The National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) has shut down 25 facilities in four states of the Federation over noncompliance with environmental regulations.
Officials of the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) during an enforcement operation
Mrs. Nwamaka Ejiofor, Assistant Director (Press) in NESREA, stated this in a statement on Friday, June 13, 2025, in Abuja.
She said that the facilities which cut across different sectors were shut down in Anambra, Enugu, Bayelsa, and Rivers for various environmental crimes.
Ejiofor said these included refusal to conduct Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) before commencement of the project, Environmental Audit, and lack of a functional effluent treatment plant, among others.
She said the sealed facilities included Rugal Pharmaceutical, Emene Industrial Layout, Enugu; China Communication Construction Company (CCCC), Owo yard, Enugu; Hardis and Dromedas, Umunya, Anambra State; and Pinnatech Engi Asphalt Plant, Awkuzu, Anambra.
Others are China Civil Engineering Construction Corporation (CCECC), Obogoro Road, Swali, Yenagoa, Bayelsa State; Megastar Technical and Construction Company Limited, Imiringi Road, Yenagoa, Bayelsa; and Multi Plan Nigeria Ltd., Okuru-Ama, Trans-Amadi Industrial Layout, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, among others.
Prof. Innocent Barikor, the Director-General of NESREA, urged operators to comply with the provisions of environmental laws in their operations.
Barikor stated that the agency would continue to conduct such enforcement exercises to safeguard the environment and serve as a deterrent to facility operators.
The Country Manager, Natural Justice, Michael Karikpo, has called on Nigerian lawyers particularly women to explore the growing field of climate change litigation, highlighting the urgent need for legal reforms and court interventions to combat the climate crisis.
Participants at the Natural Justice training workshop on climate change litigation
Speaking during a two-day training session hosted by Natural Justice in Lagos, Karikpo emphasised the global rise in climate related legal actions and Nigeria’s slow pace in that space.
“In the discussion of climate change litigation across the world, there is an increasing use of law of the courts to encourage governments and companies to act for climate justice. In Nigeria, we only have two cases over the last 20 years on climate change litigation.” Karikpo said.
The programme, focused exclusively on female legal professionals, aims to encourage their participation in climate advocacy and litigation, considering the disproportionate impact of climate change on women.
“We have decided to focus on women because of the fact that they suffer even more impact from the climate change crisis,” Karikpo explained.
“This is the first cohort of this meeting. We will be having subsequent meetings where we will have both male and female lawyers discussing climate change litigation, but this is actually just for women, for female lawyers, so that they also reflect on how climate change impacts them and what they can do using the instrumentality of the law to address those impacts.”
Karikpo expressed hope that the initiative would inspire a new generation of female lawyers to engage in climate change litigation and push for legal and policy reforms.
“We hope that it will inspire young women lawyers to specialize in climate change litigation and see the need for legal reforms, policy reforms, and the role that court decisions and court action can play in enhancing government’s capacity to act for climate justice,” he said.
Among the participants was Confidence Chisoma Jonathan, a lawyer, chartered arbitrator, and founder of the Raj Foundation, a non-profit focused on women and girl empowerment. She described the training as transformative and practical.
“So far, the training on climate change litigation and responses by Natural Justice has been amazing,” Jonathan said. “For me, it’s been an eye opener, learning how to manage my everyday life and also protecting the climate and the planet the way it is.”
Jonathan, who is based in Port Harcourt, plans to take her new knowledge back to her community and educate women and girls about the realities of climate change.
“One of my key takeaways, if I go back to the South, I’m going to let the people know, especially my organisation, like I said, I’m a founder and I have women in my organisation. I’m going to let them know that climate change is not one scientific myth. It is not a folklore, a fairy tale. It is real. It is real because we see it every day in our society, in our streets, in the marketplace.”
She emphasised personal responsibility and practical solutions, especially around plastic use.
“How can we prevent the whole climate change issues that we’re experiencing today? By taking responsibility for our actions. The use of plastics should be prohibited, and if not possible to be prohibited, it should be reduced. There are other ways we can fight this, from using bamboo bags or biodegradable bags.”
Jonathan stressed that her motivation isn’t financial gain but community impact.
“Right now, as a founder, I’m not just looking at using this training to make money because it’s not about making money. So whatever I’ve learned here, I’m taking it back to my community, to the rural areas, to teach girls, to teach women, to take climate change very seriously,” she said.
Abdul Ruqoya Anuoluwapo, a 200-level law student from the Faculty of Law, Lagos State University, expressed her appreciation for the opportunity to attend the training program on climate change litigation for female lawyers.
“I’m not a lawyer yet, so yeah, I’m an aspiring lawyer. I’m grateful for the platform actually because I’ve learned a lot,” she said.
Ruqoya admitted that before receiving the invitation, she was unaware of the concept of climate change litigation.
“Initially, I didn’t know that there was something called climate change litigation until I received the mail. Somebody recommended me for this program, so I received the mail and I was wondering, climate change litigation? And it happened, I came.”
She noted that the first day of the training was insightful, highlighting the indirect impact of human actions on the climate and the potential for collaboration between legal and scientific experts.
