Last fall, I was part of an animators circle for delegates to COP 30. These reflections arise from that experience.
A couple decades ago, we talked about “global warming.” This was an accurate description of the issue—our planet was and is getting warmer. Then, we shifted to “climate change.” Not sure if it is true, but I heard that this shift in language was an intentional political shift with the goal of lessening public concern. “Change” is continual so maybe not something that can or should be prevented.
Although I think we should still talk about global warming—it is a fact—talking about climate does broaden our view. We are not just talking about daily temperatures but all aspects of weather from rainfall to snow cover to wind. Talking about climate invites us to think about our relationship to all aspects of weather.
The UN forum on climate, COP 30, took place in mid-November in a city known as the gateway to the Amazon. Given the importance of the Amazon, this was a good place for this year’s conversations. I followed a group of church representatives through the eleven days and kept tabs on the official reports and what the World Council of Churches reported.
Church people are using the phrase “climate justice.” I read a post from an Indigenous representative to which said over and over that those who suffer most from climate change are not the people who caused our planet to warm. The Global South is more affected by drought and intensifying storms, but it is the industrialization of the Global North that caused the greenhouse effect. And in Canada, remote Indigenous communities are disproportionately affected by wild fires. This makes climate change a justice issue.
Talking about justice reminds us to look at who is affected. It reminds us to look at who has benefited. Like the conversation about privilege when discussing racism, talking about climate justice helps us to see why we might find it hard to change: the Global North will have to give up stuff.
The World Council of Churches is using another phrase: climate justice action. It is a bit awkward, but this language is important. “Justice” can be a static concept. It sounds like something that can be enacted in law. What the world-wide church is calling for is concrete actions that will move us toward climate justice.
There is another phrase that gets bandied about: climate innovation. Day Five of COP30 was about fuel and transport, about practical ways to transition away from fossil fuels, ways to get to net zero in an area like shipping. I heard a radio program recently where a woman was talking about the dramatic shifts taking place in some countries. China is moving quickly to electric vehicles because they make cheap EVs. Indonesia is moving away from coal toward solar generated electricity because solar panels have become much less expensive. New technologies can help us lower greenhouse gas emissions.
I worry though. While new technology can help us stop using fossil fuels, if we have an EV we may drive just as much. Change airplanes and we may fly just as much. If we think that climate innovation will get us to net zero, we may not reevaluate our lifestyles, think about having less, using less. If technology can solve our problems, we don’t really have to change our behaviour.
There was a phrase in the report of Day Four that jumped out at me: “long-term, investable climate resilience solutions for vulnerable nations.” This statement was made in the report on a new project that was launched to help countries with adaptation plans. If the focus is building resilience, then we are not trying to stop the warming of the planet but adapt to it. But the word that really got me was “investable.” The project (called FINI) is about how to channel money to poorer, vulnerable nations, which feels like a good thing at first glance. However, international corporate investment is going to go where a company thinks it can make money. This runs the risk of taking money out of the Global South and into the coffers of the north. Again.
Last summer’s forest fires reminded us of the cost of global warming. Heat and drought affected farmers in Ontario. We know climate change is real. What we need are actions large and small, public and individual that bring change. But how we talk about what is going on in our world affects the kind of actions we will take.

