First Global Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels by IISD, Covering Climate Now, WMO, agencies   24 Apr. 2026   The First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels aims to advance collective efforts to phase out fossil fuels. The conference will identify legal, economic, and social pathways to phase out fossil fuels.   The Governments of Colombia and the Netherlands announced their intent to co-host the conference after the 2025 UN Climate Change Conference (UNFCCC COP 30) negotiations did not result in an agreement on phasing out fossil fuels. In response, the governments proposed continuing the momentum for an equitable roadmap for the global phaseout of fossil fuels.   The conference will advance international cooperation on transitioning away from fossil fuel extraction in line with the ‘Belem Declaration on the Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels’.   The conference takes place from 28-29 April, bringing together countries, subnational actors, Indigenous Peoples and local communities, scientists, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and other stakeholders. Over 60 countries are taking part in the Conference.   The Conference “is not intended to serve as a negotiating body, nor does it constitute part of any formal negotiation process or initiative, and it is not intended to replace the UNFCCC.”   Rather, the event will serve as “the first implementation-focused global Conference, intended to support practical action by those already prepared to move forward.”   The event will not conclude with a negotiated outcome, but will “generate shared understanding and actionable guidance that can help accelerate a just, orderly, and equitable transition away from fossil fuels.”   Apr. 2026   A new economic power could spark a global retreat from fossil fuels, by Mark Hertsgaard and Kyle Pope for Covering Climate Now.   The Iran war is also a climate war. Beyond its terrible human costs, the war’s disruptions of oil, gas, fertilizer and other shipments is another reminder of the risks inherent in basing the world economy on fossil fuels.   The war’s jets, missiles and aircraft carriers, and the tankers, refineries and buildings they blow up, represent millions of tons of greenhouse gas emissions that further imperil a climate system that is already “very close” to a point of no return, scientists say, after which runaway global warming could not be stopped. Nevertheless, those committed to fossil fuels around the world continue doing their utmost to stave off a desperately needed course correction.   Now, a little noticed ray of hope may be peeking over the horizon.   At the UN Cop30 climate summit last November, Saudi Arabia led a group of petrostates in vetoing calls to develop a “roadmap” to phase out fossil fuels globally; indeed, the words “fossil fuels” were not even mentioned in the final text agreed at Cop30. But the 85 countries on the losing end of that veto may soon turn the tables.   Many of those governments will gather in Colombia on 28-29 April for a conference to begin a global transition away from oil, gas and coal. Critically, the First International Conference on the Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels will not be governed by UN rules, which require consensus, but by majority rule, thus preventing a handful of countries from sabotaging progress as petrostates did at Cop30.   What’s more, the underlying terrain of this conference will no longer be principally politics, but economics: not the words that canny negotiators can keep in or out of a diplomatic text, but the implacable market forces that shape the world economy, including the potential emergence of a de facto economic superpower.   The conference is co-sponsored by Colombia and the Netherlands, a pairing rich with symbolism: Colombia is the world’s fifth-largest coal exporter, Royal Dutch Shell one of the world’s biggest oil companies. Conference organizers confirm that they have invited countries that endorsed the roadmap proposal at Cop30, as well as high-profile leaders of sub-national governments, including the California governor, Gavin Newsom, a presumed 2028 US presidential candidate.   The conference aims to begin drawing up the roadmap blocked at Cop30. Energy and environment ministers of governments comprising a “coalition of the willing” will share plans to transition their economies away from oil, gas and coal without leaving workers and communities behind. Joining them will be climate activists, leaders of Indigenous peoples, trade union representatives and other civil society voices, sharing ideas and experiences on how to make the abstract goal of phasing out fossil fuels a practical reality.   The goal of the conference is to agree on “actionable solutions” that follow-up meetings can refine so governments around the world can implement them.   One area of focus will be how to phase out the $7tn a year governments spend subsidizing fossil fuels – but to do so without punishing communities, workers and tax bases that rely on such subsidies.   