Newscasts - Reuters Climate Frontlines: The Corporate Climate Dilemma 1

Mongodb

24/09/2025 15:05

Click the following link to watch video: https://share.newscasts.refinitiv.com/link?entryId=1_5nu4bub6&referenceId=1_5nu4bub6&pageId=Newscasts
Source: 'Reuters - Business videos'

Description: Join Reuters Editor-at-Large Axel Threlfall and Climate Editor Katy Daigle in Times Square for conversations with global policymakers, business leaders, investors, and innovators during Climate Week NYC.

Short Link: https://lseg.group/3IDAAaG

Video Transcript:

>> Hello, and welcome everyone to Reuters Climate Frontline. We're live from Times Square in New York to bring you as many voices and as much insight and colour as we can from proceedings here at Climate Week NYC, which of course, began on Monday. This is the biggest Climate Week yet, over a 1,000 events unfolding across the city in spite of political headwinds. And renewed skepticism, of course, over climate reporting. Today is climate day at the UN General Assembly when world leaders focus on climate change for a day with many countries expected to announce new pledges and plans ahead of this year's COP 30 meeting in Brazil. Let me before I tell you what's coming up in the show, give you a quick recap of what happened at the United Nations yesterday. All eyes, of course, were on the US president. He launched a scathing criticism of the United Nations. He issued a stark warning to Russia and we had another dismissal of climate change. This is what he said on that. >> Climate change. Because if it goes higher or lower, whatever the hell happens, this climate change, it's the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world, in my opinion. >> It was short and short. We've heard it before. Katy Daigle is Reuters environment and climate editor joins me on the set. Really good to have you here Katy. We want to go over some of this news and how you reported it and what reading you got from the room, if you like, on the back of the president's comments. >> So the president's comments were very much typical of what this administration has said before. To be honest, it doesn't land very well at the UN General Assembly. There are many countries that do not believe this is a hoax. Scientists world over, say this is absolutely not a hoax. This is real, and the risk is becoming more acute and urgent, not just for countries, but for businesses. >> My question, I guess, we're going to speak to Rob Bonta from California and some of the mayors in just a moment. My question is the more frequently we hear these messages, does this so more fear locally? >> I think everyone is trying to navigate these uncertain waters at the moment. But overwhelmingly, we're seeing a lot of pushing past that. Just this week, we had Colombia, fossil fuel dependent country, saying that it wants to hold the first ever conference on phasing out fossil fuels. That would be this April if they can get ahead with it. That's significant. Colombia relies on fossil fuels for 50% of its exports, and here it is trying to push that agenda forward. We have extreme weather that's getting worse every week. Right now we have Pakistan inundated just 2.5 years after it was last inundated. >> And very quickly, climate day today at the UN, we had, of course, Teresa Ribera from the European Union from the Commission here on the set yesterday, tried to get her to tell us what these NDCs might look like. It looks like we're going to be disappointed today. >> It's tough. The EU has struggled to come to consensus. They have 27 countries that need to agree, so that challenge is clear. But the pressure is on all governments. Currently, as of today, 40% of the emissions that humanity has released into the atmosphere have been since the UNFCCC was signed. So, we're clearly charging ahead in the wrong direction still, and governments know this. They're going to do what they can to, if not announce cuts, then encourage policies that affect that. >> Very good Katy. We're going to keep a close on the Reuters wire. See if you get anything out there today in terms of headlines and stories. Katy Daigle, thanks a lot. Coming up on today's show, we spotlight the policymakers, innovators, and financiers reshaping the climate agenda from the ground up. We're going to start in just a moment in California where the Attorney General's legal battles and policy leadership are setting precedents for climate accountability across the US and beyond. We'll talk to mayors and city officials on how they're deploying policy, technology and community engagement and meet climate goals block by block, borough by borough. And we're going to examine the rising stakes with the chair of the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market, as well as the UN's special representative for disaster risk reduction. So a very busy show. First though to California, where Attorney General Rob Bonta has become a prominent voice in the national climate debate, especially among advocates of environmental justice. Rob, really good to have you on the set. Thanks for coming by this morning. Look we started with the president's clip there. I've got to ask you a very quick question on it. It was predictable, we've heard it before. I asked Katy whether, we keep hearing these messages from the White House, and I wonder if it sows more fear locally, whether public trust is tested more and whether that makes your job more difficult. >> It's predictable. It's old, it's tired, it's anti science, anti fact. It hurts global cooperation. And most importantly, it hurts communities. And I think it shows the way he approaches leadership. Leadership is about confronting and acknowledging problems and taking action and being bold and being courageous, not shrinking away from them, denying their existence, hiding from them. He's hiding from them. He's denying their existence. It's a problem. Everybody knows what the science says, and people believe their own lived experiences and their own eyes about climate change. So, he's really swimming upstream on this one. I don't think anyone is with him on it. But it is very dangerous for the president of the United States to say such a thing. >> Last year during climate you announced your lawsuit against Exxon Mobil. That was the deception around recycling. The year before that, Governor Newsom announced the BP, the ConocoPhillips news. You got anything for us this year? You got to break any thing for us this year? >> Updates on those too. We brought the first lawsuit on climate change, deception with the governor. Proud to do that. California entering the fray with political subdivisions, other states last year on our lawsuit against Exxon Mobil as you mentioned, on perpetuation of the myth of plastic recycling. We have multiple lawsuits this year, mostly challenging a federal government that is anti science, doesn't believe in climate change, isn't taking action, is trying to roll back our progress. We've made great progress in our lawsuits. We've blocked the Trump administration from trying to withhold money from electric vehicle infrastructure, from trying to withhold money, FEMA money from pre disaster mitigation. We're suing on our clean car waivers and other lawsuits. So those lawsuits exist now. They continue to progress, but we're successful on. >> So they exist. Give us the latest on the Exxon Mobil plastics suit, specifically. Because yes, these lawsuits exist, but this litigation takes a very long time. >> It does. >> I know a lot of people are looking at it. Fans of yours are looking at it and saying maybe we should go about this a different way. What do you think? >> Well, I think there's multiple pathways. Litigation is absolutely one of them. That's our track. We believe in the rule of law and the court system. Litigation to seek justice, hold companies accountable when they lie to the American people, to the California people. So we're going to stay on this pathway. Policymakers should, and are free to take action. Activists should and are free to take action as well. It's all of the above, all tools in the toolbox. Litigation can be fast when we get