,
I understand there are still delegations looking for accommodation at Blean.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
Is that the case, I don't think so. I believe
that the accommodation issue in Berlin was first to have
rooms for all affordable rooms for all the delegations, because
we need everybody to go, and this has been already confirmed.
Now that people are seeing that the prices are going down, etc.
(04:07):
Et cetera. I think that some delegations are growing, which
I think is great. They are going to discover the
amazing food of Bilaying and the many charms of Bilay,
and so they are most welcome, and I believe that
they will find some ice rooms.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
So we spoke last year in Baku, and you'd give
me a big pitch of you of what COP thirty
would be. You're here now, your COP president is going
to start. We all know this COP is going to
be a little different. It's ten years since the Paris
Agreement was signed. All the rules that needed to be
agreed in the Paris Agreement that required negotiations, quite testing
negotiations at times, they've all been done. The one thing
(04:48):
that COP thirty needed to achieve by the time countries
even came here was to make sure that countries submit
their climate plans. You have spent a lot of your
year trying to get countries to submit more climate plans,
and yet so far only about sixty countries have done.
So why has it been so hard to convince countries
to put forward their climate plans for twenty thirty five?
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Yeah, this was not expected because the deadline, the original
deadlines for the NDCs, which are those nationally determined contributions,
was February. But the truth is that countries have realized
how complex it is to do a good NDC, and
(05:32):
now that much more people are watching it and that
you have the structures of some verification of support, etc.
Countries want to present NDCs that are credible and they
have to negotiate inside the country to make sure that
they are proposing something that is doable. So we had
(05:53):
lots of consultations in Brazil, but we did it in
advance because we knew we were going to preside the
cop and we had to represent our NDC and represented
our NDC in Baku. But I think it's very much
linked to the fact that the NDCs are a very
serious issue. Now what do we do by having much
(06:16):
less than we should? First we have some consequences, is
that the reports that we were supposed to receive from
the NDCs that would have brought a more informed debate
at the Cup, these reports could not be done the
(06:37):
way they were supposed to. But since this report which
was presented, I think shows where we're going and tomorrow
will have the gap report from a unipp that will
also work on the numbers that are available, But it
is true that it is something that was quite unexpected.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
The numbers we do have, and there are some analysis
have come with numbers, is that we are heading towards
the world that is two point seven to point eight
degrees celsius of warming. The Paris Agreement goals are two
degrees celsius, ideally one point five degrees celsius. Now that
gap has been reducing since the Paris Agreement, it was
about four degrees celsius. It has been falling, but that's
(07:19):
that fall has now slowed down. And one of the
goals that you were hoping if these NDCs, if these
climate plans had come in time, is that you would
at COP thirty come up with a way to try
and narrow that gap, to try and accelerate the speed
of decline for that higher temperature end. Given where we
are right now, how do you think you're going to
(07:40):
achieve that at COP thirty, Well, it's complex.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
I think that there is a recognition of the necessity
of lowering to the expectation to one point five. But
I think that you you mentioned something that is essential
is that Paris worked because when we were negotiating Paris,
who were going towards at least four degrees. So Paris worked.
(08:12):
Now it didn't work in the way that was expected
if you ask developing countries, is because there was not
enough financing. Because it's true that most of the renewable revolution,
for instance, is happening in developed countries and in China,
and there is an incredible potential in developing countries. So
(08:34):
the point of developing countries is quite logical. If there
was more financial resources, this revolution could have happened in
other countries too. Sometimes developed countries talk about ambition and
things like that, but ambition we've seen from developing countries'
point of view is ambition both in finance and in
(09:00):
so the two things have to go together. Now the
cost is high, but the returns are enormous too. We
are seeing that China recognizes that a considerable part of
its growth of its GDP has been linked to the
agenda of combating climate change. Many jobs also have been
(09:20):
created thanks to that. So we have a demonstration that
this is something that works very well in a developing country.
And I believe that we end up coming back to
finance as a key issue, which it is since we
negotiated the Climate Change Convention nineteen ninety two.
Speaker 3 (09:40):
So I want to come to finance, But let me
come to one important topic before we come to finance.
So we know in the national climate plans, there are
lots of plans that are differing speed different contexts. Developing
countries have different commitments in their climate plans. Developed countries
have different commitments. But we also have some big goal
goals that countries had set, like tripling renewables or stopping deforestation.
(10:04):
One of those goals, which was signed off at COP
twenty eight in Dubai, was to start to phase out
fossil fuels. Now, none of the sixty climate plans that
have been submitted so far have any language about stopping
the production of fossil fuels. You talked about China. Now,
China is a country that is clearly building what many
(10:25):
call an electro state, a country that is exporting clean tech.
But even their own submission of a climate plan is
much weaker than anybody expected. We had Wukahukstra from EU
saying no, they wanted China to reduce their emissions by
twenty percent, maybe thirty percent by twenty thirty five, but
the commitment is ten percent. So what do you think
(10:47):
you can do at COP thirty to try and get
countries to start to phase out fossil fuels.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
Yeah, it's very easy to have an opinion about the
other countries. So China has many opinions about the EU
reduction of emissions also and about financial resources. So I
think that we have to concentrate on what the countries
can really do among themselves. And in fact, what we
agreed in Dubai was to transition away from fossil fils.
(11:16):
That's the word thing that allowed the jest to be approved,
and in Brazil's NDC we mentioned it. In our NDC
we say that we welcome a discussion on how we're
going to do this transition away. And the transition away
(11:38):
is agreed by all, but it's going to be different
according to each country, and that was something also that
was in the presentation. We're going to have different transitions,
and I think that this is an extremely important debate.
How are we going to organize in each one of
the countries this process. Now, some countries have completely different circumstances.
(12:01):
So now we have, for instance, here in Brazil we
have asked some think tanks and universities too to develop
some ideas on how can we transition away, and we've
also asked sectors of Brazil and economy to present their
way of looking at how this transition can happen. And
I think this exercise is extraordinary and somehow that's why
(12:25):
we have to trust and believe that these cops are useful.
I'm highly suspicious, obviously because I'm going to preside one.
But the fact is that if it was not for
the cops, we would not have developed many of the
technologies that we have now. We would not know about
so many things that we know and all these statistics
(12:48):
that allow us to understand what we need to do,
what we can do, and what we have still to invent,
because unfortunately there are things in that direction too.
Speaker 1 (13:05):
Join us after the break for more of my conversation
with COP thirty president Andre Corea. The logo and if
you're enjoying this conversation so far, please take a moment
to write a review on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.
Speaker 2 (13:17):
Thank you.
Speaker 3 (13:29):
So. Coming to finance. At COP twenty nine, there was
a commitment to come up with a roadmap called the
Baku tablean roadmap, and you're supposed to present that roadmap now. Now,
roadmap says.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
It's a roadmap.
Speaker 3 (13:41):
It's going to tell you what our idea is to
try and unlock climate finance as much as one point
three trillion dollars every year. What should we expect in
the roadmap that would be concrete, what that could convert
into real money for developing countries.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
Well, I wish I could give you a very exciting
news that we found one point three trillion a year
by twenty thirty five. I believe that we have to
understand better what is climate finance, to understand better the numbers,
where it comes from, how it is used. And so
(14:21):
the roadmap that the Presidency of Coup twenty nine and
the Presidency of Brazil are going to present, I believe,
translate in a very straightforward way the difficulties that we
may face. And there are many things that we have
(14:41):
to do. But obviously there is no super bullet, so
we have to work on many of the directions that
we are already exploring. The good news is that we
are already exploring probably all the possibilities to get these resources.
The second thing is that we have to take the
pandemic as a reference. Nobody would think that we would
(15:03):
be able to raise as much money that was possible
for the pandemic in the time that this happened. So
there is money. There is enough money. And by the way,
it's quite interesting because one of the numbers that was
presented here is that the cost of climate change is
already one point four trillion a year, so one point
(15:24):
four one point three trillion, So it already costs one
point four trillion. So the numbers are there, the resources
are there, but we really have to correct many things
that may look small, but together they become a barrier
to this finance objective. But as we put it in
(15:46):
the in the report, we are optimistic because it is possible.
Speaker 3 (15:51):
So in that chart of one point four trillion, there's
one big.
Speaker 2 (15:55):
Blue one point three don't exaggerate.
Speaker 3 (15:58):
In the dam chart, yes, on the one point four
trillion dollars of annual climate damages, there was a big
blue bar and that was the US, and that was
about eight hundred billion dollars of climate damage in one year.
And we need to talk about the US. You have
been a diplomat all your life and it must be
(16:20):
recognized what happened at the International Maritime Organization in October.
