Cop 27: EBRD says climate plan key to finance access

Market: Emissions
09/11/22

Clear country-level strategy for dealing with climate change is key to accessing climate finance, president of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) Odile Renaud-Basso told delegates at the UN Cop 27 climate conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, on Wednesday.

The process for accessing climate finance from multilateral development banks such as the EBRD will always be slowed down by the stringent requirements requested by stakeholders, which require time-consuming studies, Renaud-Basso said.

But there are also country-level and local barriers to climate finance access, and having a clear strategy to deal with both mitigation and adaptation is "fundamental".

"The more you have clarity on what is the plan, what is the strategy, the better it will be for access and to also attract financing, private investors, because then they know the direction and what they can expect," Renaud-Basso said.

There should be a shift from "project-by-project" to a "more global and strategic approach" to climate financing, Renaud-Basso added.

A more "programmatic" approach to climate finance is "really important" to access available capital, agreed head of the OECD's environmental directorate Jo Tyndall.

The $100bn goal is a "tiny fraction" of what is needed for the global transformation, Tyndall said — "more of a pump primer than an end target in itself."

Bridging this gap will require a "major reorientation of available public finance to effectively tap the stocks of private capital that are increasingly in search of Paris [climate agreement]-aligned investments. We know there's no shortage of capital out there."

Tyndall pointed to the $700bn spent last year on fossil fuel subsidies. "That could go a long way towards the $1tn that is needed to help developing countries transition to net zero."

Germany's special envoy for international climate action, Jennifer Morgan, pointed to the significance for the climate finance process of ending fossil fuel investments. "Grants are important… but we also need to be looking at how we actually phase out financing for all fossil fuels."

Morgan called for a "really proper conversation" about Article 2.1c of the Paris climate agreement — a key article for climate finance which sets a goal to make finance flows consistent with low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development. She added that it "doesn't get the attention that it needs".

EU principal adviser for international aspects of EU climate policy Jacob Werksman said [earlier today that the EU was disappointed that discussions on the Article 2.1c](https://direct.argusmedia.com/newsandanalysis/article/2389359) were not added to the Cop 27 agenda.

"There is a larger architecture of financial institutions and private-sector where we know [financial] resources are," he said. "We want to make sure that all economic support from both the private and public sector are in line with commitments under the Paris Agreement", he added.

By Victoria Hatherick

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News

11/04/25

Q&A: IMO GHG scheme in EU ETS could be 'challenging'

London, 11 April (Argus) — Delegates have approved the global greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanism proposal at the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) 83rd Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting. Argus Media spoke to ministerial adviser and Finland's head representative at the IMO delegation talks, Anita Irmeli, on the sidelines of the London MEPC meeting. What is your initial reaction to the text? We are happy and satisfied about the content of the agreed text, so far. But we need to be careful. This week, all member states were able to vote. But in October, when adaption will take place, only those states which are parties to Marpol Annex VI will be able to vote if indeed a vote is called for, and that changes the situation a little bit. Here when we were voting, a minority was enough — 40 votes. But if or when we vote in October, then we need two thirds of those party to Marpol Annex VI to be in favour of the text. Will enthusiasm for the decision today remain by October? I'm pretty sure it will. But you never know what will happen between now and and the next six months. What is the effect of the decision on FuelEU Maritime and the EU ETS? Both FuelEU Maritime and the EU ETS have a review clause. This review clause states that if we are ambitious enough at the IMO, then the EU can review or amend the regulation. So of course, it is very important that we first consider if the approved Marpol amendments are ambitious enough to meet EU standards. Only after that evaluation, which won't be until well after October, can we consider these possible changes. Do you think the EU will be able to adopt these the text as it stands today? My personal view is that we can perhaps incorporate this text under FuelEU Maritime, but it may be more challenging for the EU ETS, where shipping is now included. What was the impact of US President Donald Trump's letter on the proceedings? EU states were not impacted, but it's difficult to say what the impact was on other states. By Madeleine Jenkins Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Find out more