“We learned a lot about the effects of our actions on the climate and how it might not even directly affect you, the doer, but somebody somewhere else. And how we can cooperate with scientific experts, I don’t know, is that correct? Scientists. In short, how the lawyers and the scientists can collaborate because they are the ones that will provide the fieldwork, the evidence, and the lawyers have to just go to court to drag the case.”
She emphasised the importance of pursuing climate justice for the benefit of future generations. “How we have to do this, not for our own generation but for the future generations,” she said.
When asked how she intends to use what she has learned, Ruqoya shared that she had spoken with the organisers and learned that the workshop is a recurring event.
“They’ve said that it is okay for students to be there and they are providing this platform, they are engaging us. I feel like it’s something that I can leverage because before today, there’s this CFA Institute that used to talk about climate change and I’ve always been attending, not even knowing that I can merge this with law.”
Asked whether she had found her new calling, she responded with cautious optimism.
“I think I am, but I’m not sure. Do you like climate change? The thing about me is I used to have short attention span. So one moment I’m very invested in something and the next moment I’m like, is this thing even for me? I don’t know. Let me say I’m more of the quick results type of person.
“So if I’m not getting that…That’s like something that I’ve learned in this workshop, that the result might not necessarily come immediately and we just have to keep pushing. The purpose of the workshop is not even to like get compensation actually. Sometimes it’s just to get them to stop those actions that are causing damages.”
Another participant, Oderanti Zainab, a 400-level student of Common and Islamic Law at Lagos State University, also shared her thoughts.
“I’ve been here since yesterday for the Natural Justice event. It’s been a nice event and I got to meet wonderful women in the industry,” she said.
“Talking about climate change is something I’ve not really been into. I have an idea now of what the climate change and climate education is all about and how I can make a change.”
The Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP), the Ogoni Liberation Initiative (OLI) and other groups in Ogoni ethnic nationality of Rivers State have rejected the state pardon granted to the late Ken Saro-Wiwa and other leaders of the area by the Federal Government.
People protest against the hanging of Ogoni leader Ken Saro-Wiwa and his eight colleagues in London, UK, November 17, 1995. Photo credit: PA Archive/PA
President Bola Tinubu had on Thursday, June 12, 2025, granted pardon to Saro-Wiwa and other leaders of Ogoni who were murdered in 1995 by the military administration of late General Sani Abacha on allegation of civil disturbance, murder and others.
Responding to the state pardon, MOSOP said what the people of Ogoni need from the government is exoneration and not pardon, calling on President Bola Tinubu to review his stance.
Speaking, the Publicity Secretary of MOSOP, Comrade Imeabe Saviour Oscar, in Port Harcourt, said the declaration of pardon is not acceptable, noting that pardon does not arise because Saro-Wiwa and eight others did not commit the crime levelled against them by the government.
Oscar said: “It is clear that the Ogoni struggle is not a local struggle rather international. So, Mr President cannot claim that he is not aware of what led to the death of Ken Saro Wiwa and others by the military administration of Abacha that Ken Saro-Wiwa and others were hanged even in their innocence.
“What do you call pardon, when somebody was killed in his innocence? He is supposed to exonerate them and not pardon. President Bola Tinubu cannot claim that he is not aware of the history of the Ogoni people. He is not a novice to the incident, so granting these our leaders pardon is not acceptable rather we need outright exoneration because they did not commit any crime.
“The President should have exonerated Ken Saro-Wiwa and the others of any crime because they were killed innocently. So, if you pardon them, it simply means that they committed crime and have been forgiven, whereas these leaders were innocent. We need exoneration for our murdered leaders.”
Similarly, OLI noted that the people of Ogoni are not against the administration of President Bola Tinubu but noted that decisions of the President ought to be impeccable.
The leader of OLI, Dr. Fabeke Douglas, in Port Harcourt, noted that the state pardon granted Wiwa and others did not meet the least expectation of the people of Ogoni and Niger Delta, demanding that the murdered Ogoni leaders be exonerated.
Douglas said: “Thank you, Mr President, for considering the plight of the Ogoni people, however, granting pardon to the Ogoni did not meet our expectations. We demand that they be exonerated from the crime they never committed.
“They were not afforded a fair hearing nor given the opportunity to appeal the judgement as stipulated by the law of the land. We shall continue to offer you our support until you adequately address this matter Mr. President. We appreciate your efforts, but the Ogoni case necessitates meticulous attention.”
Corporate Accountability and Public Participation Africa (CAPPA) has praised President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s posthumous pardon and conferment of national honours on Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other Ogoni activists but noted that, for this long overdue gesture to transcend ceremonial pageantry, it must catalyse full reparations and tangible justice for Ogoni Land and its people.
The late Ken Saro-Wiwa
In a statement made available by its Media and Communications’ Officer, Robert Egbe, after the President’s June 12, 2025, Democracy Day address, CAPPA described the pardons as a historical reckoning that coincides with the 30th anniversary of the fatal and unjust execution of the environmental activists.
“Ken Saro-Wiwa was a writer, poet, and political activist who founded the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP) and led a non-violent campaign against the oil pollution and mindless exploitation of Ogoni land and waters by Shell and other big oil corporations.
