I am the mother of two funny and charismatic little kids who love being in nature. They love to run in the forest and play in the mud, collect slugs along the way and bike through puddles. Above all things, I care for their wellbeing. Like most parents, all I want for my kids is to have a safe and peaceful place to grow up in. For them to eat healthy food free of toxic pesticides, and breathe fresh air that doesn’t harm their little lungs. I want our climate to become stable and my kids to be protected from any impacts of extreme weather like storms, heat waves or heavy rains. I want them to experience the joys of growing up like I did, with a sense of security about the future.

Instead, we are living in times where it can be difficult to feel a sense of security as to what the future holds for them. 

A fallen (family) hero

Over a year ago, the region where I live was affected by heavy floods. Water was dripping from our basement walls. After an intense week of heavy rain, soggy soil and storms, our hundred-year-old apple tree fell like a toothpick. My kids were sad to see the majestic apple tree fall and anxious about the long-lasting rain. We feared for our friends living down the hill, who were affected even worse.

To me and my family, it is more than obvious that these extreme weather events are becoming more frequent and severe. I hold my heart imagining what an increasingly hotter planet will look like for our kids, how biodiversity collapse might impact their food security, how this might affect their friends and community. I can only imagine how parents in other parts of the world, where the situation is even worse, might feel. And I am very aware that the window to act on the climate and nature crisis is shrinking each year.

‘We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors. We borrow it from our children.’ 

Given the obvious urgency, you might assume our politicians are trying all they possibly can to prevent worse, right? Sadly, the opposite is true. A liveable planet and caring for our kids’ wellbeing seems out of fashion and not popular these days. Instead of putting the interests of our most precious little ones at the heart of meaningful climate laws and restoring nature to protect us against the next flood, I only hear politicians say there is no money for all of that. 

Really? No money for solutions that will keep our kids safe? No money for climate action, green housing and other basic social services that guarantee social security?

The “No Money” excuse

This narrative deployed by many politicians is not only handy for defending their own failure in protecting us, it also benefits one small, but very powerful group in society – the billionaires and the super-rich. A recently published Greenpeace Africa report showed that a very small group of ultra-rich individuals is linked to climate damage, driven by their financial investments in highly polluting industries like oil and gas, and their carbon-intensive lifestyles – think private jets. The report shows that richest 0.01% – that is a tiny fraction of the world’s population – is estimated to have nearly US$1 trillion in annual climate debt 

Now, if the very super-rich were taxed according to the climate damage they are estimated to have caused, wouldn’t there be enough money to work on protecting our kids and secure a stable planet we all need to survive?

Taxing the super-rich is common sense

We all pay taxes on our hard earned income and they form the super powers of our society. This is how we fund our fire fighters helping us against forest fires, but also how we fund our schools and hospitals. Taxes are how we fund more resilience against floods, or in an ideal scenario, halt the climate crisis. 

If we are serious about making the urgent changes needed to secure a liveable Earth, from transitioning to 100% renewable energy in affordable green homes that protects people from extreme heat and cold to ensuring ecological food systems and guaranteeing essential services for everyone, then taxing billionaires and the super-rich is inevitable. 

This is not a nice to have, it is a must have, and it can unlock trillions each year to fund climate action and protect nature. Even the super-rich themselves want to systemically contribute more fairly, as over 400 millionaires and billionaires from 24 countries, among them Hollywood actor Mark Ruffalo demanded earlier this year. They understand it is their responsibility to contribute their fair share and that it is totally unacceptable global leaders keep on ignoring what a broad movement of people are demanding: we urgently need new people-centric global tax rules to guarantee our ability to lead healthy, happy and dignified lives on a healthy planet

Breaking through the concrete

Funding a just and green future for all will ensure stability and peace. And above all we need a stable climate and thriving ecosystems, dignity and democracy, to pass down a sustainable and flourishing planet to the next generations. 

My 9-year-old daughter loves a song that she loudly sings along to: “Don’t wait for wonders, we’ll create them ourselves. Our future breaks like flowers through concrete” As parents we owe it to our kids to indeed not wait for wonders, but do all we can now to make their future flourish.

Christine Gebeneter is a communication specialist with the EU Socioeconomic campaign, with Greenpeace Central and Eastern Europe 

Tax the super-rich

Together, let’s urge governments to tax the super-rich and fund a green and fair future.

Add your name

Nairobi, Kenya / Bonn, Germany – A very small group of ultra-wealthy individuals is associated with disproportionate climate harm, driven alarmingly by their ownership of and investments in high-emitting activities alongside their carbon-intensive lifestyles, a Greenpeace Africa report revealed today. 