News

Q&A: Australia’s Corporate Carbon expands ACCU trading

11/04/25

News

11/04/25

Q&A: Australia’s Corporate Carbon expands ACCU trading

Sydney, 11 April (Argus) — Australian carbon project developer Corporate Carbon has been expanding its trading capabilities around Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs) on the back of growing supply and wider market maturity. Head of carbon trading Angus Robertson spoke with Argus about the latest developments in the market. Corporate Carbon is one of the biggest suppliers of ACCUs. Is it correct that the company has been issued around 15mn ACCUs, counting both fully-owned projects and partnerships, which would be around 10pc of all ACCU issuances since the scheme started in 2011? Yes, that's the approximate number. We've got around 100 projects. In terms of issuance from a mix of owned projects and offtake agreements with other developers and partners in the industry, the approximate forecast is around 3mn ACCUs/yr. We trade around that and then also have capacity to trade outside of our own projects and within the portfolio, plus operating as a trading entity in the secondary market. The company has been one of the main suppliers to private buyers, and to the federal government through carbon abatement contracts (CACs). But you are also buyers. How does that work? The increased capability of our business to both buy and sell is a reflection of the broader Australian carbon market maturing over the last few years. The beginning of the business was very much built off the back of those CACs. As that policy changed over time, allowing for the partial exiting of those CACs , obviously there's been a lot more focus on the secondary market now. We've seen a lot of trading houses, banks and other financial institutions coming into the market, and with that you get a more mature financial market. So in response to that, we've been building out our trading capacity as well as our broader commercial team over the past few years. We take a portfolio approach and we have a large inventory flow to assist with that growing demand, but there are times when we go out to the secondary market and source units on behalf of clients. You recently partnered with trading and risk management firm Ion Commodities to implement their Carbon Zero tool. How does that translate into your trading capabilities? We see Ion's solution as a really effective trading tool and portfolio management system. It reflects our readiness to operate at a larger scale. By providing those tools, it allows us to focus on the strategic goals of the business, especially from a commercial perspective. It is very much a tool for reporting purposes and the automation capabilities of the system assist with that, but it does have a bit of a flow-on effect in terms of efficiency across the business as well. Going to the market, in the short term, it seems to be all about the upcoming federal elections. Do you expect to see much price volatility within the next few weeks? Yes. As we approach the Australian federal election, we would expect there to be a degree of uncertainty, considering the difference in the two major party outcomes in terms of their take on the carbon market. We would see it as positive in either instance, but I think there is still a degree of uncertainty that should lead to perhaps a degree of illiquidity in the market. The market has been also weighed down by a strong issuance of safeguard mechanism credits (SMCs). Were you surprised with that high volume when it was first disclosed by the Climate Change Authority late last year? I think it was the general market consensus that the number was higher than initially forecast, and [ACCU] market prices definitely reflected that in the following weeks and months after those numbers were disclosed. Once the final numbers were released, I think the market had generally already priced that in by that point. Has that changed your internal outlook for when the ACCU market might see an expected shift from oversupply to undersupply? I wouldn't say our internal view has changed all that much. If the majority of that volume is now weighted towards the early years of the safeguard mechanism, policies might reflect that going forward. Now we would probably see ACCU supply as a potential restriction on the market in the short to medium term. Obviously, there's speculation around certain methods in the ACCU market, where higher forecasts were expected over the following next few years and that's now no longer the case. So probably more around supply than demand in terms of our shifted internal views, and this is more from a trading and market perspective as opposed to our actual projects being affected. So it's more on the supply side than demand, even with the high SMC issuances? Well, obviously the market has reacted to those media releases by the regulator around SMCs. So you know that's already happened — you can't really argue that now. Will there be further policy changes around the safeguard mechanism to account for that? That's a bit of an unknown, but it's definitely potential in the following years. And when you talk about supply constraints, is it mostly the delays with the development of the integrated farm and land management methodology , and potentially lower issuances from a reformed landfill gas method? Those are good examples of general delays in certain methods and the creation of new methods. So yes, our expectation is that this could be a big driver on ACCU prices in the next few years. By Juan Weik Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