“Yet in 1995, under the Abacha junta, he and eight fellow leaders—Saturday Dobee, Nordu Eawo, Daniel Gbooko, Paul Levera, Felix Nuate, Baribor Bera, Barinem Kiobel, and John Kpuine – were unlawfully arrested, subjected to a sham trial, and arbitrarily hanged. They paid with their lives for courageously defending the pillage of their homes and rights to live in dignity.
“Three decades on, nothing has changed. Despite evidence and witness testimonies showing Shell’s wicked collusion with the Nigerian state and military to crush the Ogoni resistance, the company continues to operate without accountability and has even succeeded in divesting its Niger Delta subsidiary to a Nigerian consortium to evade mounting liability,” the statement said.
“Till today, the executions of the Ogoni 9 remain an indelible stain on Nigeria’s record and proclamation alone will not vindicate their legacy,” CAPPA’s Executive Director Akinbode Oluwafemi remarked.
“Genuine tribute demands decisive action. The presidency must match these honours awarded today with political will by speeding up the full cleanup and restoration of Ogoni land. Major oil polluters that have caused this pain and devastation must answer for every drop spilled,” he added.
“In 2011, the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) assessment of Ogoni Land recorded that its soil and water remain so dangerously polluted that restoring safe farmlands and access to potable water will take up to 30 years, as well as cost at least USD 1 billion, with the first five years alone demanding that full sum.
“Although urgent remediation plans were highlighted years ago, including a recommendation for an initial $1 billion capital injection from both the polluting oil actors and the Nigerian government to facilitate the process, to date, substantive cleanup and justice for Ogoni communities remain stalled, even as alarming discussions and plans to resume oil production in the region have surfaced in recent times.
“The Hydrocarbon Pollution Remediation Project (HYPREP), established by the President Muhammadu Buhari administration in 2017 to oversee the environmental cleanup and provide drinkable water to locals following the UNEP assessment, remains plagued by many controversies. Contracts have been found outsourced to firms with no track record or environmental credentials. Some sites listed as ‘remediated’ exist only on paper, and communities have reported that even the so-called restored areas remain barren, incapable of supporting crop growth or aquatic life.
“Meanwhile, the polluters-in-chief, including Shell, Total, Agip, and the former Nigerian government-owned NNPC, which comprise the Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria (SPDC) Joint Venture partnership for the clean-up exercise, pledged $900 million, to be paid over five years. Yet since their first $180 million deposit in 2018 into the Ogoni Trust Fund, a HYPREP-managed escrow overseen by government, they have contributed only $572 million in total.
“The Nigerian government, for its part, has failed to pay its counterpart fund put at N100 billion, arguing that the NNPC serves as its proxy,” the statement observed.
CAPPA called on the federal government to immediately match talk with action by insisting upon the full payment and transparent disbursement of every dollar owed to the remediation of Ogoni land.
It also urged President Tinubu to commit to a legally binding moratorium on oil exploration in Ogoniland and not use the pardon as a cover for resuming drilling in the area.
“The presidency must institutionalise community reparations, ensuring that total and thorough cleanup is achieved and verified by independent experts, civil society, villagers, and local communities. The Nigerian government must also compensate farmers and fishers for decades of lost harvests, while also investing in renewable energy and agro-ecology programs to rebuild livelihoods,” it said.
“Our demands are not rocket science, they are the sine qua non of genuine reconciliation and healing.
“Democracy Day commemorates Nigeria’s hard-won right to dissent and assemble, a right Saro-Wiwa and others exercised at mortal risk. Now that the presidency has taken a critical step, he must ‘show workings’ by making sure the pardon of these martyrs becomes the mandate to cleanse our nation’s soil and soul alike.
“President Tinubu must make sure his tenure oversees the rapid revival of poisoned lands, the restitution of stolen livelihoods, and the accountability of every corporate actor whose pipelines and flares turned a vibrant delta into a toxic hinterland.
“Anything less would betray both the sacrifice of heroes past like Ken Saro-Wiwa and the very spirit of June 12,” the statement concluded.
With the world on the brink of breaching the 1.5°C global warming threshold before 2029, the Least Developed Countries (LDC) Group is calling for urgent and transformative action at the UN Climate Meetings (SB 62), taking place from June 16 to 26, 2025, in Bonn, Germany.
Chair of the Least Developed Countries, Evans Njewa
WMO projects that global temperatures will remain at or near record highs over the next five years, intensifying climate risks and impacts on societies, economies, and sustainable development. Keeping 1.5°C within reach is vital to minimize the worst impacts – giving up on it would be a betrayal of the most vulnerable countries, including LDCs.
Backed by recent warnings from the latest WMO Global Annual to Decadal Climate Update, which projects an increasing risk of surpassing 1.5°C within the next five years, the LDC Group is pushing for meaningful outcomes on adaptation, mitigation, and climate finance that match the scale and urgency of the climate crisis that disproportionately affects LDCs.
“We can no longer afford frameworks that look good on paper but fail to deliver where it matters most,” said Evans Njewa, Chair of the LDC Group.
