COP29 Failed. But What is the Good That Can Emerge From It?

The COP29 finance deal, rushed by Azerbaijan’s presidency and the UN Climate Change after two weeks of talks, fell far short of the commitment that vulnerable developing nations need from wealthy, developed ones. India, Nigeria, and others immediately called out how it was pushed through despite their objections.

COP29’s failure leaves developing nations with little choice but to scale up climate action independently. Wealthy countries, historically responsible for global warming, were expected to fund $1.3 trillion annually for climate costs but committed only $300 billion by 2030—a figure dismissed as “peanuts”.

In the two weeks preceding it, much of the urgency in the Blue Zone, the hub of the talks, was focused on the other side of the funding coin, innovation in green tech and financing options.

A sizeable part of this was on health, how the climate crisis is fundamentally a health crisis, and the need to decarbonise a sector that has more emissions than aviation and shipping.

Take innovation in health. Officials and experts explained how the decarbonisation of this sector through innovation could rapidly help health services get to net zero or near zero goals.

Globally, the health sector contributes about 5% of greenhouse gas emissions, with significant disparities between nations. In England’s NHS, 50% of emissions come from energy use, costing £1.4 billion annually. In sharp contrast, many healthcare facilities in Sierra Leone don’t have electricity, an official pointed out. Diesel gensets are an easier option than renewable energy but are expensive and polluting. [It’s a dilemma in parts of India too.] They want RE and have appealed to development partners to join them “in this fight”. But solar adoption in Africa remains slow.

In Europe, there’s a focus on more innovations in reducing emissions. England’s NHS is tackling anaesthetic gases and inhalers, responsible for 2% and 3% of its emissions, respectively. In Stockholm, ‘circular’ aprons, remanufactured after use, could cut emissions by 60%. Belgium is testing which material for kidney trays is most sustainable – stainless steel, paper pulp, or plastic. Much innovation is needed in Scope 3 emissions, covering indirect sources like travel, pharmaceuticals, and supply chains.

The transfer of green funds and tech on a scale that’s needed right now to try and stick to the 1.5° global warming limit is almost certainly not going to happen.

For India, this is an opportunity for the innovation ecosystem, one that Social Alpha has been fostering, to take off. With 1.5 million engineering graduates annually and urgent climate action needs across vulnerable sectors, the private sector must step up to bridge the gap, drive change and fill the funding void left by COP29.

-Chetan Bhattacharji, Strategic Communications Advisor, Social Alpha