New tariffs could upend US tallow imports: Correction

10/04/25

News

10/04/25

New tariffs could upend US tallow imports: Correction

Corrects description of options for avoiding feedstock tariffs in 12th paragraph. Story originally published 3 April. New York, 10 April (Argus) — New US tariffs on nearly all foreign products could deter further imports of beef tallow, a fast-rising biofuel feedstock and food ingredient that had until now largely evaded President Donald Trump's efforts to reshape global trade. Tallow was the most used feedstock for US biomass-based diesel production in January for the first month ever, with consumption by pound rising month to month despite sharp declines in actual biorefining and in use of competing feedstocks. The beef byproduct benefits from US policies, including a new federal tax credit known as "45Z", that offer greater subsidies to fuel derived from waste than fuel derived from first-generation crops. Much of that tallow is sourced domestically, but the US also imported more than 880,000t of tallow last year, up 29pc from just two years earlier. The majority of those imports last year came from Brazil, which until now has faced a small 0.43¢/kg (19.5¢/lb) tariff, and from Australia, which was exempt from any tallow-specific tariffs under a free trade agreement with US. But starting on 5 April, both countries will be subject to at least the new 10pc charge on foreign imports. There are some carveouts from tariffs for certain energy products, but animal fats are not included. Some other major suppliers — like Argentina, Uruguay, and New Zealand — will soon have new tariffs in place too, although tallow from Canada is for now unaffected because it is covered by the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement. Brazil tallow shipments to the US totaled around 300,000t in 2024, marking an all-time high, but tallow shipments during the fourth quarter of 2024 fell under the 2023 levels as uncertainty about future tax policy slowed buying interest. Feedstock demand in general in the US has remained muted to start this year because of poor biofuel production margins, and that has extended to global tallow flows. Tallow suppliers in Brazil for instance were already experiencing decreased interest from US producers before tariffs. Brazil tallow prices for export last closed at $1,080/t on 28 March, rising about 4pc year-to-date amid support from the 45Z guidance and aid from Brazil's growing biodiesel industry, which is paying a hefty premium for tallow compared to exports. While the large majority of Brazilian tallow exports end up in the US, Australian suppliers have more flexibility and could send more volume to Singapore instead if tariffs deter US buyers. Export prices out of Australia peaked this year at $1,185/t on 4 March but have since trended lower to last close at $1,050/t on 1 April. In general, market participants say international tallow suppliers would have to drop offers to keep trade flows intact. Other policy shifts affect flows Even as US farm groups clamored for more muscular foreign feedstock limits over much of the last year, tallow had until now largely dodged any significant restrictions. Recent US guidance around 45Z treats all tallow, whether produced in the US or shipped long distances to reach the US, the same. Other foreign feedstocks were treated more harshly, with the same guidance providing no pathway at all for road fuels from foreign used cooking oil and also pinning the carbon intensity of canola oil — largely from Canada — as generally too high to claim any subsidy. But tariffs on major suppliers of tallow to the US, and the threat of additional charges if countries retaliate, could give refiners pause. Demand could rise for domestic animal fats or alternatively for domestic vegetable oils that can also be refined into fuel, especially if retaliatory tariffs cut off global markets for US farm products like soybean oil. There is also risk if Republicans in the Trump administration or Congress reshape rules around 45Z to penalize foreign feedstocks. At the same time, a minimum 10pc charge for tallow outside North America is a more manageable price to pay compared to other feedstocks — including a far-greater collection of charges on Chinese used cooking oil. And if the US sets biofuel blend mandates as high as some oil and farm groups are pushing , strong demand could leave producers with little choice but to continue importing at least some feedstock from abroad to continue making fuel. Not all US renewable diesel producers will be equally impacted by tariffs either. Some tariffs are eligible for drawbacks, meaning that producers could potentially recover tariffs they paid on feedstocks for fuel that is ultimately exported. And multiple biofuel producers are located in foreign-trade zones, a US program that works similarly to the duty drawbacks, and have applied for permission to avoid some tariffs on imported feedstocks for fuel eventually shipped abroad. Jurisdictions like the EU and UK, where sustainable aviation fuel mandates took effect this year, are attractive destinations. And there is still strong demand from the US food sector, with edible tallow prices in Chicago up 18pc so far this year. Trump allies, including his top health official, have pushed tallow as an alternative to seed oils. By Cole Martin and Jamuna Gautam Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Quebec stands by GHG program