In preparation for the Bonn sessions and COP30 in Belém, Brazil, the LDC Group convened a strategy meeting in April 2025 in Blantyre, Malawi. The priorities agreed at this meeting will guide its negotiations at SB 62 and will be further reflected upon during the upcoming LDC Ministerial later this year.
Among them is the call for a clear and credible roadmap to finalise measurable and meaningful indicators for the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA).
Mr. Njewa said, “These indicators must go beyond vague commitments and drive real progress in enhancing adaptive capacity, strengthening resilience, and reducing climate vulnerability. Importantly, they must also include the means of implementation – finance, technology, and capacity-building – without which adaptation will remain out of reach for many LDCs.
“Ahead of COP30, we also expect a clear, fair, and time-bound pathway to implement the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) decision and deliver the $1.3 trillion annual climate finance goal by 2035, ensuring adequacy, transparency, and predictability, while fully reflecting the needs and special circumstances of LDCs.
“While 2025 marks the deadline for developed countries to double adaptation finance, this target in our strong view is outdated, inadequate, and dangerously behind the times. Informed by science and the scale of escalating climate impacts, the LDC Group is calling for a bold leap: triple adaptation finance by 2030 as part of an ambitious New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) to meaningfully protect vulnerable communities on the frontlines of the climate collapse.
“The Global Stocktake clearly outlined what is needed to limit warming to 1.5°C. Governments must respond by submitting new, updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) in 2025 that commit to deep cuts in emissions, reflecting their highest possible ambition and fair share of global action Yet, just 22 countries have stepped up so far. We can’t afford further delays and major emitters must lead by example to demonstrate genuine ambition and global solidarity.
“The LDC Group also expects rapid, direct, and simplified access to the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD), prioritising frontline communities who are already bearing the brunt of climate impacts.
“We are committed to supporting the incoming presidency in rebuilding trust in the climate process,” Mr. Njewa concluded. “This means moving beyond processes to deliver real outcomes – outcomes that are shaped by those most affected and designed to secure a safer, fairer future for all.”
As delegates gather for the UNFCCC SB62 climate negotiations, civil society voices from across the Global South and North are calling for a course correction grounded in justice, equity, and real accountability.
November’s COP30 in Belém must not repeat the failures of Baku, the campaigners insist.
UN Climate Change Talks in Bonn, Germany
Bonn SB62 arrives at a moment of reckoning for the multilateral climate process. Six months after the collapse of trust at COP29 in Baku – where Parties failed to agree on a credible New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance – civil society operatives believe that the credibility of the UNFCCC is under intense scrutiny.
“Vulnerable countries left Azerbaijan with unmet expectations and deepened mistrust. The result is a system creaking at the seams, and – in the year when countries are meant to deliver on their new climate plans – many people are now openly asking: can the UNFCCC still deliver the coordinated, equitable action the world urgently needs?
“This question lands in a world reeling from multiple overlapping crises. Wars, genocides, growing authoritarianism, weaponised trade, and unregulated digital upheaval have created a geopolitical environment that is increasingly resistant to collaboration.
“At the same time, the climate crisis is accelerating: temperatures are rising, weather extremes are worsening, and climate impacts are threatening lives and livelihoods across every continent. Yet even in this worsening context, the political will for ambitious, cooperative climate action – especially from the world’s largest emitters – remains alarmingly weak.”
Climate Action Network’s new expectations briefing sets out detailed demands across key negotiation tracks – highlighting the stark contrast between worsening climate impacts and the lack of political will from wealthy nations. As geopolitical instability, economic inequality, and ecological collapse deepen, the group wants SB62 to signal a decisive shift from fragmented, elite-led processes to people-centred multilateralism grounded in justice.
“COP30 can only succeed if the road to Belém rebuilds trust, prioritises equity, and delivers clear political and financial commitments that centre those most impacted by the climate crisis.”
June’s Triple Test for Climate Justice
The next few weeks present a rare and revealing sequence: the G7 Summit (June 15–17), SB62 in Bonn (June 16–26), and the Financing for Development Conference in Seville (June 30–July 3). Together, they expose the power dynamics that continue to stall climate finance, submitted CAN.
“From empty promises on debt and IMF reform at the G7, to stalled ambition in the COP process due to a lack of predictable finance, to the structural rules on tax, trade, and SDRs under scrutiny in Seville – June is a test of whether the global financial system can be reshaped to serve people and the planet. These are not separate tracks – they are one crisis. Justice, coherence, and political will must rise across all three if COP30 is to succeed.”
Tasneem Essop, Executive Director at Climate Action Network International, said: “We are facing a crisis of legitimacy and a breakdown of trust in the UN climate process. Government negotiators at the SB62 session must send a clear signal that the decisions and actions they take will ensure that justice is not a side conversation – but the core principle that will determine whether COP30 can succeed or not.”
Key Demands Ahead of COP30
Centring Justice in Just Transition: A Just Transition must uphold human rights, labour rights, and the rights of Indigenous Peoples. It must guarantee social protection, ensure inclusion and social dialogue, and be rooted in equity and international solidarity. This includes providing debt-free climate finance and fair access to technology. The establishment of the Belém Action Mechanism (BAM) would accelerate and strengthen Just Transition efforts within and between countries – giving voice to workers and communities in shaping the transitions they need, and supporting countries to build economies free from pollution, debt, and regressive technology and trade rules.
