A key goal of this year’s conference is to mobilize trillions of dollars to finance the energy transition in less developed, lower-income countries, which often bear the brunt of the worst impacts of climate change. climate change for which little is to blame.
Senator Edward Markey of Massachusetts spent a few days in Baku, meeting delegates from the United States and abroad. Fresh off a 17-hour flight and armed with an ice-cold Coke for caffeine, he called the Globe to share his perspective on the progress of the talks.
This conversation has been condensed for length and clarity.
Q: You just returned from COP29, as it’s called, where the election of Donald Trump takes place loom large. How have you responded to people concerned about how climate action will continue in the US during his presidency?
A: I told them that climate change will not be solved by one president and that climate action will not be stopped by one president. Trump has been in power for four years, but ours is a generational struggle. Cities, states, businesses and individuals across the country will continue this revolution. California does one of the ten largest economies in the world. New York State is one of the ten largest economies in the world. If New England were a nation, it would be one of the twenty largest countries in the world. We are going to continue the revolution, and I tried to convey that message with (DI) Senator Sheldon Whitehouse at every meeting we had.
Q: The big theme this year is climate finance – getting rich countries that are big polluters to contribute to a huge fund to support energy transition and climate change adaptation in lower-income countries. The amount the US is donating this year is just a drop in the bucket of what is needed. How can US negotiators convince global partners that they intend to release large amounts of money when it seems unlikely that the Trump administration or a Republican-led Congress would actually support that?
Answer: You’re right. The concern is that the most vulnerable countries will be left behind. I am hopeful that the Biden administration will do what it can defend progress made in the past four years. Now is the time for bold and swift action.
From my perspective, it must be a very ambitious new collective, quantified target for climate finance. The proponents insist on a target of at least $1 trillion per year in total financing, public and private. I believe that this is ultimately what this week should deliver as a promise to those countries.
Question: Reports emerging from the negotiations indicate that this could be the first COP not to reach an agreement – that there is still far to go and not a lot of time. How important is that if negotiators fail to reach an agreement?
A: I don’t think they can end this COP without an agreement. They should stay as long as necessary.
We just saw it in the United States, Hurricane Helene And Hurricane Milton caused $300 billion in damage in two weeks. That is the equivalent of 35 percent of our country’s defense budget. These poor countries around the world, these vulnerable countries, these countries that have yet to industrialize, have a moral calling on the rest of the world.
Q: Well, here’s a negative. Emissions are rising. Meanwhile, oil and gas companies are delivering on their climate pledges, and the COP is filled with more fossil fuel lobbyists than ever, as they held in a petrostate for the third year in a row. Is there still a need for these climate talks?
A: They are very important because they give the countries that are being harmed the opportunity to have a forum where they can speak to the richest and most powerful countries in the world. The rich countries of the planet owe a great debt to the poorest countries, which are now suffering.
At the last COP in Dubai, they didn’t want to call for a phase-out of fossil fuels, but they knew they couldn’t leave before accepting that as the ultimate goal. And I think that’s the case this week too.
Our influence is enormous with the World Bank, the IMF and the EXIM bank, all these international institutions, and before the end of this week we must leverage that influence.
Question: But will our influence be weakened at all by Donald Trump being re-elected president?
A: Last year, for the first time in world history, more investment was made in solar energy than in oil. And that is not going backwards. As I walked through the COP, I could just feel the excitement for this revolution in renewables. So Donald Trump may be trying to slow down America’s contribution to the solution, but there is a counter-movement coming in our country that we can point to and the world will see very clearly – that from California to Massachusetts, state after state is helping. .
Question: That ties in nicely with my last question. What do you say to your voters in Massachusetts who care deeply about the climate and are feeling quite deflated after the presidential election?
A: In 2009 there were only those 2000 total megawatts of solar energy in our country. There were only 2000 fully electric vehicles in our country. That will happen this year 37,000 megawatts of solar energy deployed in one year, and the next 8000 megawatts of wind. And the electric car and the plug-in hybrid revolution is underway. We are no longer talking about thousands, but about how many millions of new vehicles will be deployed.
Trump is a threat. He is a climate denier. He is an embarrassment on the world stage. But we will work with working people across America who want to contribute to this clean energy revolution. We’re going to hold our heads high and we’re going to get things done. He won’t be able to stop it.
Sabrina Shankman can be reached at [email protected]. Follow her @shankman.