restraining orders within days, sometimes the same day. Sometimes it takes time here, of course, Exxon Mobil. Their plan is to delay judgment day, to file motions and block and drag feet to delay the ultimate decision. But we're in this for the long haul and we believe will prevail in the end. >> Of course, at the same time, there are those who question whether it's worth suing the Trump administration on major regulations like, for example, the endangerment finding. Because even if you win in the lower courts, Supreme Court is going to come in and nix that, anyway. Is that a defeatist attitude on my part or is this something you think about and again, wonder how you might approach from a different way? >> I won't call you defeatist Axel, but I'll say most cases don't get to the US Supreme court. The federal trial courts and the intermediate appellate courts decide most of the cases on key issues, the US Supreme Court will take an issue. But they're not outcome determinative. They're going to look at the case, they're going to analyze it based on the facts. They definitely have a more conservative bent right now. But we believe that our cases are strong. When we have the law and the facts on our side, we can prevail in any court, and we should, including the US Supreme Court. So we think it's important anytime the Trump administration breaks the law violates the constitution, hold them accountable. Sue them. The courts will decide what they're going to do if they believe in our case and if they find for us. But there's no passes. Rule of law governs, and it applies to everyone, including the president of the United States. >> Do you worry, Rob. And I ask you this, personally, your family and the kickback you get from whether it's the White House or the government or anyone related to that, linked to that. Do you fear for your safety sometimes given the prominent role you play in fighting this White House and fighting this president? >> I think that's what the president wants people to worry about and wants them to think that's part of his bullying, his intimidation, his threatening to make people fearful to talk about prosecuting them. He's going after my colleague here, Tish James in New York. And that politicization of the Department of Justice is very dangerous. But no, we're prudent, we take protocols. This job has a high profile on any time, certainly now with the Trump administration, having the role it has in us vis-a-vis them. So we take prudent steps. But I do my job. I sign up to do a job. We're going full speed, full tank of gas and completely committed to it. >> And you spoke at a Reuters impact event last year in October and you said I watched that just before this show. California is going to be California regardless of who's in the White House. Fine. But I imagine you didn't expect to be so busy as you are now. You don't have a daughter of California, as you've said before in the White House, 39 lawsuits against the president in what? Twenty nine, 30 weeks? >> Thirty five weeks, 39 in 35 weeks. >> Thirty nine, 35. And is it going to get busy? >> So you got a lot more planned. >> The Trump administration is showing no signs of slowing down on its lawbreaking. If the Trump administration was judged based on how frequently and consistently how brazenly and blatantly it's violated the law, it would be the most successful presidency in the history of the United States. And so we don't want to sue the Trump administration at all. That would be great. That would mean that the Trump administration is complying with the law, complying with the Constitution. But each and every time they violate the law, they hurt my state and my people, we will sue them and we will take them to court. So far, that's meant more than once a week. We definitely have more lawsuits planned, maybe some that we could announce as early as this week or next week. There's a bunch of actions that we're tracking that look like they could amount to lawsuits. >> And this is against the government, or are we talking about corporates and the fossil fuel companies again? >> I was referring to the Trump administration. >> The Trump administration. Are we going to see anything else in the corporate space? >> I think so. We have ongoing investigations. We're looking more broadly at the myth of plastic recycling that's been perpetuated. We've sued Exxon Mobil, but there are others who have been involved in perpetuating that myth, we believe. So we're pursuing that and looking at the possibility of another lawsuit. We have an important PFAS lawsuit for every chemical lawsuit. So we're taking big swings that we think are appropriate, based on the law, based on the facts that can really make a difference to advance climate action. >> Who are you talking to this week, here in New York? I mean, who do you really want to talk to this week in New York, who maybe you haven't organized meetings with? Who do you need to talk to here in New York? >> I talked to Jane Fonda yesterday, and that was very inspiring to see someone who continues to fight, who has such courage, who has such moral clarity about the need to act, given what we're facing with the attacks on democracy, the attacks on climate action. I'm proud to be here with my legislative partners who have been working overtime in the California legislature, really doing great work over many years. We're here to talk about the California story, to provide inspiration, a blueprint for others. And I think we're doing that. >> And finally, are you in touch with your predecessor , Kamala Harris? >> I am. >> How's she doing? >> She's doing well. She's busy on a book tour now. We've crossed paths in Los Angeles and in California. Obviously, she had a really tough campaign and is telling her story as is appropriate. But she looks great. She's continuing to be the great leader that she's always been. I'm proud to have known her since she was the District Attorney of San Francisco, supported her in all her races, and honored that she continues to be a daughter of California that leads with such grace, courage, and conviction. >> Rob, thanks so much for coming in today. I really appreciate you starting the show. >> Great to see you. >> Rob Bonta from California. >> Thank you. >> From Cleveland to New York to London, cities are rewriting the climate playbook in real time, navigating politics, infrastructure, and public pressure. In a moment, we're going to hear from three urban leaders. Just before Climate Week, though, I spoke with Christiana Figueres, one of the architects, of course, of the Paris Climate Accord. She was also, until recently, vice chair of the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy. That's a network of cities committed to climate action. This is what she had to say about the importance of local leadership. >> The role of subnational governments is absolutely key because while national governments set the direction, it really is the subnational governments that have much more of a say and much closer. They're much more closely located to the point of action. So they are the key figures from the public sector. They are the ones that can decarbonize their cities or their regions. They are the ones that can put local policies and measures in place in order to support what is already happening on behalf of the market economy. >> Joining me now, Justin Bibb, Cleveland's first millennial mayor, who's spearheading a $5 billion Lakefront Redevelopment and other infrastructure investments aimed at positioning the city as a national test case for urban climate resilience. Rohit Aggarwala is New York City's Chief Climate Officer and head of the City Department of Environmental Protection, leading efforts to overhaul New York's aging environmental infrastructure. And Mete Coban is London's deputy mayor for Environment and Energy, who is driving the city's climate strategy with a focus on community-led initiatives. Really good to have all of you here. We just heard Christiana talk about the importance of leadership at the sub-national level, and we will talk more about that. But let me ask you first, on the back again of the