The UN secretary general, Antonio Guterres, has urged the International Energy Agency to help create a “global platform” where public and private sector actors can “sequence the decline of fossil fuel investment with the rapid scale-up of clean energy”.   The secret weapon of the “coalition of the willing” gathering in Colombia is its potential to function as a major economic power.   At least 85 countries at Cop30 backed developing a roadmap to phase out fossil fuels. Included among them were the global north states Germany, the United Kingdom, France and Spain – the world’s third, sixth, seventh and 12th biggest economies. Brazil and Mexico, the world’s 10th and 13th biggest economies, also backed the measure.   Combine the gross national products of those 85 countries and the total is $33.3tn. That’s larger than the $30.6tn GNP of the US, the world’s biggest economy, and considerably larger than the $19.4tn GNP of China, the world’s second-biggest economy.   That amount of economic heft gives those 85 countries enormous potential leverage. If those attending the Just Transition conference can outline a credible roadmap for phasing out fossil fuels for the wider group to unite behind, it could send shock waves through financial markets, government ministries and C-suites around the world.   “A coalition of that scale signaling its intent to move beyond fossil fuels would send an unmistakable message that the age of oil, gas, and coal is ending, and the smart money is shifting,” Mohamed Adow, director of the non-profit Power Shift Africa, said in an interview.   Money follows money. If a large chunk of the global economy announces that it intends to leave fossil fuels behind – and releases transparent, convincing plans for doing so – private investors and government planners everywhere would have to question whether sinking new money into oil exploration, coal mining, or gas terminals makes financial sense or would instead leave them with virtually worthless stranded assets.   Much the same thing happened after the 2015 Paris agreement. When governments pledged to limit temperature rise to “well below” 2C and to aim for 1.5C, public and private sector leaders began changing course. Fossil fuel expansions were scaled back, renewable energy investments boosted.   Before the Paris agreement, the planet was on track toward a hellish 4C of temperature rise. Five years later, the emissions curve had bent to a 2.7C future – still much too high, but a big step in the right direction, and proof that change is possible.   The Just Transition conference underscores a point often missed in the usual narrative on climate change: the overwhelming majority of the world’s people – 80-89% of them – want their governments to take stronger climate action. Scientists have long been clear that phasing out fossil fuels is imperative to limit global warming to an amount our civilization can survive.   * Mark Hertsgaard and Kyle Pope are co-founders of the global journalism collaboration Covering Climate Now   http://transitionawayconference.com/ http://transitionawayconference.com/press-releases http://transitionawayconference.com/contributions http://enb.iisd.org/transition-away-fossil-fuels-1-summary http://genevasolutions.news/climate-environment/a-breath-of-fresh-air-first-conference-to-quit-fossil-fuels-ends-in-optimism http://coveringclimatenow.org/from-us-story/santa-marta-may-be-a-game-changing-moment/ http://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/press_releases/?15886841/WWF-Santa-Marta-marks-a-pivotal-milestone-in-implementing-the-fossil-fuel-transition http://climatenetwork.org/2026/04/30/santa-marta-plants-the-seeds-of-a-fossil-free-future-civil-society-will-hold-governments-to-account http://www.ciel.org/news/santa-marta-fossil-fuel-phaseout/ http://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2026/04/santa-marta-conference http://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2026/04/fossil-fuel-treaty/ http://www.carbonbrief.org/santa-marta-key-outcomes-from-first-summit-on-transitioning-away-from-fossil-fuels/ http://www.genevaenvironmentnetwork.org/resources/updates/climate-action-from-geneva-to-santa-marta-first-conference-on-transitioning-away-from-fossil-fuels/ http://www.fossilfueltreaty.org/briefing-pack http://www.fossilfueltreaty.org/latest#newsroom   http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/apr/30/colombia-climate-talks-end-fossil-fuel-phaseout http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/apr/28/middle-east-crisis-oil-firms-profit-colombia-conference http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/apr/07/iran-war-oil-phase-out-fossil-fuels http://www.iisd.org/events/inside-first-conference-transitioning-away-fossil-fuels http://www.iisd.org/articles/press-release/governments-five-times-more-public-money-fossil-fuels-than-renewables http://iwgia.org/en/news/6136-a-just-future-beyond-fossil-fuels-indigenous-peoples-rights.html http://350.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Out-Report-Pocket-Full-Report.pdf http://unfccc.int/news/un-climate-chief-in-brussels-fossil-fuel-dependency-is-ripping-away-national-security-and http://news.un.org/en/story/2026/03/1167135 http://wmo.int/news/media-centre/earths-climate-swings-increasingly-out-of-balance http://www.unognewsroom.org/story/en/3060/wmo-presser-state-of-the-global-climate-2025-report/9190 http://www.pik-potsdam.de/en/news/latest-news/significant-acceleration-of-global-warming-since-2015 http://www.clientearth.org/latest/news/fossil-fuels-and-energy-security-what-s-the-issue/ Visit the related web page
