A rather gloomy picture of the outcome of COP29 and the consequences for global climate protection prevails across the media landscape. How do you assess what was achieved?
Ruppel: I don't want to gloss over the result, but it cannot be denied that COP29 has at least tripled the previous funding for developing countries: from 100 billion US dollars – based on an agreement reached in Copenhagen in 2009 – to 300 billion annually by 2035. This is not an ideal result, but it is one that we can continue to work with. Incidentally, this was also Joe Biden's reaction.
However, the countries concerned, as well as the scientific community and the UN, do not consider this sum to be sufficient.
Ruppel: That is at least partly true. UN climate chief Simon Stiell admitted that the negotiations that led to the agreement were difficult, but praised the result as an insurance policy for humanity against global warming. 300 billion US dollars a year is not an insignificant amount. In addition, the prospect has been raised of increasing the sum to 1.3 trillion per year by 2035 with the involvement of private investors – i.e. from public and private sources. Although this is not a concrete commitment, it is at least a perspective.
What do you think about the idea of using private funds for climate financing?
Ruppel: I think it's perfectly legitimate. Industrialised countries have committed "sins" in the past with regard to the climate, but so have companies. They must be given the opportunity to contribute more. And it must also be worthwhile for them. Then everyone benefits. Enormous markets are opening up in Africa, South America and Asia that can be advanced with new energies and other investments.
Which nations are responsible for climate financing?
Ruppel: At the moment, it is the European Union, its member states, the USA – for now – and Canada, as well as a few other large countries. The question will be what contribution the newly industrialising countries will have to make in future. Where are the new emitters? Will they also be on board in the future or are their contributions still mainly voluntary? China sometimes has a "bad reputation for climate protection" in Europe. I see it differently. China's voluntary contribution to climate financing is by no means insignificant. Especially in development contexts, for example in Africa.
However, there are strong vested interests behind this, with China expanding its sphere of influence to these regions.
Ruppel: This is certainly not all salutary. Nonetheless, if you want to avoid certain mistakes that we made in Europe in the course of industrialisation on other continents, you need financial resources and new technologies which have other positive effects in addition to economic ones: Jobs, an improvement in food security and that people – especially the poor – are spared the worst effects of climate change.
Back to the climate conference in Baku: it didn't bring any progress in terms of phasing out fossil fuels. Was this issue not discussed at all?
Ruppel: Fossil fuels were discussed very intensively at the climate conference in Dubai in 2023. That should have been made mandatory this year in order to drive development forward. This has not happened sufficiently, despite negotiations on the topic. There are allegations that there was even trickery behind the scenes, that – as some claim – the Saudis advised Azerbaijan to filter fossil fuel issues out of the negotiation results as far as possible. I can neither confirm nor deny this, but it would indicate an intention to manipulate.
Do you now fear a regression in terms of fossil fuels?
Ruppel: Things are always moving a little further. But yes, the development is too little and too slow. Fossil energies have to decrease – and there is really a lot of time pressure. It is understandable that Saudi Arabia and other fossil countries, whose economies are largely based on these energy sources, are not enthusiastic about dealing with those issues. But one thing is clear: the fossil age will come to an end, hopefully sooner rather than later. Although it won't be much later, but perhaps not quite as soon as it should be.
Do you see any interest in a new orientation on the part of the oil states?
Ruppel: Of course, these countries and the oil and gas industry are aware that the fossil fuel era is coming to an end. The only question is how quickly, and how hard the landing on the other side will be. Industries are primarily economically orientated, scientifically advised and rationally controlled. This means that they are already trying to invest in new energy options and in research that enables technological progress so that the landing is not too hard at some point.
On 25 November, "Clim:Law: Graz", together with the field of excellence “Climate Change Graz”, hosted a "Post COP29" discussion entitled: Solidarity for a green world or back to old energies and competition? What is your answer?
Ruppel: Solidarity is available in the 300 billion US dollars a year for climate financing. But whether that is enough is doubtful. A green world – unfortunately we are still a long way from that, I think. I take a very, very critical view of the old energies. However, we have to admit that even in this part of the world, people are still clinging on to them. For example, Putin's gas contract obligations are still being honoured. The population loves prosperity and security. And they want to be warm in winter. It is therefore quite understandable that the old energies will not disappear overnight here either.
Oliver Ruppel is Head of the Research Centre for Climate Law at the University of Graz and Professor of Public and International Law at the University of Stellenbosch in South Africa, where he heads the Institute for Development and the Rule of Law. He was a member of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for many years and worked on the 5th Assessment Report as coordinating lead author. He has also been a non-resident Distinguished Fellow of the German Fraunhofer Centre for International Management and Knowledge Economy (IMW) in Leipzig since 2015 and worked for the Konrad Adenauer Foundation for several years. He headed a regional programme on climate policy and energy security for the foundation. Ruppel has repeatedly taken part in climate negotiations himself, including at COP21 in Paris.