comments from the US president of the United Nations yesterday on climate. Justin, let me start with you: how detrimental in practice is the federal stance on climate to what you're trying to achieve? What does it actually stop you doing? >> It's very detrimental to cities like Cleveland all across the country. For example, we won millions of dollars through the Solar for All grant program, that would allow us to install free solar panels for working-class families in Cleveland. That funding just got cut. 1,200 families now are going to have higher utility bills in my city, and the list goes on and on. Despite this federal retrenchment we're seeing, mayors are standing in the gap fighting the good fight, but we need a federal partner. >> What you're saying, Justin, is, while the money on the one hand might go or a lot of it might disappear, you feel a renewed and a greater sense of urgency and responsibility as a result of that. How does that actually translate into getting stuff done? >> Well, for example, it's going to look different. One tool we have at the city of Cleveland is around energy procurement. We just passed legislation with the city council to retrofit buildings across the city, taking that savings and redeveloping our police stations across the city, for example. We're working with grassroots activists to install more solar panels where we can. We're enhancing our tree canopy to cut down on asthma rates and improve air quality. So we are still seeing progress, but we need a federal partner to fight the good fight. >> Rick, same question to you. On the funding piece, how much of what you do forges ahead without federal funding? Because I know you're doing a big coastal protection network piece in the Redhook neighborhood right now. Where does that money come from, and how much momentum can you build around money that isn't federal money? >> Well, look, I think just like the Attorney General of California just said, California will always be California. New York will always be New York. New York started its work on climate under the George Bush administration, George W. Bush, when **** Cheney was trying to build hundreds of new coal-fired power plants. We know how to do climate action in the face of federal opposition. As the mayor said, it is costly. We'd much rather have the federal money flowing in as it did under the previous administration, as it did under the Obama administration, to help us. And just as the mayor said, we've lost solar for all money. We're going to have low-income people who won't get their homes retrofitted. We're going to have neighborhoods that are going to have a longer wait before they get the stormwater and coastal protections that they like. But the fact is, New York City generally funds most of what we need. The federal government helps, but we do most of it on our own. And the legislative and policy power that we have, we control our building code here at the local level. We've put in congestion pricing in partnership with the state, and we are working aggressively not just to protect Brooklyn, but across the city. >> Mete, look, all you guys know each other. I mean, I'm sure you talk a lot. I'm keen to explore the collaboration between you and what you learned from each other. I'll come to what you're doing specifically in London in a moment. But what do you learn from New York and the way New York deals with heat in particular, heat, I guess, but also the flooding risk. >> Look, my first visit, actually, when I arrived in New York was together with Rohit, we went to Flushing Bay to see one of the water treatment plants because in London, we have a big plan to clean all 41 of our rivers, of course, New York City has the biggest municipally owned water company, whereas in London, we have Thames Water, which is a privatized company, and there's so much learning between cities. We delivered the world's largest clean air zone. We've been working collaboratively with cities like Bogota, for example, around their clean air zone, Warsaw around their cleaner zone, the work that New York City is doing around the building energy efficiency, which is going to help save so many tons of carbon, but also create so many new jobs and high-quality jobs. There's so much that we're learning from planning infrastructure to transportation to green infrastructure to flooding. And I think that's the beauty of why we're here. I'm here also representing C40 cities, which is over 100 cities taking action on climate. And that's part of the big focus we're trying to bring to New York, which is around actually where we have some countries who are delaying progress. Actually, like Mayor Bibb has already said, cities are already leading. >> I'm going to come back to heat because I'm also really intrigued to know what you learned from say cities in the Middle East, where it's getting really bad. But very quickly, Mete, a lot of your priorities are shaped by your upbringing, you're growing up in East London. Are we seeing enough equitable change happening in London? I'd be interested to hear from you guys on this as well, really getting the money and getting the effort to where it matters most. >> I think the green transition is one of the biggest economic opportunities in the 21st century. I think it's a huge opportunity for us to think about how we can redistribute wealth, particularly to working-class communities. I myself, like you said, I'm not a traditional environmentalist, but partly the reason why I grew to care about this issue is because I saw my family suffering from an yearly increase on their energy bills because we're dependent on fossil fuels. We are seeing action. We've got the biggest retrofit program in London's history, 22,000 homes that will be improving their energy efficiency, which means that we will no longer have residents having to choose between heat and eating during the winter. But also on heat, specifically, we've had a really bold program of making sure we're getting water fountains across the city, retrofitting our homes so they're cooler in the summer because we know we're going to have more heat waves, but also making sure that we're creating shading across our streets by planting more trees. >> Justin, are you doing that equitable bit well enough in Cleveland? >> Absolutely. As my colleagues mentioned, this is not only about addressing climate change but about a work wages and wealth agenda at the local level. In Cleveland, we believe that a green energy economy can create nearly 10,000 good-paying jobs by 2030. So we're investing in Clevelanders. We're training high school students to be apprentices, to weatherize homes, install solar panels. That's how we make sure these benefits are broad-based. >> What worries you most about the whole context now that we're operating in? I mean, clearly, there's a lot of pressure on you guys. We hear from Christiana, we hear from everyone. The cities and the states, they've got this. There's a lot of pressure, a lot of responsibility. What worries you most now, Rohit? >> Look, I don't know that it's a worry, but the task ahead is about delivering. It's not about pronouncements. It's not about new commitments. It's about delivering the stuff we've already committed to. We've been focused over the last four years on implementing our local law 97, which is our building decarbonization mandate, which somebody pointed out to me yesterday involves the highest price per ton of any legislative carbon cop in the world. We've been working on green infrastructure, which is one of our key strategies for equity. Actually, a disproportionate share of our green infrastructure is in low-income neighborhoods. It's a good thing. And we've got a lot of infrastructure to build. So the task is on us to stay focused and deliver efficiently and quickly. >> Just very specifically on the heat piece because this is clearly an issue in London. I live in London. It's getting worse in London. Give us a sense of some of the exciting projects that you've got planned to deal with the heat piece other than AC. Because we can't air-condition our way out of this. >> Well, look, I will