	Let’s show that humanity can do better by United Nations Office for Humanitarian Affairs   Geneva, 11 March 2026   Remarks at Press Conference on 87 Million Lives Campaign by Tom Fletcher, UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator. (Extract):   "I want to start by saying that we’re living through a moment right now of grave peril across the Middle East. We’re seeing these crises escalate rapidly and increasingly collide in dangerous ways. We’re seeing violence reverberate across borders, displacement, economic shocks, soaring humanitarian needs – and we’re seeing the consequences spread faster than we can respond.   Later this afternoon, I’ll make three asks of the United Nations Security Council.   Firstly, that civilians, all civilians, wherever they are in the region, must be protected. Constant care must be taken to spare civilians and critical civilian infrastructure, schools, hospitals, at all times and by all parties. And humanitarians must be protected and our movements facilitated.   My second ask: we must be supported to go wherever the needs are in the region. I’ve reaffirmed our readiness to help Lebanese, Iranian, Palestinian, Israeli or other civilians, as needed. Humanitarian action is always harder in times of war, but this is, of course, when it is most needed. We call on Member States to help ensure that our life-saving work continues.   And a third ask of the Security Council is for a revival of strategic, calm, rational, patient, hopeful diplomacy – we need calmer heads to prevail. Peacemaking is hard, but it is always better and takes more courage than the alternatives.   So, every time you hear the powerful attack the UN, ask yourself what they gain by weakening us. Let’s have the courage instead, to recommit to lasting peace, sustained stability, dependable governance and international law.   The developments of the last two weeks are further confirmation that we’re living in a time of brutality, impunity and indifference. The rules-based scaffolding meant to restrain the worst excesses of war is cracking.   Human ingenuity is being applied to find ever more sinister ways to kill at scale, while civilians are subjected to ever more abject violence.   Aid workers are increasingly under attack. Just today, three more of my humanitarian colleagues, in Sudan, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and in Lebanon have, I’m afraid, been killed.   So, this is a tough moment for humanitarian action. We are overstretched, under sustained attack and under-resourced, but we refuse to retreat from our principles and we refuse to retreat from our mission. We refuse to give up on the people who rely on us to survive.   Ans that’s why today I actually want to talk a bit about something more uplifting: a global mission to rediscover solidarity and humanity, even in these toughest of times.   Just over 87 days ago, the humanitarian community unveiled a hyper-prioritized humanitarian plan calling for $23 billion to reach 87 million people this year with life-saving support.   87 million people, more than died in the Second World War, the catastrophe that, of course, led to the creation of the United Nations. And of course, behind every number is a life, is a story.   We gave ourselves 87 days to challenge Member States to back this plan with resolve, with resources, with a determination to deliver in 2026. Of course, the real needs are far greater than just those 87 million lives. And, of course, we have vital, vital appeals that go well beyond $23 billion, but what we’ve done here is to prioritize on the basis of greatest need, where the most urgent cases are that we must respond to first.   This plan will be delivered by around 2,000 humanitarian organizations across our extraordinary global humanitarian community. Over 60 per cent of them are local partners, local organizations.   In January, we reached over 7 million people with life-saving support – and they are the 7 million people facing the most severe needs in the most hard-to-reach places across 17 of our operations. In Sudan alone, we reached almost 2 million people in January, despite the security challenges we face.   Imagine delivering that same result every month, this year: 7 million lives a month. We can do that if we get the support we need, and we would then reach our target of saving 87 million lives across the year.   I said over 87 days ago, when we announced this plan that we would set out where we were on the funding at this stage. So far we've received $5 billion for the plan, with additional pledges and announcements, bringing the total to $8.7 billion. But we still face a massive gap without additional support, millions of people will die.   