Climate summits face an extraordinary challenge: asking 195 nations to agree on transforming the global economy while that economy still runs. COP30 in Belém embodied this complexity; delivering neither the breakthrough many hoped for nor the collapse some feared, but something more nuanced: the patient, essential work of building consensus across vastly different national circumstances.
Media headlines focused on what was missing: explicit fossil fuel language in the final text. Yet Belém delivered substantial progress on multiple fronts. The Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF) advanced with over USD 6.7 billion toward its USD 125 billion target – real financing for forest protection at unprecedented scale. Countries agreed to tripling adaptation finance, acknowledging the urgent needs of climate-vulnerable nations. The Belém Gender Action Plan was adopted, formally recognising the intersectional realities of Indigenous women, women with disabilities, and women of African descent in climate policy. A just transition mechanism was established (the first under the UNFCCC) to protect workers and communities in the shift to clean energy. More broadly, the Global Ethical Stocktake affirmed that fairness, inclusion, and responsibility must guide every climate decision.
On fossil fuels specifically, progress came outside the formal text: the COP30 presidency committed to developing roadmaps on deforestation and fossil fuel transition, and Colombia and the Netherlands will host the first International Conference for the Phase-Out of Fossil Fuels in Santa Marta (Colombia), on 28-29 April 2026.
COP30 deserves credit for advancing climate action across such a broad front during a turbulent geopolitical moment. The philosophy of mutirão, the collective effort toward shared goals, shaped an approach that found creative solutions when traditional negotiations reached their limits. This is how transitions actually unfold: through the patient accumulation of frameworks, mechanisms, and commitments that gradually shift economic incentives and create new possibilities.
The real achievement of COP30 may be its focus on translating existing commitments into actionable frameworks. Brazil’s Open Coalition on Compliance Carbon Markets exemplifies this practical approach, bringing together China, the EU, the UK, and other major economies, not to impose uniform carbon prices but to enable trade despite different pricing systems.
Consider the variation in starting points. China generates 55% of its electricity from coal while pioneering solar manufacturing. India relies on coal for 73% of power generation yet must provide electricity to millions who still lack access. The United States depends on natural gas for 40% of its power while leading in technological innovation. Germany, despite its Energiewende, struggled with energy security after cutting Russian gas supplies. The EU has mature carbon markets with prices currently fluctuating around €60-80 per tonne, while many developing nations are at various stages of implementing carbon pricing, from initial consideration to operational systems. Small island states face existential threats requiring immediate adaptation with minimal resources.
This complexity extends to the corporate level. Recent research[1] reveals that 98% of public companies lack credible capital reallocation strategies, collectively overshooting their carbon budgets by 61% through 2050. This gap reflects practical challenges every company faces: how to value stranded assets, which technologies to bet on, how to satisfy quarterly earnings while investing in decade-long transformations.
Several countries are developing frameworks to bridge this implementation gap. The UK’s Sector Transition Plans, announced shortly before COP30[2], show how specific industries can create detailed decarbonisation roadmaps. Singapore’s carbon tax trajectory provides price certainty. Japan’s newly approved Green Transformation strategy goes further – issuing 20 trillion yen (USD 133 billion) in climate transition bonds while mandating an emissions trading system by 2026[3].
For businesses operating globally, this patchwork creates complexity but also opportunity. Companies that develop capabilities to navigate multiple frameworks – measuring carbon across different standards, adapting strategies to local contexts, building resilience into planning – gain competitive advantages today and reduce their financial exposure tomorrow as carbon pricing mechanisms expand and tighten. The firms making real progress act now rather than wait for perfect harmonisation.
While COP30 grappled with global frameworks, the fundamentals of energy competitiveness have already shifted – energy security is now a boardroom priority. Recent analysis from Schneider Electric shows renewables now represent over 40% of global generation, with wind and solar alone accounting for 25%. Corporate power purchase agreements (PPAs) reached record highs in 2024, driven not by regulation but by economics – renewables are the most cost-effective source of new capacity in around 60% of global markets.
Energy efficiency remains a critical lever. Supply/demand imbalances may create financial opportunities for companies, from improved ROI on energy efficiency projects to new revenue streams from demand and load response programme participation. Demand-side flexibility is expected to play a growing role as electrification increases, with demand taking an active role in balancing the power grid rather than passively receiving supply.
What companies should do now: Invest in renewable energy, energy efficiency, and electrification strategies to reduce costs and climate risk. Where available, secure renewable energy through corporate PPAs to lock in cost predictability and reduce exposure to fossil fuel volatility. Be proactive with electric providers about potential load increases to avoid supply constraints. Explore financial opportunities created by supply/demand imbalances, from improved ROI on energy efficiency projects to new revenue streams through demand and load response programmes. And stay informed on short-term energy trends while building long-term strategies around budgeting, energy contracts, and climate risk assessments. Companies taking these steps now will be better positioned to adapt as market conditions evolve.