say, actually, and this is very much driven by an equity concern, one of our key initiatives is to go ahead and do a mandate for indoor air conditioning. We've come to the conclusion that outdoor air temperatures are really important to manage, and we've done a lot of tree work, and the green infrastructure is a key part of that. But ultimately, in New York City, people die from heat. We've had more than we think our estimates are 500 New Yorkers have died from climate change-induced extra heat over the last decade. Compared to 56, each one a tragedy, but 56 losses due to climate change-related flooding since Hurricane Sandy, or including Hurricane Sandy, people die because of the temperature in their bedroom and they are only people who don't have air conditioning or are so low income that they have an air conditioner and don't run it because they worry about the energy. >> Do you have a handle on it? Do you have a handle on this problem in New York? Do you have a handle on this problem in Cleveland? >> We have a lot more work to do. But one thing we have done is we've invested in our rec centers to be resilient hubs. So whether it's a winter storm or cold temperatures or when it's a really hot day in the summertime, making sure our rec centers can be that resilience of residents who can't afford to have AC in their home. We don't have a warm place to go when it gets really cold out there. >> What do you take back, Mete, to London from a week like this one in New York? I mean, there's clearly a lot of talking shop going on. Criticism has leveled at a lot of people exactly for that reason. What can you take back to London that you can really use to make things better in our city? >> Well, firstly, I think there's a sense of optimism coming out of New York. Lots of people coming to New York were concerned about how big New York climate would be. And I believe this is the biggest ever New York Climate Week. So I think there is a sense of business, innovators, policymakers coming together to really make sure that we're pushing ahead of climate action. But also, like I say, on a practical level, there's so many things that I've learned from other mayors just being here. And I think going into Cop 30, our big push is making sure that actually, when we're talking at an international level, we need to be talking about cities because cities are where most people will be living and where we're going to see the impacts of climate. >> And of course, the London climate was astonishing this year. We did this show actually in the center of London for London Climate Week, and there was a lot of momentum there. Look, I've got to stop it. Thank you so much for coming in, Justin, Rohit, and Mete. Many thanks. Good luck to you all as well. Up next, Annette Nazareth, Chair of the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market, and Kamal Kishore, special representative of the UN Secretary General for disaster risk reduction. We're going to tackle the global risk equation. >> From climate finance to disaster resilience, and what it takes to build trust, accountability, and preparedness in an era of compounding crises. >> At a time when truth and new ideas have never been more important, Reuters next examines the big issues without fear or favor to get a clearer picture about what lies ahead. >> Reuters NEXT Gulf will provide a forum to ignite real change and to build a better tomorrow for generations to come. >> Join us at Reuters NEXT because in a time of great change, the most important question is what's next? >> Welcome back, everyone. Joining us here in our studio as Annette Nazareth, chair of the Integrity Council for the voluntary carbon market, former SEC commissioner with decades of experience in financial regulation and global governments. Next to her is Kamal Kishore, special representative of the UN Secretary General for Disaster Risk Reduction, who brings nearly 30 years of experience in disaster preparedness across the UN government and civil society. Really good to see you both. I mean, you and I, we're making a habit of this, Annette. >> Yes, we are. Wonderful. >> So let's get an update from you. I mean, look, for the lay person, the Integrity Council voluntary carbon market, it's a mouthful, to say the least that there's a lot of haziness there. You're trying to get transparency into the whole carbon space. How are you doing on that? Because I know a lot of criticism has been leveled at you and the organization for not moving fast enough. >> Well, I think we're making great progress, actually, and the last time you and I spoke, we were a pretty nascent organization, and we really started with our core carbon principles, which are the framework that define high integrity carbon credits and that the core carbon principles and assessment framework have been implemented and we now have seven of the largest carbon crediting programs with the core carbon principle label and 28 methodologies that have been approved for trading. And I would say that by the end of the year, we will have assessed all of the methodologies that the programs were ready for us to assess, and then we expect them to come in with more next year. So we're seeing some real progress. >> Approvals are still low, though? >> Well, we were asked to assess 50 methodologies, but approved 28. But that's a sign, that we have a high bar for integrity. But having said that, at this point in time, 46% of the credits that are now being issued have the CCP label. So we're seeing real adoption. And what's very gratifying is the market is essentially telling us that they have put a high value on our work because the CCP labeled carbon credits are trading at approximately 25% premium over those credits that don't have the CCP label. So what that says is this label, it represents high quality. And it's important that when purchasers buy credits, they don't have to do massive amounts of due diligence themselves. They've got a framework that has established what a high integrity credit is. >> What role should voluntary carbon markets play in building climate resilience, especially in vulnerable regions? And I want to put that to you as well. >> I think they play a very important role. Carbon credits are not the only answer. They're a tool in what I hope is a massive toolbox to address our climate issues. I mean, first and foremost, we agree with climate scientists. We need to get our emissions down and corporates are working very hard to do that. But we can't do it all fast enough. And so carbon credits really enhance and scale up our ability to address climate action by providing finance for projects that would not otherwise have occurred, but that will be able, in the near term to reduce emissions. So they play a very important role. >> What do you think, Kamal? Just in terms of their role and products like that to help reduce risk, build resilience, especially in the global south. >> I think anything we can bring to bear to mobilize money for investment in adaptation and resilience, disaster risk reduction, we should deploy that because we are making no investment or close to no investment in adaptation and resilience and disaster risk reduction. This is despite the fact that there is enough evidence that if you invest in resilience, it's the best return on investment you're going to get. The good news is that in many parts of the world, the investment that has been made in risk reduction has actually delivered results. So if you live in a cyclone, hurricane, Typhoon prone area, anywhere in the world now, the chances of dying now are a third of what they were 15 years ago. But this progress is not enough. We have to do a lot more. We have the problem of extreme heat, we have the problem of floods, geography of flood is changing, drought is changing. I think governments, private sector, everybody needs to do a lot more in terms of financing risk reduction. >> Of course, a network is all about or a lot of it is about accountability and transparency, and I want to ask you as well, about ensuring both accountability and transparency in multilateral initiatives, including the work that you do. How big a