Delivering Justice for Climate-Impacted Communities:Justice means adaptation and loss & damage get real money, not empty promises. Communities on the frontlines of climate breakdown need urgent support now. SB 62 must deliver a justice-centred roadmap for COP30: finalise adaptation indicators that reflect grant-based finance, set a new public target to replace the outdated doubling goal, and build a permanent UNFCCC agenda on Loss and Damage. The new fund must be fast, fair, and fully resourced – because delay equals denial.
Advancing Economic and Financial Justice: Fix the money or forget the climate goals. From Baku to Belém, the roadmap must shift public finance from fossil fuels to frontline solutions. That means ending subsidies and fossil finance by 2025, taxing polluters under a UN framework, linking climate justice to debt relief, and reforming global rules to give the Global South real access to resources. Climate finance must be public, grant-based, and transparent – no offsets, no loopholes, no excuses. Let’s make polluters pay – and make finance finally work for the many.
Beyond Just Transition, adaptation and finance, SB 62 must also deliver progress across key negotiation tracks:
The Global Stocktake must confront the emissions and finance justice gaps head-on, not hide behind vague gestures.
Ambition discussions must drive real and equitable emission cuts across whole economies – and all NDCs must be submitted by September in time for consideration in the UNFCCC NDC Synthesis Report, with rich countries taking the lead.
Sectoral work must fast-track fossil fuel phase-out, align agriculture with agroecology and food sovereignty, and protect ecosystems from false solutions.
Finally, shrinking civic space and surveillance of observers threaten the legitimacy of the UNFCCC itself – Bonn must mark the start of a course correction on human rights and participation.
Jacobo Ocharan, Head of Political Strategies at Climate Action Network International, said: “Justice is the red thread – from finance to forests, from transition plans to civic space. If it is not centered, the climate process will lose what little credibility it still holds.”
On the road to “net zero”, governments should use a separate target to control the ramp-up of atmospheric carbon removals, independently of emission reductions. Setting a political target for the volume of such planetary waste management is almost as cost-effective as letting the market decide, and it produces a more reliable and – in terms of planetary boundaries – sustainable result.
Carbon emission
This is the conclusion of a comprehensive model study by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), now published in the renowned journal Nature Communications.
For the first time, this work quantitatively examines how global heating can be limited to 1.5°C using separate targets for emissions and removals. PIK relies on its integrated assessment model REMIND, which describes the energy sector with a high degree of technological detail and shows how it interacts with climate and the economy.
“We wanted to know how much additional cost would be incurred by a separate political control,” explains Jessica Strefler, head of the PIK Carbon Management Team and a co-author of the study. “Letting the market decide how much to reduce emissions, and how much to compensate for remaining emissions through removals, is theoretically compelling, but in practice – at least in the short and medium term – it could show problematic weaknesses.”
In such a system, the uniform carbon pricing – where the price paid by emitters is the same as that collected by removal companies – automatically ensures the most favourable mix in terms of direct costs: in a market equilibrium, emissions are reduced exactly to the point where the next tonne of CO₂ can be removed more cheaply than being avoided.
But a high removal volume could harm the environment – for example, because “climate plantations” with fast-growing biomass consume a lot of land and water. In addition, a removal volume that forms in real time on the market affects investors’ planning security, which is particularly important in this emerging industry.
The shift appears financially viable
In several model runs, all of which assume compliance with the 1.5°C limit and net-zero carbon emissions in 2050, the study examines the consequences of achieving net zero with different levels of carbon removal. Based on the study’s assumptions, a uniform carbon price ensures a global annual removal volume that increases to around 7 billion tonnes by 2050.
The key finding, however, is that setting a volume target below this market equilibrium results in only a small increase in costs. Even well below equilibrium, the cost of the climate transition rises by less than 10 percent. The shift to a separate removal target therefore appears financially viable.
The results point to some fundamental recommendations: “Policymakers should set the removal target high enough to stimulate urgently needed investments in the relevant technologies and the ramp-up of removals,” emphasises Anne Merfort, a PhD student in PIK’s Transformation Pathways research department, and lead author of the study. “Nevertheless, policymakers should definitely avoid overemphasising the role of removals and thereby undermining decarbonisation.”
A stringent avoidance target also has many other advantages: “It means that less underground CO₂ storage is needed, less greenhouse gas is released into the atmosphere, and the state has higher carbon-price revenues and more scope for social compensation.”
The study also sheds light on the interactions within a system that has separate targets for emissions and removals. It shows how the level of the removal target influences the carbon price for greenhouse gas emissions, as well as the technology mix for removals.
“This study clarifies the levers that policymakers have at their disposal on the road to climate neutrality,” says PIK Director Ottmar Edenhofer, also a co-author. “We need market-based and well-designed removal targets at the EU level – not too high in view of sustainability, but also not too low in view of driving investments and technological progress. After all, planetary waste management will become a central pillar of climate protection after 2050.”
On Wednesday, June 11, 2025, women climate leaders at a press conference called for governments to take effective climate action in the face of growing political conservatism and pro-fossil fuel agendas.