While COP30 advanced discussions on international cooperation, carbon pricing increasingly happens through regional mechanisms. The EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) enters its definitive phase in January 2026, though certificate purchases have been postponed to February 2027 – importers remain liable for 2026 emissions but gain additional time to prepare for payment. The UK is set to follow with its own CBAM in 2027, requiring importers to pay for emissions unless their home countries have equivalent carbon pricing.
For businesses, CBAM has proven more complex than anticipated. After July 2025’s deadline, companies must collect site-specific emissions data from suppliers, meaning energy consumption, fuel efficiency, production processes, etc. From 2026, EU importers can only use site-specific emissions data if their suppliers have undergone third-party verification – including physical site visits. Suppliers without verification leave importers no choice but to report using EU default values, which assume higher emissions intensity and result in higher CBAM costs. These are requirements many suppliers, particularly in developing countries, struggle to meet. Some are reconsidering supplier relationships based on data availability rather than just price or quality.
What companies should do now: Start by mapping your supply chain’s carbon intensity before payment obligations begin. Prioritise engagement with high-emission suppliers to understand their data capabilities and decarbonisation plans. Consider dual sourcing strategies, maintaining existing relationships while developing alternatives with lower carbon footprints or better data systems. Most critically, factor future carbon costs into procurement decisions today – this is about supply chain resilience as much as emissions reduction.
One of COP30’s key objectives was to reach consensus on indicators to measure global adaptation progress under the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA). Fifty-nine indicators were adopted, covering finance, technology transfer, capacity building, and gender-responsive policies, though questions remain about implementation, with possible revisions through 2027[4].
The agreement to triple adaptation finance by 2035 falls short of what vulnerable nations need today, yet it provides crucial certainty for planning. Climate impacts already cost 3.3% of asset values annually in exposed regions according to S&P Global, rising to 28% in extreme scenarios[5]. Insurance has become unavailable or unaffordable for many assets. Supply chains designed for more stable historical conditions are increasingly fracturing under current extremes.
The USD 120 billion annual commitment for adaptation represents progress, but, unfortunately, companies can’t wait for public finance to solve private risks. Physical climate impacts are accelerating faster than adaptation funding, creating both immediate threats and cost saving opportunities in medium to long-term.
What companies should do now: Adaptation isn’t a defensive expense – it’s a required investment in operational continuity and market positioning. Conduct granular climate risk assessments across all facilities and supply chains. Invest in adaptation measures that deliver immediate operational benefits: water recycling systems that reduce both drought risk and costs, building retrofits that cut energy use while improving heat resilience, supplier diversification that enhances both climate and market resilience. In addition, develop products and services for climate-altered markets. The companies designing for tomorrow’s climate conditions will capture emerging demand worth trillions.
While governments work through Article 6 technicalities, the voluntary carbon market continues operating, providing immediate channels for climate finance where policy frameworks remain incomplete.
SE Advisory Services’ Carbon Credit Outlook 2025, launched shortly before COP30, captures this reality. With 55% of surveyed companies planning to scale carbon credit engagement by 2030, and 40% already actively engaged, businesses aren’t waiting for perfect regulatory clarity. The research shows companies building diversified portfolios that balance immediate impact through nature-based solutions, which 50% prioritise for biodiversity co-benefits, with emerging technological removals.
What companies should do now: Use carbon credits to complement, not replace, ambitious emission reductions. Consider direct investment in landscape conservation aligned with business operations. Build diversified portfolios that support your decarbonisation journey. Use rigorously vetted nature-based credits to address emissions while you transform operations. Simultaneously, explore technological removal options for truly hard-to-abate residual emissions. Prioritise projects with verified permanence, conservative baselines, and strong community involvement. Partner with experienced advisors who understand both quality assessment and strategic deployment.
COP30 marked biodiversity’s elevation from side issue to central challenge. The TFFF initiative and the Congo Basin Pledge demonstrate growing recognition that climate and nature crises are inseparable. Nature underpins an estimated USD 44 trillion of global economic value[6], and addressing climate and nature in silos not only misses synergies but can create unintended trade-offs. SE Advisory Services addresses this dual challenge through integrated climate and nature strategies – recognising that the capabilities organisations build for decarbonisation and those needed for nature-positive transformation are fundamentally interconnected. Organisations that embed nature-positive strategies today will be well positioned to lead as disclosure requirements strengthen and markets begin to price biodiversity risk.
SE Advisory Services’ research with Spainsif, “Financing and Investment: Horizons in Biodiversity 2025,”reveals financial institutions are developing biodiversity strategies driven by dependency risks rather than compliance. The report identifies measurement as the primary barrier. Unlike carbon’s single metric, biodiversity resists simple quantification. The new global standard for biodiversity, ISO 17298, which SE Advisory Services contributed to developing, provides assessment frameworks, while tools like ENCORE, our upcoming NaRVal (Nature Risk Valuation) tool, and the Global Biodiversity Score can support progress against such frameworks.