priority is that for you and for the organization you work for? >> I think it's a great priority. It's very important that the investment we make shows measurable results. And there are three parts to the solution to that problem. One is that we need much better tracking of losses and damages, much more granular. And I think this is something which requires detailed, tedious, boring work. This is really the plumbing of risk reduction work. The second is that losses are not the only thing. We also have to look prospective risk. If we have commonly accepted risk matrix globally for disaster and climate risk, what is the risk of losses? That is really important. And the third is put money at the local level. >> Annette, I think this is a question I've asked you before, but I will continue to ask this. When does the voluntary piece, in your view, need to become mandatory? Is voluntary enough right now to get this stuff done? >> No, voluntary is really just a means to enhance our ability. >> It's a holding pattern. >> It's a holding pattern in a sense, yes. But even if all governments met their commitments today to reduce emissions, we still would not meet our climate goals. So the voluntary part of this is very important, but the bottom line is that voluntary and the compliance markets are becoming very much interchangeable and a big point of the way we established our work was that it would work interchangeably with Article 6, and we're starting to see a lot more interchange between the two. So I think it's going to be important. But ultimately, if governments decide to take this over, that would be. >> Is that the outcome you want? Is that the goal for you? >> I think the goal is to do whatever we can to get our emissions down and to have the biggest carbon market that we can to assist in that process, obviously, with reductions and removals, also on the compliance side being very important. >> Kamal, a final question for you and it goes a little bit off piece, but it goes back to what we heard from the mayors on combating heat extreme heat because I know you've done a lot of work on this and the Secretary General announced his call to action a year ago. How are you doing on that? What I'm getting is most government responses need to be more systemic and less reactive when they're looking at this extreme heat issue. >> I think we are not doing enough. There are three pieces to it. The first piece is reducing deaths immediately by quick response. I think on that we are doing a lot better than what we were doing a few years ago. The second is that when you stop construction sites, when you stop vendors from vending in this street because it's too hot, they need some social protection, some protection for their incomes. The third bigger piece is that there is no way around transforming our built environment, our economies. As you said a few minutes ago, we are not going to be able to air condition our way out of it. We have to make passive cooling cool. There needs to be much greater demand for passive cooling so that air conditioning load goes down. The cities are greener. We incorporate nature-based solutions. That is really the deep piece of work, transformative work which needs to happen. >> Very good. Kamal, Annette, great to see you both. Thanks so much for coming by the studios this morning. Coming up a global look at the capital divide from climate finance to energy equity. This will be a candid conversation on closing the investment gap where it matters most. Plenty of guests coming up, you can see on the screen there. Nancy Pfund from DBL is going to be on with Bill Lenihan. A very interesting company, Bill is running, and I believe a company Nancy invests in as well. Bryan Garcia of Connecticut Green Bank and Fatima Denton will also be on among others. Just before we do go to that, I want to go back to Christiana Figueres because I asked her about the finance context and whether she was disappointed. There are a lot of the momentum and impetus around coalition set up to finance this space seem to have fallen away since Paris. This is what she said. >> I'm not disappointed. What I see is that the financial world has rightly moved back from giving itself public exposure of what they are doing because of the toxicity of the US administration. But all of these coalitions that mushroomed after Paris, some of them are no longer in effect. That does not mean that their members are pulling back. With one exception, none of those banks or financial institutions or asset owners have actually pulled back from their own net zero commitment because they understand something that is very key. Climate risk is investment risk. >> So who's driving investment now in climate and development and who's being left behind? Joining us are three leaders with deep expertise across finance, energy and sustainability. Avinash Persaud is a Special Advisor on climate change to the president of the Inter-American Development Bank he brings over 30 years of experience in finance, public policy, and academia to this. Damilola Ogunbiyi is the CEO of Sustainable Energy for All, SE for All, and a global advocate for energy equity. And Daniel Klier, CEO of Climate Advisory South Pole, previously served as global head of sustainable finance HSBC. Some great voices on our show this morning. I'm thrilled to have you all here. Daniel, I'm going to kick it off with you. We heard Christiana say, she's not disappointed because the impetus, the finance piece, the momentum is still there despite people pulling back, whether we're talking Gfans or whatever else. Where are the big gaps in financing as far as you're concerned? >> First of all, thank you for having us. I think there's a real positive story in the last 10 years of climate finance. When I looked at this after the Paris agreement, we were wondering, how do we get to the first trillion of climate finance? Now we talk 2-3 trillion every year that is mobilized mostly from the private sector to go into climate finance. So that's a great story. That's four or five fold since we started this conversation, and I think it's surpassed everyone's expectations. But what's the problem? The problem is 90% of that is going into renewable and into transport, to EVs. So it's not going into how to abate sector, it's not going to hydrogen. It's not going into the more challenging topics that we need to tackle next. 85% of that is going into the global North. So we're not investing into the economies that are growing, that are building new infrastructure. And in these economies that are most vulnerable, 2/3 of funding is public, and we all know that public funding at the moment is a lot more challenge. >> We're going to speak with Kinetic Greenbank about exactly this in just a second. Getting the private money together. Damilola, SE for All, I think you mobilized about 1.5 trillion in finance, in energy finance. What, in your view, as Daniel was saying, is stopping that money getting to the communities that need it most mainly in the global south? >> I mean, to Daniel's point, about only 15% goes to emerging and developing economies. Even more shockingly, only 2% goes to the African continent. If you think where the population is growing, where we're going to be at risk of shocks with climate it is in Africa. I mean, there's a series of things. I think the first one is the fact that people say they're not bankable projects. People want scale. >> But to develop scale, there's a level of infrastructure you also need to develop to get to that point. There's also a big part on clear policy and regulation. If I invest my money, how do I get it out? What do I do with it? Are there any key guarantees? >> Are we making progress on this piece, though, in terms of scaling this stuff? I remember sitting in Glasgow. I remember sitting in Charm, we were talking about these problems. We were talking about exactly the same thing with Mark Carney, with Bill Winters, all these people. Have we made any progress on this at all in the last 10 years? >> Absolutely. I think we've made vast progress first. You have governments wanting to do energy transition planning