10/04/25

News

10/04/25

Quebec stands by GHG program

Houston, 10 April (Argus) — Quebec legislators and government officials reaffirmed their support for the province's cap-and-trade program on Wednesday. The National Assembly of Quebec unanimously adopted a joint resolution expressing continued support for the provincial program, which was introduced by members from opposition parties Quebec Liberal Party, Québec solidaire, Parti québécois and Quebec environment minister Benoit Charette of the majority party Coalition avenir Québec. The resolution's passage came a day after US president Donald Trump issued an executive order taking aim at state climate policies as an "overreach" of their authority, specifically citing California's cap-and-trade program, which formed a joint market with the province in 2013. While Trump's order cast a wide net over potential areas the administration intends to scrutinize, a familiar theme from his previous term did appear around state climate policies interacting with international relations. "These state laws and policies try to dictate interstate and international disputes over air, water, and natural resources," Trump said. While Quebec's Ministry of Environment declined to comment on the order, the province's link with California's program was an area of contention between the state and the first Trump administration. The Trump administration in October 2019 filed a lawsuit that sought to sever California's link on the grounds the state had unlawfully overstepped federal powers to negotiate independent foreign policy for greenhouse gas (GHG) regulation and was "inconsistent" with Trump's then-ongoing withdrawal from the Paris Agreement started in 2017. But the lawsuit ultimately failed following two separate rulings by the same federal judge in 2020, with a subsequent appeal by the Trump administration withdrawn after the election of former US president Joe Biden. Trump's new executive order roiled environmental markets on Wednesday, with California Carbon Allowances (CCAs) for December delivery trading as low as $22.51/metric tonne on the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE), before partially rebounding as participants expressed concern about potential federal action against the program. While state and government officials continue to evaluate the order, the office of California attorney general Rob Bonta (D) said the state's Department of Justice will use the "full force of the law and tools of this office to address the climate crisis head on." The California and Quebec programs aim for economy-wide reductions in GHG emissions, including from power plants, refineries and on-road fuel use. Both jurisdictions are seeking to increase the stringency of their respective programs to remain on course for statutory targets through a pair of rulemakings that may be implemented next year. The joint market, known as the Western Climate Initiative (WCI), is also evaluating linking with the Washington "cap-and-invest' program, which would make the state the first one to join California in the WCI, creating a larger North American carbon market. Quebec seeks to reduce GHG emissions by 37.5pc below 1990 levels by 2030, and achieve carbon neutrality in 2050. Provincial regulators are considering removing 17.5mn allowances from the program to speed emissions reductions, while tapering the use of carbon offset credits by 2030, among other changes. California requires a 40pc reduction from 1990 emission levels by the end of 2030, and net-zero in 2045. CARB is considering changing the 2030 target to 48pc. By Denise Cathey Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Norway plans to cut GHGs, but remain oil, gas producer

10/04/25

News

10/04/25

Norway plans to cut GHGs, but remain oil, gas producer

London, 10 April (Argus) — Norway's government has proposed a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction of a minimum 70-75pc by 2035, from a 1990 baseline, but has also committed to the country remaining "a stable and predictable supplier of oil and gas produced with low emissions". The government today set out plans for a 2035 GHG reduction target, as well as a wider climate plan for the country. The 2035 GHG reduction targets build on Norway's 2030 goal of "at least" a 55pc reduction in GHGs, again from 1990 levels. Norway has a legislated goal of "a low-emission society" by 2050 — GHG reductions of 90-95pc from the 1990 baseline. Norway's government underlined its commitment to Paris climate agreement goals and phasing out the use of fossil fuels "towards 2050", but also said that it would "not prepare a strategy for the end phase of Norwegian oil and gas". "The government's plan is about phasing out emissions, not industries", it said, noting that Norway is "a significant contributor to Europe's energy security". Norway is the largest producer and only net exporter of oil and gas in Europe. "The government will further develop the petroleum industry and facilitate the future provision of fields… production will continue to be efficient and with low emissions," the government said. It aims for the country's oil and gas sector — the country's highest-emitting industry — to bring emissions from production to net zero in 2050. The bulk of oil and gas emissions are from downstream use — known as scope 3. Norway plans to achieve the majority of its proposed 70-75pc GHG cuts through national measures, including reduced fossil fuel use and both technical and nature-based carbon removals. It also plans to purchase emissions reductions from outside the EU and European Economic Area. This refers to internationally transferred mitigation outcomes (ITMOs) — emission credits — under Article 6 of the Paris climate agreement. Norway's parliament will consider the proposals. Once legislated in the country's climate act, Norway plans to communicate its updated plans to the UN. Signatories to the Paris climate agreement are expected to submit updated climate plans — known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs) — to UN climate body the UNFCCC every five years. The deadline for NDCs setting out climate goals up to 2035 was in February, but many countries have yet to submit plans . By Georgia Gratton Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more