Proceedings at the Bonn Climate Change Conference in Germany
The call comes just days before negotiators convene in Bonn, Germany, where Parties will prepare for the annual climate negotiations at COP30 in Brazil. With the window for tackling climate change quickly shrinking, the coming years are said to be crucial in mitigating the crisis through democratic, science-based solutions worldwide.
“In 2025, this year alone, we have seen triple-digit heatwaves from across Brazil, the U.S., Central Asia, and the Gulf Region. This is not just an environmental crisis; it is a justice crisis and a societal crisis, and how we respond and who is centered in that response matters deeply. Study after study shows that women are the most effective climate leaders, building local scalable solutions and defending ecosystems and human rights,” said Osprey Orielle Lake, Founder and Executive Director at the Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network (WECAN).
“And yet, that space to lead is shrinking. We can’t separate the failure of governments to act ambitiously on climate from the global rise of authoritarianism, and right now, that is playing out heavily in the United States. When democracy is weakened, climate justice becomes nearly impossible. The same forces suppressing free speech are blocking climate action and silencing frontline communities,” added Lake.
Speakers, including Canadian Senator Rosa Galvez, addressed top priorities for climate action on the road to COP30 this November, including phasing out fossil fuels, advancing a just transition, ensuring protections for forests and biodiversity, and ensuring gender equity in climate policies and programmes.
“The science is clear: fossil fuel emissions are the main driver of global warming. Continuing reliance on these past energy sources is leading to more violent and frequent extreme weather events. COP30 must be the critical turning point in redefining the future of our planet. The COP in Belem cannot become just another wasted opportunity. The world must walk the roadmap for transitioning away from fossil fuels, ending deforestation, and scaling up climate finance,” said Rosa Galvez, Canadian Senator.
“This is why I joined a group of parliamentarians for a fossil-free future with special emphasis on ending the exploration and exploitation of oil and gas in the Amazon territory. This will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, capture CO2, protect habitats and biodiversity, and progress reconciliation with Indigenous peoples,” noted Galvez.
“Any woman from the Amazon territories can speak about our experiences, our rights, about what we are doing to protect the forest, and how we are tackling climate change. In the Indigenous world, there are no owners of Nature. When we work in our territories on the ground, we continue to take care of the forest. We see poison falling over us, but we do not give up,” said Watatakalu Yawalapiti (Xingu), Elected leader of the Women’s Movement of the Xingu Indigenous Territory (MMTIX), and Political Organiser for the National Association of Indigenous Women Warriors of Ancestry (ANMIGA), Brazil.
“We are showing that our way of life is the alternative for us to be able to survive on this planet, where we have been struggling so much. We have COP coming, and we will show everything we are doing. We don’t have time to wait for the government, so mobilisation here is really in the Indigenous movements that are mobilizing at COP to show our reality to the world,” added Yawalapiti.
“COP30 will mark 20 years since the Kyoto Protocol came into force and 10 years since the adoption of the Paris Agreement. This is preceded by a year recorded as the warmest globally, which is 2024, and the first calendar year where the average global temperatures exceeded 1.5 degrees is almost poetic,” said Zukiswa White, Project Specialist and Social Justice Consultant (South Africa).
“What does this mean for us? We already know that those responsible for delaying meaningful action to course correct have run out of time. And what is also true is that the climate crisis-deniers have run out of excuses. Amongst these deniers, we must include those who continue to keep women, feminists, Indigenous, and local community leaders out of spaces where we belong. So, in Bonn, Belem, and beyond, we must amplify calls of feminist advocates, Indigenous leaders, and the majority world at large, and call time of death on hiding behind false solutions and dangerous distractions,” submitted White.
“A natural forest is where I was born and where I work today. Congo is the second-largest rainforest after the Amazon rainforest and the Congo contains 60% of all African forests. It is being said that Congo is the future solution for climate change. Since 2013, we have planted half a million trees in traditional ways. We don’t have cars or machines, but we are planting by hand. Right now, we are calling for justice and democracy. Without justice, there is no work we can accomplish. Climate justice is humanitarian justice,” said Neema Namadamu, Founder and Executive Director of Hero Women Rising, and WECAN Coordinator in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
On Tuesday, June 17, 2025, the Brazilian National Agency of Petroleum, Natural Gas and Biofuels (ANP) will hold the 5th Cycle of the Permanent Concession Offer, an auction of 172 blocks for oil and gas exploration, including areas in the Equatorial Margin such as the mouth of the Amazon River.
Lula da Silva, President of Brazil
Civil society organisations, along with Indigenous Peoples and local traditional communities, denounce this setback and demand the immediate suspension of the auction.
The burning of oil and gas from the offered blocks could release more than 11 billion tCO₂e, according to Instituto ClimaInfo. This is more than the agribusiness sector has emitted over the past six years, and 5% of the total emissions humanity can still produce to keep global warming below 1.5°C. Fossil fuels from the 47 areas in the mouth of the Amazon River alone could emit 4.7 billion tCO₂e if the blocks are explored.