coming to say, How do I actually decarbonize without anybody telling them what they want to focus on is, how much is it going to cost and where am I going to get the money from? The other biggest what I think at least on the African continent, public-private philanthropic partnership is a program called Mission 300. With the World Bank and African Development Bank, I want to provide electricity to 300 million Africans by 2030. And there's 40 to about $45 billion of concessional capital to push this. Having governments do that and seeing the first 30 million connection, that is a big push, especially since a lot of that is renewable energy. >> I'm going to ask a familiar face. You and I, I used to speak to Avin 30, 35 years ago or something before this road. >> Tell me how old I am. >> Yeah, you look great, by the way. You were a key architect of the Bridgetown Initiative in Barbados. How do you think that framework has shifted this whole piece around equitable finance and shifted the whole piece. Exactly what we're talking about here, getting the money to where it's needed most. >> Well, the Britain Initiative was about pragmatic steps that were at the edge of the frontier possibility that could be done to make a change. One of them, and Daniel mentioned this a little bit on the World Bank, the multilateral development banks announced last week that they had lent directly or indirectly, $118 billion last year , around climate finance. I think the MDBs, multilateral developments, can play a big role in dealing with the resilience gap in developing countries. But as Daniel and Damilola also said, we've got a lot of space to work on in the private capital mobilization to developing countries. We've just launched a major initiative. >> To be fair, I remember sitting in Glasgow and most of the people I had on the set were bemoaning the lack of momentum from the NDBs. Is that fair? >> But it started there, and indeed, the origins of the Britian Initiative started in Glasgow. >> Okay. So things have changed. >> Yes. >> Yeah. And what excites you most now about what you and the organization you work for, for example, can do? >> Well, you talked just before about heat readiness, for example, we're launching in Balem 55 heat-ready schools. We're showing how you can do a low-cost heat readiness without air conditioning, reflective paints, green shading, etc. So, mobilizing MDB money for resilience and making our countries more resilient, not just physical resilience, also financial resilience. We're spreading pause clauses everywhere in depth. >> Daniel, you guys at South Pole did a study. I believe this is right, and it found 72% of financial institutions, or the banks, have no intention of reducing their fossil fuel exposure, but 44% plan to increase their exposure to green assets over the next 10 years. I think those were the headlines. Should we feel hope from that 44% or do you focus more on the 72% right now still investing heavily in fossil fuels? >> Well, I think just walking through the streets of New York in the last two days, I'm actually filled by hope because I feel money is looking to be mobilized into areas that are future proof for the next 30 years. But I think also more and more financial institutions recognize that you need to finance the economy today and have clearly a consideration that they can't or don't want to run ahead of policymakers. Which, I think, explains a little bit those numbers. There's a recognition that an economy today is not decarbonizing at the pace that we need to. I think it's really important to remember, over the last ten years, emissions went up globally 25%. While we were meant to decarbonize about a quarter over that same period. So we are clearly not trending in the right way. And so, we need to recognize that is happening at the same time offer the opportunities to decarbonize. Obviously, where we're cFoming from, we need a private market mechanism for this and the carbon market. Annette's book about this is probably a most scalable mechanism to do this. >> Who do you think is making the calls on climate now? All day yesterday we were talking about the market forces and the private sector, and they've taken over the mantle and the policymakers who 10 years ago were really leading this push. They're more in the background now. Is that a good thing, Avinash? >> Yes, because technology has changed. Every year, $3 trillion is spent on energy, and last year, two trillion of that was renewable energy. There's been a substantial change. There's also a geographical shift. The largest amount of harmful emissions are now coming from middle-income developing countries, and getting them on board in reducing harmful emissions is a critical thing for which they need a lot of private capital finance. >> What do you think, Daniel? The fact that the policy side is scaled back, I guess, scaled back is fair to such a degree, yes, the momentum is there from the private sector, from the market. But we need that policy backing, right? >> We definitely do, but I think it's unfair to say it's scaled back. I think when we make these categories, we really are talking about the developed world. In the developing world, they're looking at cost. Solar is the cheapest cost of power generation right now in every single continent. People are going to look at the economics, they're going to look at the jobs. So when we're talking to emerging and developing countries, we're like, this is the best economic decision. It's not just about climate, it's about climate people, which is really important when you're talking about politics. I think you would see some of these very big countries in the developing world, like India and even Brazil, and China. They are still leading the way, and in these discussions, and they are putting policy decisions, but they're not always the first ones on the map when we talk about it. >> Very quickly, are you hopeful for this cop? When are you going to get there? It's expensive if it's hard to get to. You're going to be there. You said you're going to be there. >> I'm going to be there. It's going to be a different kind of cop. It's not about pushing to further negotiations. It's about implementing an action, and I think they're going to show that. >> Christiana was saying that lots of little bits rather than big proclamations. Very quickly from you, are you going to be there, Daniel? >> I will not be there, but I think we'll see positive surprises coming out. I think we see new leaders emerge that we didn't expect to emerge. >> I just really have to put a push for all the countries that have not submitted their NDCs, any determined contribution. Please do so. I really, really encouraged the signs coming out of Brazil. >> Okay. Look, I got to stop it. Thank you so much, Avinash, Annette, and Daniel, thanks to all of you. Right. >> Thank you. >> Right, next up, a pioneering investor in climate innovation and the CEO of startup in distributed energy solutions. Together, they break down the deal-making dynamics driving climate tech. Nancy Pfund is founder and managing partner of DBL Partners, a firm known for its double bottom line approach, delivering strong financial returns alongside measurable social and environmental impact. She was an early investor in Tesla, SolarCity, and other transformative clean tech companies. Bill Lenihan is the CEO of ZOLA Electric, a company delivering energy solutions across four continents. Under his leadership, ZOLA has brought power to over 1.5 million people, redefining energy access in underserved markets. Great to see you both, Nancy and Bill. I did say earlier on. I just want to double-check this, but you do invest in Bill's company, right? >> Absolutely. We have been partners for some 10 years, and that's part of the story. These overnight successes take a while. >> What makes Nancy for a genuine, compelling impact investment strategy? >> What it all boils down to is name of our firm, double bottom mine. You've got no sacrifice. You have to deliver on the quality, the better, cheaper, faster product, at the same time that you drive environmental progress and climate change