So we need those countries who’ve made these pledges to deliver that disbursement quickly. We need those who have more funds available to get those funds moving fast towards this plan in the first half of the year, not the second half, to allow us to deliver where support is most needed. And we need more partners to come forward, from the private sector, everyone who can to join this global effort.   We still need over $14 billion now to deliver this plan, and this is at a time when conflict in the Middle East is costing $1 billion dollars a day. Listen to that number and feel the shame that I feel that we’re spending a billion dollars a day on this war. Even just $1 billion would allow us to save millions of lives.   So the choice is, are we going to close this gap? The resources exist, but does the solidarity?   We’re not asking you to choose between a hospital in Brooklyn, London, Mexico City, Rio, Manila, or a hospital in Kandahar, Akobo, Aleppo, Port-au-Prince. We’re asking you just to recognize that maybe the world can spend a little less on weapons this year and more on saving lives. (In 2025, Global military spending was $2.7 trillion)   A recent global survey demonstrated that supporters of international aid outnumber opponents by four to one. There is a movement of billions supporters out there.   I believe that when people understand what humanitarian funding represents and delivers, they overwhelmingly support this action – it’s about solidarity, humanity, kindness.   Our ask, therefore, is simple. Choose solidarity. Choose this year to save 87 million lives. No one can end every crisis, but together, we can help end someone’s crisis – one life at a time. Let’s make 2026 a story of genuine solidarity and genuine hope. Let’s show that humanity can do better.   Q: You mentioned the $1 billion cost every day of the war. How much does it cost in extra humanitarian needs? In other words, do you have to already revise the plan that you unveiled in December?   Under-Secretary-General Fletcher: Yes, the cost of our response is going up, and we will have to prioritize even harder and further with the resources that we have. We basically have to make do responding to crisis as they come.   Because of the conflict in the region, we are now going to have to scale up further in places like Lebanon, for example. I’m having to use more money from the Central Emergency Response Fund to react to these crises across the region. And every time we do that, it means that we have to deprioritize the response elsewhere at a time when, as I say, the needs go well beyond the 87 million people in critical need.   I’m also really worried about rising food costs, energy costs, fertilizer costs as this conflict goes on. I’m worried that further escalation will damage other supply routes. All of this has a direct impact on our humanitarian supplies, including going to areas of key need in sub-Saharan Africa. But more broadly, the conflict drives up the prices and so drives more people into greater need.   Q: I was wondering what kind of contingency plans you are looking at for the region – if you have any estimates yet, of the numbers of numbers of people, more people who will be in need or who will be displaced because of the conflict now. Is there any way of estimating that? Also, you mentioned that you’re calling on countries to spend less on weapons and more on solidarity, but I think the trend that we’re seeing right now is going in the opposite direction, with more spending on a lot of arms.   Under-Secretary-General Fletcher: It’s hard for us to predict how many will be displaced, but already, hundreds of thousands of people are on the move. Many in Iran are internally displaced at the moment.. Of course, that’s already happening in Lebanon, where you have hundreds of thousands displaced.. Those numbers are very worrying, and every day of the war pushes more people away from their homes and their communities. I’m sorry, the second question?   Q: It was on the weapons spending.   Under-Secretary-General Fletcher: I think the world has decided that it’s far more interested in spending enormous amounts of money developing increasingly deadly weapons than it is on saving lives. It seems to have decided that it hasn’t got time to work on ensuring that the rules that govern these weapons, these lethal autonomous weapons, keep up with the pace of technology.   So you’ve got this dangerous alliance between very innovative technology and huge amounts of money and people’s desire to kill more people – and that’s a toxic combination. Last year, 90 per cent of all deaths caused by drones and other explosive weapons in populated areas were civilians.   And we’re seeing that across the crises on which we work – whether it’s Gaza, Sudan or in Ukraine, we’re seeing these bad practices move between crises. The bad actors are actually discovering newer ways to kill and learning from each other new ways to kill, and we’re struggling to keep up with that innovation in killing.   I’m really concerned that this conflict whenever it ends, or whenever people claim it ends, this phase of the conflict, will mean that in the next phase, people will be spending even more money on arms and defense, because they’ll be more anxious about the next conflict. There’ll be even less funding for humanitarian action.   