The Amazon Basins at the centre of the debate
In addition to the mouth of the Amazon River, the Amazonian territory is home to six other sedimentary basins: Parecis, Solimões, Amazonas, Parnaíba, Barreirinhas, and Pará-Maranhão. The total estimated potential of oil and gas beneath these basins is nearly 60 billion barrels. If confirmed – and exploited – the burning of these fossil fuels could release around 24 billion tCO₂e. That’s nearly half of all global emissions in 2023 (57 billion tons) or the equivalent of all Brazil’s emissions over the past 11 years.
Although the Brazilian government claims it wants to lead the global climate debate – especially by hosting COP30 in Belém – the statements made by the president of Petrobras, Magda Chambriard, the Minister of Mines and Energy Alexandre Silveira, and President Lula appear to go against the principles of a just transition. While Lula delivers speeches about the “Blue Amazon” and makes formal climate commitments, his administration continues to push for expanding the fossil fuel frontier in one of the planet’s most sensitive and strategic regions for climate balance, according to observers.
This contradiction not only weakens Brazil’s international credibility but also directly violates the rights of Amazonian Peoples, who have historically protected the forest and the planet’s climate. Pushing for oil exploration in areas of high socio-environmental vulnerability – without free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) and without respecting their right to self-determination – perpetuates a model of climate injustice and energy colonialism.
Recently, more than 60 Indigenous leaders from the Oiapoque region publicly opposed Petrobras’ activities in the mouth of the Amazon River, exposing the lack of FPIC as well as threats to their lives, territories, and the future of the Amazon. Last week, authorities and Indigenous leaders from across the Pan-Amazon region – representing all nine countries – along with Indigenous leaders from all biomes in Brazil, issued a political declaration for COP30. Among other demands, they reiterated the urgent need to phase out fossil fuels.
Toya Manchineri, General Coordinator of the Coordination of the Indigenous Organizations of the Brazilian Amazon (COIAB), said: “We know what the solutions are to the multiple crises we face: the full protection of our territories, which are major carbon sinks. For millennia, we have lived in and cared for the Amazon, safeguarding the balance of the climate and of life itself. This crisis is also one of values and leadership. With COP30 approaching, the Lula government must choose: stand with the peoples of the Amazon or continue investing in oil. The time for contradictions is over. As guardians of the forest, we reaffirm our climate authority: THE ANSWER IS US.”
Carolina Marçal, project coordinator at Instituto ClimaInfo: “We need a global agreement for the phased elimination of fossil fuels. Until that happens, oil companies should not open any more oil and gas wells. And that must start with the Amazon, a critical region for biodiversity and the global climate. We need climate leadership that goes beyond words, and that won’t happen by opening new fronts of exploration in the Amazon.”
Clara Junger, Brazil campaigns coordinator at the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative: “It’s unacceptable for the government to keep expanding oil and gas exploration in Brazil while claiming to support an energy transition. The ANP auction on June 17th, with 172 exploration blocks, directly contradicts the climate commitments of the country, which is still the host of COP30.
“The same government promoting the Amazon COP is pushing for exploration of 47 new blocks in the mouth of the Amazon River, threatening traditional communities and the planet. Data shows that only 0.06% of oil revenues go toward the energy transition. We need a global agreement to phase out oil extraction in a fair and just way. In the meantime, the bare minimum is to stop the expansion.”
Ilan Zugman, director of 350.org Latin America and the Caribbean: “There is no leadership without coherence. There is no just energy transition with more oil. We’re talking about billions of tons of additional greenhouse gases at a time when the entire world must stop burning fossil fuels to reverse the damage we’ve already done. Indigenous Peoples and traditional communities have already said no. Science has said no. And civil society is saying no. This auction must be canceled immediately. Brazil cannot become a symbol of global climate hypocrisy – it must be a model of courage, justice, and respect for life.”
Sila Mesquita, national coordinator of Grupo de Trabalho Amazônico: “The Grupo de Trabalho Amazônico rejects the oil and gas auction scheduled for June 17th, which puts 47 blocks in the Amazon up for offer. This auction poses a direct threat to the Amazon, traditional peoples, and the planet’s climate. Instead of investing in clean energy and protecting the forest, the government insists on fossil fuels and destruction. We oppose this model of development. The Amazon is not for sale. It is alive and it will resist.”
Mauricio Guetta, director of law and public policy at Avaaz: “Brazil needs to show its true face: is it a climate champion that protects the Amazon and its peoples, or just another oil baron with pretty environmental rhetoric while pursuing development at any cost? The auction of new oil blocks in the Amazon must be canceled now – this is an environmental issue and a matter of justice for Indigenous Peoples and the forest.”
Lucas Louback, campaign and advocacy manager at Nossas: “Thousands of people are already saying no to oil exploration in the Foz do Amazonas. And the Brazilian government needs to listen. Just a few months away from hosting COP30, continuing to bet on oil is a glaring contradiction. The Amazon is dangerously close to a tipping point, and clinging to this model pushes Brazil and the world closer to climate collapse. The claim that oil will fund the energy transition doesn’t hold up when less than 1% of the sector’s revenue goes toward it. If the government wants to lead on climate, it must make a real commitment.”
