What Would Another Trump Presidency Mean for the U.S., China, and the Climate? Climate overshoot, halting climate dialogues, an escalated trade war, a more costly transition … and hopefully, a rise of Trump-proof climate policies around the world

In this week's Shuang Tan newsletter, a former award-winning photojournalist reflects on her experience covering extreme weather’s impact while navigating censorship and budget cuts in China. Read here: https://t.co/hRtpDgoRwu

China’s aviation sector will soon need to comply with two carbon pricing mechanisms: China's national ETS for domestic aviation, and @icao's CORSIA for international flights – an activity neglected by the Paris Agreement.

Flying is energy-intensive yet hard to dabate. The most promising solution in the near term – replacing petroleum-based jet fuels with Sustainable Aviation Fuels – faces cost & production constraints. Other options, e.g. H2 and electric aircraft, are still in early development.

@icao @YingzhiTang @isfcanada Today, aviation accounts for <1% of China’s emissions. But emissions are set to grow given China's strong demand for air travel. @IEA has cautioned the country to “reconcile its ambition of developing its aviation industry with its climate policies.”

China's national ETS and @icao's Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) will soon impose a carbon price on China's domestic and international aviation activities. But are airlines ready? ✍️@YingzhiTang (@isfcanada) https://t.co/getDnXolVL

In this week's newsletter, carbon expert @GoessSimon shared his firsthand experience of navigating the complexity of #CBAM with over 30 Chinese companies and their EU importers in the chaotic ten months of CBAM implementation. Read here: https://t.co/vGAVt4t912

China flip flops on whether “clean coal” is green. Last month, Chinese regulators suggested “low-carbon coal” technologies could qualify for green finance funding.. good piece by Feng Hu on @LHongqiao ‘s @ChinaShuangTan

However, due to China's parallel definitions of green in its finance and industry policies, coal-related projects like “low carbon” technology transformation, may still be labeled as “green” or “transitional.”

*Coal ≠ ‘Green’* With the existing climate finance gap, encouraging investments in “clean coal” and “low-carbon coal” investments risks diverting much-needed capital away from genuine climate change mitigation and adaptation projects.

However, last month, Chinese regulators suggested *low-carbon coal* could qualify for green finance After years of *clean coal* controversy, this new policy has once more sparked concern over greenwashing and inconsistent policymaking Read our deep-dive:

As the world accelerates the phase-out of fossil fuels, the global consensus is that there is no place for coal in #GreenFinance or #TransitionFinance For coal-fired power plants, aligning with Paris - a precondition for transition finance – means *early decommissioning*

Regulators’ recent push to support “low-carbon coal” through green finance sends a troubling signal, further complicating the ongoing standardization and alignment Read our exclusive analysis of China’s green finance progress, challenges & opportunities https://t.co/iqEaMpXXcW

Policymakers, however, are unlikely to consider this approach before China completes a smooth transition toward a new energy system over the next decade.

Capturing and utilizing coal mine methane is a secondary solution. The most effective abatement measures that address the root cause are reducing coal production, implementing phase-out plans for operational mines, and ramping up abatement efforts for closed mines.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the coal industry attempted to negotiate for a higher discharge threshold or a delayed implementation date. Standing firm on the new limit would be a litmus test for China’s determination to reduce methane emissions.

Lowering the emission standard from 30% to 8% means coal mining companies must increase investment to meet the abatement requirement – an opportunity for solution providers but a compliance burden for coal companies.

In the past, the low cost-effectiveness of CMM capture and utilization technologies has made coal companies reluctant to implement abatement measures even for high-concentration CMM, the discharge of which – according to the interim emission standard – is strictly prohibited.

Based on China’s official figure, CMM’s 20-year climate impact is significant enough to make its coal mining sector the world’s fourth-largest greenhouse gas emitter, just after China, the United States, and India. Other estimates put the figure even higher.

Official statistics show that CMM emissions increased by 20% between 2014 and 2018. This increase, using a 20-year Global Warming Potential (GWP) calculation, is equivalent to the annual greenhouse gas emissions of Poland or France in 2018.