But you also have this knock-on effect on international law and international trust. It will be even harder for us to stand up the systems and processes, the scaffolding, that’s meant to hold the world together because it’s facing such sustained attritional attack. So that’s what I mean about the warning lights are flashing red right now.   Q: Can you elaborate a little more on other areas where you need to channel funds to save lives. Besides the Middle East region, what about other crisis areas that are not getting into the spotlight, like Central and West Africa?   Under-Secretary-General Fletcher: I’m glad that you mentioned the neglected crises, because this is a big concern we have. There are many neglected crises: Gaza, Sudan, Haiti, DRC, South Sudan, Yemen, Lebanon is moving up the list as we speak, crisis in sub-Saharan Africa.. We are struggling to fundraise for the Sahel, where you have a lot of people in need. The Ukraine crisis is, of course, a massive humanitarian crisis.   What we are trying to do across these major crises and many others is to show where the gaps are and to ensure that as a world, we’re not neglecting those in real need of our support".   http://www.unognewsroom.org/story/en/3044/un-relief-chief-presser-tom-fletcher http://humanitarianaction.info/document/global-humanitarian-overview-2026 http://www.unocha.org/latest/news-and-stories   * A US Iran War Cost Tracker: http://iran-cost-ticker.com/   17 Mar. 2026   US war spending in Iran could have saved 87 million lives, says UN. (EU Observer)   The money spent by the US attacking Iran over the past two weeks could have saved the lives of 87 million people, according to the United Nations.   “The US alone has already spent more money on this conflict in the last two and a half weeks than the $23bn we need to save 87 million lives this year,” said Tom Fletcher, a senior official at the United Nations.   The Trump administration spent over $11.3bn in the first six days alone of its war against Iran.   Speaking to European lawmakers at the development committee on the 17th of March, Mr Fletcher said the $23bn also represents less than one percent of what the world will spend this year on guns and arms and defence.   “This is a very tough time to be a humanitarian. It’s a very tough time actually, to be a UN official,” he said, noting that major UN agencies and international NGOs have been forced to cut a third of their staff.   Mr Fletcher, whose full official title is UN under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs and emergency relief coordinator is appealing for greater international funding to support those in urgent need. As hundreds of child nutrition centres for severely malnourished children shut down in multiple vulnerable countries.   Last year was marked a stark reversal for global aid funding. Major donors implemented drastic cuts despite escalating crises, raising alarms about a funding shortfall. As a result, only about one-third of global humanitarian needs were funded last year.   Over 240 million people are in need of urgent humanitarian assistance, says UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).   The funding cuts has forced the UN to prioritise only 87 million people facing life threatening needs. But only $5bn has been mobilised so far, or about 15 percent of what is needed.   http://euobserver.com/207273/us-war-spending-in-iran-could-have-saved-87-million-lives-says-un/   * The Iran War Is Breaking Global Humanitarian Aid Efforts   The war in Iran has triggered severe global economic disruption, choking off disaster relief supply chains and spiking oil prices—further exacerbating existing humanitarian crises. Sam Vigersky an international affairs fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations calls on the Trump administration to immediately release the $5.5 billion that the US Congress recently appropriated to the WFP, UNHCR, and NGOs working mitigate the global fallout from the crisis.   "Even that funding would not contain what is unfolding across the globe. That figure is less than half of what the United States historically devoted toward international humanitarian response, and it arrives at a moment of growing need. Still, releasing those funds would be an immediate, and desperately needed, first step. As Congress debates supplemental funding for the war with Iran, the United States already has money appropriated for a humanitarian response sitting inside the State Department. Moving it quickly—and following up with a larger surge of funding—may determine whether millions of people teetering on the edge of survival fall into catastrophe".   http://www.unops.org/news-and-stories/speeches/millions-of-people-around-the-world-at-risk-over-three-weeks-on-the-war-in-the-middle-east http://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-projects-food-insecurity-could-reach-record-levels-result-middle-east-escalation http://www.unocha.org/news/closure-hormuz-could-have-immense-impact-humanitarian-operations-un-relief-chief-warns http://www.rescue.org/press-release/closure-strait-hormuz-and-regional-airspace-closures Visit the related web page
	View more stories