What companies should do now: Start with understanding your biodiversity footprint: map which ecosystem services your business depends on. Use the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) LEAP framework to systematically identify nature-related dependencies and impacts across your value chain. Establish baselines before mandatory reporting arrives, using frameworks such as ISO 17298 and tools like our upcoming NaRVal tool, ENCORE and the Global Biodiversity Score.
If you have already implemented the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) for climate risk reporting, leverage that infrastructure for TNFD – this integration reflects the reality that climate and nature risks are interconnected and should be managed together, not in parallel workstreams. Most critically, build capabilities through practice rather than waiting for perfect data.
The AI Climate Institute (ACI) launch at COP30 signals recognition that artificial intelligence will shape climate outcomes. While the institute focuses on equipping developing countries with AI capabilities, the broader challenge is ensuring AI deployment accelerates climate action while managing its own energy footprint.
The numbers tell the story: data centres could consume 1,000 TWh by 2026[7], yet strategic AI deployment can unlock energy savings of more than 15%[8]. Recent research estimates AI could reduce emissions by 3.2–5.4 GtCO₂e annually by 2035 in power, food and transport alone – far exceeding AI’s own carbon footprint of 0.4–1.6 GtCO₂e[9]. These gains come from applications already in use: machine learning optimising supply chain routing, building energy management and predictive maintenance.
For SE Advisory Services and our clients, AI represents a force multiplier, automating complex analysis while freeing human experts for strategic initiatives. This collaborative intelligence approach treats AI as a tool amplifying human judgment, not replacing it. The key in deploying solutions like this at scale is “frugal AI”; a deployment discipline that prioritises efficiency: smaller, task-specific models over general-purpose giants; edge computing over cloud processing where possible; continuous optimisation of model efficiency.
What companies should do now: Embrace frugal AI principles. Deploy smaller, efficient models for routine optimisation, reserve large language models only for transformational applications where their capabilities justify energy costs. Measure AI’s energy footprint alongside its benefits. Partner with providers using renewable-powered data centres and aligned targets. Most critically, treat AI as a tool requiring conscious direction toward climate objectives, not a solution that automatically delivers them.
COP30 ended with familiar frustrations: insufficient finance, watered-down language, deferred decisions. But focusing on what didn’t happen misses what is happening. The machinery of change doesn’t wait for consensus, it’s already running, built by necessity rather than choice.
What Belém made visible was the three-speed world emerging: governments moving at diplomatic pace, markets moving at profit pace, and physics moving at its own inexorable pace. Between these mismatched velocities, companies must operate, not as heroes or villains, but as entities trying to survive multiple transitions simultaneously. The pragmatic response is building capabilities that work regardless of which speed ultimately dominates.
The companies that understand this aren’t betting on single outcomes, they are building capabilities that function across multiple scenarios. Not because they are prescient, but because redundancy has become cheaper than disruption. The same capabilities that ensure CBAM compliance also reduce procurement risk. The energy diversification that reduces emissions also protects against price volatility and supply disruption. The biodiversity baselines that may become mandatory also identify operational vulnerabilities today.
The machinery of change rewards neither heroes nor villains, but those who understand that transformation happens through mundane accumulation rather than dramatic breakthroughs. COP30 was never going to save us. The work that might is already underway.
Ready to build the capabilities that matter? Contact SE Advisory Services today.
Sources:
[1] https://www.transitionpathwayinitiative.org/publications/135/show_news_article
[2] https://www.broadwayinitiative.org.uk/sector-transition-plans-launched-to-accelerate-investment-and-action-across-uk-economy
[3] https://news.sustainability-directory.com/policy/japan-launches-massive-green-transformation-strategy-with-mandatory-carbon-market/
[4] https://www.iisd.org/articles/insight/cop-30-outcome-what-it-means-and-whats-next
[5] https://www.spglobal.com/sustainable1/en/insights/special-editorial/quantifying-the-financial-costs-of-climate-change-physical-risks
[6] https://www.weforum.org/press/2020/01/half-of-world-s-gdp-moderately-or-highly-dependent-on-nature-says-new-report/#:~:text=Davos%2C%20Switzerland%2C%2019%20January%202020,pollination%20and%20a%20stable%20climate.
[7] https://www.iea.org/reports/electricity-2024/executive-summary
[8] https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-and-ai/energy-demand-from-ai
[9] https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/news/new-study-finds-ai-could-reduce-global-emissions-annually-by-3-2-to-5-4-billion-tonnes-of-carbon-dioxide-equivalent-by-2035/
Learn how financial institutions can bridge the biodiversity financing gap and transform nature-related risks into strategic investment opportunities.
Choose SE Advisory Services for industry-leading expertise in climate strategy and sustainability solutions. We’re here to guide your business through every step towards achieving your sustainability goals while supporting your operational success and market reputation.