Gisela Hurtado, senior Amazonia campaigner at Stand.earth: “Oil exploration has never brought true development to the Amazon. In several countries across the region, such as Peru, Ecuador, and Colombia, it has historically violated the rights of Indigenous Peoples and traditional communities, caused irreversible environmental damage, deepening inequality while enriching only a few. Brazil now has the chance to lead by example by suspending the auction and showing the world at COP30 that it is ready for a just, sustainable, and fossil-free future.”
Suely Araújo, public policy coordinator at Observatório do Clima: “Brazil is missing a historic opportunity to lead the world toward decarbonisation and environmental protection. By looking to the past, the government is making clear its decision to significantly ramp up the country’s oil production. In the midst of a climate crisis, it is creating irreparable cracks in its environmental policy, and demonstrating in practice a form of denialism.
“Not denial of climate change itself – that is an undeniable reality – but denial of the seriousness of the current situation. We cannot accept this decision by the Brazilian government. No to oil exploration in the mouth of the Amazon River and other basins of the Brazilian Equatorial Margin! No to increased oil production in the country!”
One-third (34%) of all global forest lost between 2001 and 2024 is likely permanent – meaning trees in those areas are unlikely to grow back naturally, according to a new analysis by World Resources Institute (WRI) and Google DeepMind.
Deforestation. Photo credit: telegraph.co.uk
The impact is even more severe in tropical primary rainforests, where a staggering 61% of loss is tied to permanent land use change – a major setback for some of the planet’s most vital ecosystems for biodiversity and carbon storage.
Researchers also warn that while the remaining two-thirds of forest loss is typically linked to “temporary” disturbances like logging or wildfire – it can still have lasting consequences. Forests may take decades to recover. And even when they do, they don’t always return to full health.
The findings, made possible by an advanced AI model and satellite imagery and developed by Global Forest Watch, Land & Carbon Lab and Google DeepMind, offer the most detailed local, regional and global view to date of what’s driving forest loss – and what can be done about it.
“We’ve long known where forests are being lost. Now we better understand why,” said Michelle Sims, Research Associate at WRI. “This knowledge is essential to developing smarter actions at the regional, national and even local level – to protect remaining forests and restore degraded ones”.
The new dataset distinguishes drivers likely to cause permanent loss – such as expansion of agriculture, mining, infrastructure and settlements – which accounted for the 34% (177 million hectares) of global tree cover loss since 2001. Permanent agriculture alone made up 95% of that total. In tropical primary rainforests, drivers of permanent land use change drove an even greater share: 61% of loss (50.7 million hectares) – nearly the size of Thailand.
While the remaining two-thirds of forest loss stems from causes typically viewed as temporary – such as logging, wildfires, natural disturbances or shifting cultivation – recovery is not assured. Forest regeneration depends on how the land is managed afterward, the type of forest and the degree of environmental stress it faces.
“Just because trees grow back doesn’t mean forests return to their original state,” said Radost Stanimirova, Research Associate at WRI. “They might store less carbon, have fewer species or be more vulnerable to future damage. And climate change is making many natural events like fires and pest outbreaks more intense and frequent, which makes it harder for forests to recover.”
Drivers of tree cover loss vary around the globe
In tropical areas like Latin America and Southeast Asia, permanent agriculture is the dominant driver, responsible for 73% and 66% of loss, respectively. In temperate and boreal regions such as Russia and North America, wildfires – often triggered by lightning or human activity – and logging are the primary drivers. In Europe, 91% of tree cover loss is due to timber harvesting, much of it within managed forests where regrowth is planned.
Some drivers have an outsized impact in specific regions, even if they’re minor globally – driven by local land use, economic activity and governance. For instance, mining and energy drive less than 1% of global tree cover loss but caused 28% in Peru’s Madre de Dios region. In Colorado, climate-driven bark beetle outbreaks accounted for 27% of tree loss over two decades, even though natural disturbances like pests, storms, and floods make up just 1.4% of global loss. These are just two examples – many more exist around the world, each shaped by distinct local dynamics.
What this means for people, nature and climate
Permanent forest loss has serious and far-reaching consequences: reduced carbon storage, accelerated biodiversity loss and heightened risks to water and food security – all at a time when the planet is already facing a deepening climate and ecological crisis. Even temporary losses can be dangerous; depending on how forests recover, they may still lead to long-term ecosystem degradation and a decline in the critical services forests provide.
What needs to happen now
The new data marks a significant advance for forest policy, addressing a crucial gap in global efforts to halt deforestation by 2030. By pinpointing the underlying causes of forest loss in different places, it enables policymakers, companies and communities around the world to design more targeted, effective solutions to tackle deforestation.
Researchers at WRI outline a set of urgent, evidence-based recommendations tailored to the specific drivers of forest loss. Among other priorities, they call for stronger Indigenous and local land rights, designing policies that reflect local farming and land use realities, improving how forests are managed and monitored and ensuring infrastructure and agricultural expansion are guided by strong environmental planning.
For example, enforcing laws like the EU Deforestation Regulation and supporting smallholder farmers with sustainable alternatives are key to tackling agriculture-driven loss. Meanwhile, reducing wildfire risk demands ecosystem-specific fire management and early warning systems.