There was a meeting where countries were very confident that
they'd worked on years to try and come to a
global carbon tax on shipping. They were confident that a
majority of countries would vote on it. And then we
saw something that lots of diplomats have come to us
(16:40):
and told us was extraordinary, something that they had never
seen in a multilateral forum before, where the US first
made public threats and then made private threats towards individuals
to revoke their visas or put sanctions to tell them,
if you vote for this proposal, you're going to be
(17:00):
in trouble. And that kind of bullying, as one expert
put it, has lots of countries worried. Now you are
going to be at a COP where the US is
still a part of the COP. Right by next year
they won't be, but right now they're officially a part
of the COP. What is your plan to deal with
(17:21):
the US at COP, especially if they become so disruptive.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
So you told me, I'm an experienced diplomat, and I'm
a diplomat, and you want me to talk about the US,
So okay, let me try well, I heard similar reports
about the negotiation in London. Yeah, it is. Let's say
(17:48):
that it is not the definition of diplomacy what happened there.
But I believe that at COP thirty we're going to
have a different circums. The US already announced it out
and it's just waiting for the formality of waiting one
year to live formally in January. So I think it's
(18:14):
different than the US acting in two negotiations that they
believed were going to affect them. As you know, the
Paris Accord is much less binding than many of the
other agreements, and so the US maybe believes that with
the Paris Agreement, just leaving the Paris Agreement will solve
(18:37):
the problem they have with the Paris Agreement. But nevertheless,
it was two very interesting negotiations, both Plastic and the IMO,
because they showed in a very clear way how all
these negotiations have become essentially economic. So when people think
(18:58):
of COP thirty as an environment to negotiation, it's because
they haven't seen how it has evolved. It touches so
many sectors of the economy that countries really have to
be very careful because no country in the world is
ready for the transition, every country will have to sacrifice
(19:18):
some sectors or will have to invest very heavily for changes.
So what you see is that somehow we are touching
some nerves in the sense that these negotiations are reaching
something because they are provoking a reaction. That is some
(19:40):
would say, not me, I'm a diplomat over reaction.
Speaker 3 (19:44):
You say it is an economic conversation. But if you
and there have been analysis done of the global carbon
tax on shipping, it would raise the price of somebody
buying something at a supermarket by zero point one percent
of the price. Right, It's a very very small increase
because shipping is only the transport cost of the good
(20:07):
that is being brought to you. And so it was
less economic and clearly more ideolgical the battle that's being waged,
so to speak, on the diplomacy front right now in
the US. So if it was economic, you could look
at the charts that we just saw and you could
make the case that clearly, rationally people should be acting
(20:27):
for climate action. But this is not about rationality.
Speaker 2 (20:34):
Let me tell you, when we like two years ago,
when we were discussing the IMO issue, we had some
strong indications that it would increase significantly the cost of
shipping for some Brazilian products because Brazil is an important exporter,
(20:54):
but we're out of the usual routes, so we had
the next onomic concern about it. But we discussed, we
said the problems that we had, et cetera, et cetera,
and so the negotiation adjusted to incorporate the concerns of
countries like Brazil. That is what negotiations is about. You
(21:17):
you have to be careful because sometimes it will affect
your country in a very negative way. I think that
there was I wouldn't call ideological. I think it it
is a reaction against the previous government that had a
different perception of this, so they had they had no
(21:37):
time to come back to the level of the negotiations before.
So I think that today I've been trying to I
think many people agree that today you cannot anymore use,
you know, fake scientific data to discuss claim change. So
(22:00):
now there is a new stage in the debates about
climate change, which is the economic logic of the fight
against climate change. So the economic logic of this fight
on investing in renewables, on transitioning away from fossil fuels,
and so many other solutions, development of new technologies. I
(22:23):
think this is what is being debated. And in every
country in the world, the most conservative groups which are
concerned about the negotiations are the most active groups with
the governments because they are afraid to lose something. And
so somehow every country arrives at the COP very much
(22:46):
influenced by the sectors of their economy that are more concerned.
So I think there is just an increase in lack
of subtlety of some of the arguments.
Speaker 3 (23:00):
So in this fracturing of geopolitics, one reason that you
have articulated in the past, that President Lula has articulated
is that you want COP thirty to be the showcase
that multilateralism is still working. One way, and this is
a little technical part of COPP. One way in which
that is done is that towards the end, there is
a statement, sometimes many pages of PDF long, that all
(23:25):
countries sign off on, typically called a cover decision. We've
had a cover decision in Glasgow called the Glasgow pat
and Charmel Shake, called the Shamalchak Implementation Plan. One way
in which you could show that multilateralism is working, that
would be through showing countries making a commitment towards climate
action through this cover decision? Is that a tool that
(23:47):
you're going to use? If not, what tool?
