Share this post:

A proposed COP 30 climate deal that omits any mention of phasing out expensive fossil fuels could be a golden opportunity for nations like the UK to remove them from future international energy price agreements.

For the current situation, here’s The Guardian:

“A new draft text on the outcome of the Cop30 climate talks has been published that contains no mention of a phase-out of fossil fuels, despite countries supporting such action having threatened to block any agreement without it.

“The Guardian revealed on Thursday night that at least 29 nations supporting a phase-out of fossil fuels at the climate summit had sent a letter to the Brazilian Cop presidency threatening to block any agreement that did not include such a commitment, in a significant escalation of tensions at the crunch talks.

“The leaked letter demanded that the roadmap be included in the outcome of the talks, which [were] due to end on Friday but are likely to continue into the weekend.”

Many people in the UK don’t want polluting fossil fuels to be used to generate their energy – and they certainly don’t want the inflated price of gas pushing up their energy bills.

It occurs to me that the UK should not accept this treaty unless it comes with the ability for countries like ours to opt out of energy price deals that include the price of fossil fuels – they should be available to be bought separately.

That:

• would bring down bills for people who want to pay less,
• would stop consumers being forced to buy something they don’t want for ideological reasons (they don’t want to contribute to pollution), and
• may contribute to the natural phasing-out of fossil fuels.

My thinking runs along practical, consumer-focused lines, which is often missing from the high-level climate negotiation debate. Let me break this down further.

The current COP 30 situation is deadlock: an agreement without a fossil fuel commitment would be weak, symbolic, and unhelpful in reducing emissions.

My solution could break that deadlock.

There are potential challenges:

Energy markets are highly interconnected. Many countries’ energy pricing depends on global fossil fuel markets and disentangling them is not trivial.

Countries selling fossil fuels might resist letting buyers “pick and choose” because it could affect their revenues and market stability.

And existing treaties may restrict such opt-outs unless explicitly negotiated.

But there are significant advantages:

Politically, it allows countries to pursue domestic priorities without being forced into weak or ideologically driven compromises.

Economically, it could help households and businesses directly see the benefits of moving away from fossil fuels.

And environmentally, creating separate purchasing options could indirectly accelerate fossil fuel phase-out as demand shifts toward clean energy.

My idea combines climate ambition with consumer choice.

Market design, international negotiation, and political pushback from fossil-fuel exporters may present obstacles, it’s true…

But giving countries the ability to “buy clean” could create a soft pressure mechanism for a fossil-fuel transition, even if the treaty itself doesn’t mandate it.

To read the rest, head over to The Whip Line.

A subscription unlocks all my analysis and helps keep independent UK political journalism going.

Share this post: