Who Should Bear the Costs of Climate Loss and Damage?

The COP29 climate conference has sparked discussions regarding financing for climate loss and damage, highlighting the need for a tax on major oil companies. Proposals suggest that a Climate Damages Tax could generate substantial funds to aid communities suffering from climate impacts. The initiative aims to hold the fossil fuel industry accountable and ensure a shift in financial responsibility toward those causing the crisis, advocating for climate justice.

At the recent UN climate change conference in Baku (COP29), officials are actively negotiating a climate financial package to address the vital issue of compensating the escalating costs associated with climate loss and damage. It is universally acknowledged that vulnerable communities are disproportionately affected by climate change, leaving many to ponder the responsibility for financing these associated costs. An analysis by Greenpeace International and Stamp Out Poverty indicates that a modest tax on the world’s seven largest oil and gas companies could exponentially increase the UN Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage, enhancing it by more than 2000%.

For instance, taxing ExxonMobil’s 2023 extraction could cover half of the financial toll from Hurricane Beryl, a devastating storm that impacted several regions in the Caribbean, Mexico, and the United States. Similarly, a levy on Shell’s extraction could address most of the damages inflicted by Typhoon Carina in the Philippines, and taxing TotalEnergies would significantly contribute to mitigating the consequences of Kenya’s 2024 floods. This Climate Damages Tax (CDT) could provide essential resources to populations and authorities combating the direct impacts of the climate crisis, exacerbated by the operations of these energy companies, which together reported nearly US$150 billion in profits last year.

The proposal for a long-term tax on fossil fuel extraction, complemented by taxes on excess profits and other levies, is envisioned as a critical component in financing climate action. Such a tax, levied on wealthier OECD nations and increasing by US$5 per tonne of CO2-equivalent to correspond with oil and gas extraction volumes, could potentially generate around US$900 billion by 2030 for global communities grappling with climate impacts.

As the text asserts, the discourse surrounding payment for climate loss and damage is fundamentally a matter of climate justice. It is imperative to transition the financial responsibility for the climate crisis from the victims—often the most vulnerable populations—to the entities responsible for the crisis. Therefore, innovative mechanisms need to be instituted that would successfully extract revenues from the oil and gas sector, compelling polluters to contribute towards rectifying the damages wrought by climate change.

In a notable demonstration of solidarity, survivors of extreme weather events collaborated with Greenpeace activists to deliver poignant reminders of the human toll of climate change—damaged personal belongings representing lives disrupted by oil and gas production. Abdoulaye Diallo, Co-Head of Greenpeace International’s Stop Drilling Start Paying project, emphasizes that it is crucial for governments to hold polluters accountable and to prioritize actions that advocate for climate justice.

Ultimately, the path toward addressing climate loss and damage necessitates united advocacy for tangible actions targeting fossil fuel companies, paired with innovative funding mechanisms to ensure vulnerable communities receive the support they deserve in the face of escalating climate impacts.

This article addresses the complex issue of climate loss and damage compensation, particularly in the context of the negotiations at the COP29 climate conference. It highlights the disproportionate impact of climate change on vulnerable populations and the necessity of establishing a financial framework to support these communities effectively. The discussion includes proposed strategies such as the Climate Damages Tax, aimed at holding major fossil fuel companies accountable for their contribution to climate change and raising essential funds for climate action.

In summary, the urgency to address climate loss and damage underscores the need for efficient financial mechanisms targeting the fossil fuel industry. By instituting taxes on major oil companies, it is possible to significantly bolster funding for vulnerable communities affected by extreme weather events. As suggested by advocates, the pursuit of climate justice should prioritize shifting the financial burden from those most afflicted by climate change to the corporations responsible for its exacerbation.

Original Source: www.ipsnews.net