Speaker 2 (23:49):
Now? It is a tool. It's a legitimate tool because
it's in the rules of the negotiation. But in the
more diplomatic Brazilian tradition, we praise transparency above everything. So
there are some actors that are telling us we need
(24:10):
to cover decision, etc. I prefer to try to use
the negotiations that we have already included in the agenda
and try to find the place for all these concerns
in the decisions that are going to be negotiated. Now,
there may be a movement of countries, of a very
(24:33):
large number of countries that say, look, we are in
a situation that only a covered decision can solve the situation.
So I don't know if we are going to reach
that moment, but I believe that for the moment, I
prefer not to work with the idea that in the
last minute we're going to come with something. Let's try
(24:55):
to work with the elements we have in the most
transparent possible way. I think that we can reach a
good result that way. But let's see, because you know,
all cops are a bit strange, and I think that
this one will also be a little.
Speaker 3 (25:13):
Last question for you. So cop over the years have
grown in size, but also in importance and in attention
that they gathered from the world. One of the ways
they gather that attention is there's a headline at the
end saying this is what we achieved. You are now
saying there are many things that we've achieved. This is
about actually implementing them. But you want the leaders who
(25:35):
will be coming here to Brazil to go back home
and say why it is worthy of still working on
the paras agleement. What is it that you think they
can get from this cop and what is the message
that you would hope leaders would take back to their
own countries.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
Well, as you said, cops have grown enormously and cops
have a huge impact on the economy, on social issues,
on so many themes. So it's very difficult to imagine
one thing at the COP that would please everybody. The
other thing is that many times conferences like that you
(26:11):
only see the real impact of the results after a
certain time. All these things that I'm saying is to
be a diplomatic and say that I don't know what
I want at the end of the coup. But the
point is that we indeed many results of the coup
because we have many layers at the COP that we
(26:32):
have to satisfy. I mean, we need business to be satisfied,
science to be satisfied, civil society to be satisfied, developed
countries to be satisfied, developing countries to be satisfied. So
I think that this is what makes a successful COP
is when you have united people and not when you
(26:52):
have achieved one result that is appreciated by one sector
more than others. It's a very difficult balance. It's a
very difficult balance. But we've been listening to countries. We've
been listening to civil society, to science, to business, and
I hope that we are going to be able to
(27:14):
have a COP that brings true results to all of
them because I think that this is what is going
to bring back trust in multilateralisms, is not the capacity
of having an agreement in the last minute on something
that people didn't have so much time to read. So
let's try to do it. Because again I think that
(27:37):
we have to convince people that it's worthwhile to continue
to negotiate climate and convince people, also that we have
negotiated enough to act.
Speaker 3 (27:49):
Thank you and good luck.
Speaker 2 (27:50):
Thank you, I need that.
Speaker 1 (28:03):
Thank you for listening to zero. If you like this episode,
please take a moment to rate and review the show
on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. This episode was produced by
Oscar Boyd with additional help from Anna Mazarakis. Our theme
music is composed by Wonderly Special Thanks to Samarsadi, Moses
Andam Laura Milan and Sharon chan i'm Akshadrati back soon.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Ruthie's Table 4
For more than 30 years The River Cafe in London, has been the home-from-home of artists, architects, designers, actors, collectors, writers, activists, and politicians. Michael Caine, Glenn Close, JJ Abrams, Steve McQueen, Victoria and David Beckham, and Lily Allen, are just some of the people who love to call The River Cafe home. On River Cafe Table 4, Rogers sits down with her customers—who have become friends—to talk about food memories. Table 4 explores how food impacts every aspect of our lives. “Foods is politics, food is cultural, food is how you express love, food is about your heritage, it defines who you and who you want to be,” says Rogers. Each week, Rogers invites her guest to reminisce about family suppers and first dates, what they cook, how they eat when performing, the restaurants they choose, and what food they seek when they need comfort. And to punctuate each episode of Table 4, guests such as Ralph Fiennes, Emily Blunt, and Alfonso Cuarón, read their favourite recipe from one of the best-selling River Cafe cookbooks. Table 4 itself, is situated near The River Cafe’s open kitchen, close to the bright pink wood-fired oven and next to the glossy yellow pass, where Ruthie oversees the restaurant. You are invited to take a seat at this intimate table and join the conversation. For more information, recipes, and ingredients, go to https://shoptherivercafe.co.uk/ Web: https://rivercafe.co.uk/ Instagram: www.instagram.com/therivercafelondon/ Facebook: https://en-gb.facebook.com/therivercafelondon/ For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iheartradio app, apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.