The News
As world governments wait for the results of the US election this week, the United Nations’ upcoming COP29 climate conference has receded into the background.
Climate activists have for months lamented that this year’s conference in Baku, Azerbaijan will likely not result in any substantial, global initiative to curb climate change, with diplomats struggling to negotiate financing for even small-scale projects. As the world’s largest economy, the US is critical in the transition to net zero, and whoever wins the election will determine just how large a role Washington has in that transformation.
Experts expect a Kamala Harris presidency to be far more positive for global climate action than a Trump win, yet diplomats are nonetheless preparing for China to take a more sizable role in the clean energy transition.
SIGNALS
Diplomats are prepared for a Trump win — and ready for China to take leadership
Climate negotiators were unprepared for Donald Trump’s 2016 win, which came just days before that year’s climate conference in Morocco. This time, diplomats have participated in crisis simulations to keep negotiations in Baku steady should Trump be re-elected, one COP29 attendee told Bloomberg. Officials are increasingly prepared to “put China even more at the center” of the clean energy transition, especially if Trump tries to withdraw the US from the Paris Treaty again, as well as other climate agreements, according to a director at the World Resources Institute. Increasing the reliance on Beijing may not fully replace the influence the US holds, however: “Put simply, the climate stance of America’s leadership this decade will shape the chances for a liveable planet,” a climate researcher said.
Harris seems reluctant to make climate goals key to her campaign
Kamala Harris’ apparent reticence on climate represents the “fundamental problem of climate policy today,” argued The Wall Street Journal columnist Bjorn Lomborg: In a race centered on the cost of living, the “economic consequences of green ideals have become real with less reliable power and higher total energy costs.” Still, climate activists support her, safe in the belief that if she wins, “they’ll be right back at the White House,” Lomborg wrote. Harris’ silence seems particularly pronounced in crucial swing states like Pennsylvania, where policies to cut emissions could trigger layoffs in local industries, such as fracking. Her campaign may have decided that talking about climate makes her appear “too progressive” more broadly, a green-energy expert told The New York Times.
Climate experts caution against over-estimating benefits of a Harris win
A Harris win would reassure the world that the US remains committed to tackling climate change, climate news outlet Heatmap noted. But looking beyond Nov. 5, “If the U.S. can’t deliver on what it promises at COP29, it may not matter what actually happens [at the summit],” the outlet added. A big question is whether Washington will commit to financing developing countries’ energy transitions, or instead push for these countries to pay their own way, the Foreign Policy on Focus blog wrote, potentially stalling progress. Beyond financial commitments, “global climate programs are cursed with a severe case of legislative inertia,” Heatmap wrote, and experts are pessimistic Washington will have the willingness to do much more regardless of who wins the White House.