amelioration. And a lot of people think it's one or the other. We believe there's no sacrifice, it's and, not or. >> Are there enough exciting investable ideas out there in this space? >> It's getting more exciting every day because the world sees the issues that we face. Entrepreneurs want to make a difference. They want to do more than just build a successful company. They want to change the world. And so we're bringing more and more skilled entrepreneurs. And as the costs come down globally for the tools that we need, this makes economic sense, not just want to change the I'll come back to some of the ideas that excite you most in a minute. >> But, Bill, you're one of these entrepreneurs and you're one of these companies that are making change. What are the risks some of the risks you face in scaling what you do across a lot of these regions? >> Well, that's the key risk, particularly because there's a couple of trends. Technology is changing how infrastructure in these countries is being built, energy being one of them. But scaling infrastructure takes a lot of time, project management and execution is probably the biggest risk. Conversely, the technology that companies like ZOLA Intelligence are bringing into the market are redefining that risk. They're addressing the risk. They're reducing the project implementation risk, they're reducing the O&M risk in the project itself. So by definition, technology is hitting head-on the risks in these projects. >> What advice would you give entrepreneurs in your position about making the decision to address challenges like the ones that you address? How tough has this journey been for you? Yes, you've had DBL investing money in the company. But how challenging is the context right now for a company like yours? >> I think that we have tools today that we never had before to solve these problems. But the problems, as Nancy started with, they take time to resolve. Energy is a 125-year-old problem in emerging markets. Energy access is a problem that's never been solved. It's not going to be solved overnight. My advice to any entrepreneur that goes in is you got to be resilient and you have to be flexible. You're going to make mistakes. It's going to take longer than you expect. The question is, how do you pick yourself back up, look to problem solve whatever problems in front of you, and then continue to move on? >> When you decide where you're going to put your money and you speak to the founders of companies, what are the conversations that matter most to you at that stage? Is it the individual, your faith in that individual? Is it the idea that they're coming up with? Is it the space they're giving you to advise, and what they're going to do? What's important? >> Since we're dealing with such embryonic really ideas more than companies going in early as venture capitalists, impact venture capitalist. A lot of it is taking the pulse of the entrepreneur. Does he or she have the grit, the determination, the vision, the capability of building a team and leading a team through very choppy waters? At the same time, we want to make sure, as an impact leader, that we choose efforts that send a signal to the world because everyone knows about Tesla and the solar industry, and we're proud of having built that. But what led us to ZOLA is if we don't address the Global South, the developing world's clean energy needs, that's where all the population growth is, and those economies need to be able to function. We like to send a signal with our investments. >> Is sending a signal more important than making a decent return? >> No. Remember, we're all about no sacrifice, and we have investors that love our mission, but they want us to make money. >> What are some of the other really exciting ideas out there? I'd like to hear from both of you on this. When you look at other entrepreneurs around you, what excites you about what they're doing or how you can work with them? And what are some of the things you really like the look of right now? Go ahead, Bill. >> I'm going to start with partnerships. You asked the question about what are you looking for. I also look for the team on the ground. Are you putting the team on the field that is going to win the game? We're excited. We'll do it on your show. We're announcing a partnership with Bechtel Corporation. We're combining Bechtel's 126 years of infrastructure building across the globe with our AI-enabled platform to electrify, connect, and to provide financing to the emerging world. The partnership objectives are bold. Ten countries, four continents, 10 million people per country impacted, and the electrification of those countries. And so when I go back to partnerships, that's what excites me, is what we're seeing now, here is the greats of the world, it's resonating. There's projects, they're financeable, and they're jumping in to help. >> I know you're not going to give much away, but what are you looking at right now? >> Well, this is a major inflect. >> Did you have to approve that partnership, by the way? >> Well, we're cheering on the side. This has been in the works for a while. But this is a watershed moment and bringing the big infrastructure people into this field is going to transform it. Another area that's being transformed as we speak in this climate week you're seeing a lot of attention to is the role of natural climate solutions in removing carbon from the atmosphere. We all know we need to do that. We've got these big engineered projects which are showing promise, but nature based, planting trees and affording the benefits of biodiversity, water quality improvement, as well as carbon offsets for the Microsofts and other companies of the world. That's happening. And what happened right now, we have a company called Chestnut carbon that just did the largest carbon removal equity raise this year. It was a natural climate solutions, planting trees and capturing the CO_2 and turning that into offsets. We also did the first large scale project finance a debt facility with JP Morgan leading at 210 million to plant those trees by the land and make it happen. That's never happened before in natural climate solutions. And to get the backing of the JP Morgan's of the world, the insurance companies, the Microsoft we're off to the races. This truly is an inflection point. >> And they're taking it seriously. They see the potential. >> Absolutely. >> Which is critical here. What's next for you, Bill? >> Launch this partnership. We think we can roll this model out globally for continents. There's 80 countries around the world that suffer from energy inequality, and I think with our partners can do a remarkable job of addressing that and solving that problem. >> There is a message of additional hope here in addition to having a big company like Bechtel joining the mix. This is a project putting the technology into health clinics in Tanzania that was originally funded by USAID. Everyone felt, Oh, no, when USAID was dismantled, these projects won't find a home. It's really a message of hope that there is life after that and Bechtel is a pretty good partner to have and Bill will be announcing some other partnerships going forward. And it's the first time that we've been able to make that transition. I hope people take note and see that the infrastructure people, the private sector is ready to pick this up. >> Fantastic. Well, great to have the VC and the entrepreneur on at the same time. The investor and the investee. It's always a fascinating combination. Thank you very much to you, Bill. Thank you very much to you, Nancy as well. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> As the cost of going green continues to rise, who's footing the bill and who's being left behind? Bryan Garcia, is CEO of the Connecticut Green Bank, a pioneering institution that's mobilized billions in public private investment to make clean energy more accessible. Fatima Denton is director of the UN University Institute for Natural Resources in Africa, where she leads research and policy efforts focused on sustainable development and resource equity across the continent great to have you both on as the last two guests of our show today. It's been a very busy show. Thanks for your patience. Bryan, I'm going to kick it off with you. You said, what you do, Connecticut Green Bank and what green banks do is you said and tell me if I'm wrong here, but between public and private finance, the got the catalyst, if you like, between these two. This is a model that works extremely well for you and I want to find out who else is looking at this and trying to make it work. Why is this work so well in Connecticut? >> Well, I think in Connecticut, we have a philosophy that you can't have environmentalism without humanitarianism. And in order to get to the significant goals that we need to achieve with greenhouse gas mitigation, we need to make sure that the underserved, the vulnerable communities, the low income and disadvantaged communities have access to these technologies so that they can benefit from those technologies as well. What better tool than the tool of finance? Our focus is to use that tool, use a limited amount of public funding to attract and mobilize multiples of private investment so that we can provide them with easy access to capital so that they could realize those future benefits by providing them access to capital today. We've been at this for about 14 years now and mobilized over 3 million. >> Extremely successful at it. This is a model that I know others nationally and indeed internationally are looking. >> I mean, there are local communities. We heard from the Cleveland mayor earlier today. So there are local communities, states, regions pursuing green banks. We are nonprofit financial institutions that really are there to attract and mobilize private investment. Every $1 we invest, we get five to $10 of private investment into those projects back and we get the $1 back. It's a different government model. >> Fatima, and I'll come back to it. But with that in mind, getting the public money and the private money together in the regions that need it most, and we've talked a lot today about making this equitable climate finance piece, how would you characterize progress in this space? >> Thank you. Outside progress is a bit mixed. I think the promise, Bryan said, the promise of green finance is pretty good in terms of wanting finance to deliver climate finance to the most undeserved. But I think that the mechanisms for that finance is really flawed. Because finance is not distributed evenly. I often compare it to a plumbing metaphor. It's like a pipe and the pipe has got to run to a few sources, capital needs to flow, and that capital is not flowing because the pipe is at the moment, quite leaky. And part of the problem is in the design structure. I see green capital as anchored in the same principles as ordinary finance. Unless we sort out the logic of that principle, which is a global financial architecture. It's at the moment very inherently flawed. Some of the weaknesses of that architecture will reproduce the same inequities that we've seen in the past. >> Give us an idea of where this is working well in your view, Fatima. Can you hold up some best in class examples for us? Or is that tough? >> It is tough because I think the scale of what we want to see is not actually there in Africa yet. There are countries that are making an attempt to take advantage of green finance. But at the moment, it's not very well coordinated, it's fragmented. As I said, the design of the mechanisms, if you take carbon markets, these are very skewed market. Africa is acting as a carbon sink. >> Yes. >> But it's not able to basically have a say in terms of the price of carbon. These things have been decided elsewhere. There's a huge power asymmetry that we need to take we need to take into account. >> Inclusive prosperity, the equitable piece here has been a theme through this show and I know it's something very close to your heart as well, Bryan. Give us a sense of how many jobs you've created through the model that you're using, how you've supported local economic development, how you supported the underprivileged communities? >> Investment is front and center to all of that. You enable more investment and you're going to be able to receive the outputs and outcomes that you expect as a government agency, the social and environmental benefits. Over $3 billion of investment creates over 30,000 jobs in our communities. Those jobs are installing the clean energy for over 70,000 families and businesses. That clean energy is reducing air emissions that contribute to climate change. It also reduces local air pollution that can improve public health. We could look at all those measures and measure them and speak about them and improve people's lives. But financial innovation is a real tool that can provide access to capital. We have a metric of no less than 40% of investment in vulnerable communities. Vulnerable communities in Connecticut has a statutory definition, low to modern income community and we're at 52%. We're going to keep driving that, and as we continue to drive that, we're going to see more private investment in our families and businesses. >> How is the federal context changed what you've done over the last 10 years? >> Well, I think it's probably been a very uncertain environment. So I think in an area where you want to be certain about everything, I guess you could be certain about the uncertainty. So what's been certain in Connecticut has been the public policy climate that we operate in. We have a legislature that operates on a very bipartisan basis, and really sets the policy framework upon which we're trying to achieve. Whether that is our greenhouse gas emission reduction targets that are comparable to the national determined contributions, whether that is 1,000 megawatt battery storage target, 100% zero emission school buses and environmental justice communities, renewable I can go on and on that architecture really allows us certainty to attract private investment in our state. >> Fatima, look, people were sceptical about New York Climate Week, but it seems that there is a lot of energy here, the right people here, the financiers, the corporates, as well as the policy side with the General Assembly going on, et cetera etc. What are the conversations that really need to happen here? What does New York Climate week need to end with in your view? >> Well, I think we would like to see different pivot and that pivots in the sense that from a governance perspective, Africa needs to feel more in charge. Because I think that as I mentioned before, the power bases of these mechanisms are not controlled by Africa. There are several examples I mentioned the carbon market. I'll be great for conversations to actually go in the direction whereby you're seeing standards, certification processes that are designed in Africa. Where jobs are being created in Africa, where local industries are established in that continent as well. So I think that's a new direction that we need to see. More money is going into people that are in the frontline that are suffering from the impacts of climate change. >> Got you. >> So that they're not sort of left behind because at the moment, it seems like there is capital, but it's pulling at the top. >> I'm getting into a lot of trouble for going way over on this show, so I am going to have to end our conversation here, I'm afraid. But Bryan Garcia and Fatima, thank you very much indeed for coming in and indeed closing up the show this morning and best of luck this week. That is it for our show. Lots of food for thought from a fascinating array of speakers over the past couple of days. What is clear all of our guests, I think, yesterday as well as today is that the momentum is there, the will is there, albeit the source of that momentum might have changed somewhat with most of the impetus coming now not so much from the policy side, but from the corporates, the market, innovation and creative financiers. We will continue to report this story. We'll continue to hold both the public and the private sectors to account, and we will see as many of you as possible at Cop 30 Belem in Brazil in November. Many thanks for watching.