In 2022, the investments of the world’s richest 0.01% were associated with an estimated US$992 billion in what the report describes as climate debt – the monetised climate damages associated with emissions exceeding an equitable share of the remaining carbon budget consistent with a 1.5°C pathway. By comparison, the report estimates the consumption-based climate debt of the world’s richest 0.01% at US$405 billion in 2022.[1]

Clara Thompson, climate and tax justice lead campaigner at Greenpeace International, said: “We are learning that the climate impact of extreme wealth is far greater than previously understood. Yet governments often urge ordinary people to carry the burden of climate action while paying far less attention to those with the greatest climate debt and ability to cover the costs of climate breakdown: wealthy investors and major polluters. Something is fundamentally out of balance.” 

The report Understanding the Climate Debt of Extreme Wealth highlights how the climate crisis is increasingly also a crisis of extreme wealth concentration. The report argues that current climate policy frameworks focus primarily on production and consumption-based emissions, while largely overlooking emissions linked to capital ownership and carbon-intensive investment portfolios of the ultra-wealthy.[2]

Key findings from the report:

• The study estimates the average member of the global top 0.01% wealth group is associated with more than 130 times the ownership-based climate debt of the average member of the global top 10% wealth group. 
• For an average member in the global top 0.01%, the estimated ownership-based climate debt in 2022 was US$1.24 million – more than twice as large as consumption-based climate debt, estimated at US$506,783, highlighting the importance of looking beyond consumption (e.g. polluting private jets) alone when assessing climate responsibility.    
• The study estimates that, in 2022, the richest 1% accounted for approximately 41% of all ownership-based emissions, compared to 16.5% of consumption-based emissions attributed to the top 1% income group. 
• Wealth and ownership-based climate responsibility are concentrated in a relatively small number of countries, while many of the countries facing the greatest climate vulnerability and climate finance needs account for only a small share of global wealth.

As climate impacts such as damages from extreme weather, floods and droughts intensify globally, the gap between climate finance needs and its delivery continues to widen. The report suggests that taxing the climate damages associated with the ownership-based emissions of the world’s richest 0.01% alone could contribute significantly to climate finance needs in developing countries which are estimated to be at least $1 trillion annually.[3]

Koaile Monaheng, Fair Share Global Political Lead at Greenpeace Africa, said: “Taxing billionaires for the real costs of their polluting investments and lifestyles is not radical, it is a fair and necessary step toward funding climate action, addressing degradation of ecosystems and advancing climate justice for communities already paying the price for a crisis they did not cause. Without urgent action, the ultra-wealthy will continue to pollute and profit from the destruction and exploitation while the world is burning.”

Greenpeace International is calling on governments to integrate the polluter-pays principle into climate and fiscal policy frameworks and to commit under the UN Tax Convention (UNFCITC) to effective taxation of ultra-high-net-worth individuals and major corporate polluters, including through legally binding rules on taxing rights, transparency and measures to combat tax abuse. 

As climate finance needs continue to grow, discussions under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the UN Tax Convention should increasingly be seen as complementary processes to help mobilise the resources needed for climate action and sustainable development.

ENDS

Notes:

The executive summary of the report is available here.

[1] The report analyses the climate debt associated with the global top 10%, top 1%, top 0.1% and top 0.01% wealth and income groups. The study uses two approaches to estimate how global excess emissions – those exceeding the level consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C – can be attributed across different wealth groups: one based on consumption and one based on ownership. The top 0.01% , or the ultra-high-net-worth individuals (UHNWIs), are approximately – for illustrative purposes –  those with more than US$38 million.

[2] The analysis was conducted by Forum Ökologisch-Soziale Marktwirtschaft (FÖS) e.V.

[3] Climate Action Network (CAN) (2024): Climate Action Network (CAN) Submission on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG). 

Contact:

Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org 

Bonn, Germany – The COP31 Presidency’s electrification initiative is a positive step forward but must be coupled with a rapid phase-out of fossil fuels as part of a just transition to renewable energy to keep the 1.5°C limit within reach, Greenpeace said. 

As part of the COP31 Presidency’s Action Agenda, COP31 President-Designate Murat Kurum and President of Negotiations for COP31 Chris Bowen, launched an electrification target to raise the share of final energy demand met by electricity from just over 20% currently to 35% by 2035 as part of a shift from direct fossil fuel use to clean electricity across buildings, transport and industry.

In response, Greenpeace said while electrifying households, industry and other major sectors with renewable energy is a key component of ending fossil fuel use, a focus alone on growing renewables and expanding electrification will not be enough without a managed, proactive wind-down of fossil fuel production as well.

Berkan Ozyer, Director of Greenpeace Türkiye, said: “Türkiye’s call to accelerate global electrification ahead of COP31 is a vital and highly welcome step toward a clean energy future. However, it is a deep contradiction that Türkiye, as COP31 host, is championing a vision of electrification in the global arena while continuing to keep 37 active coal power plants running and leaving the door open for new projects at home.

“While dependence on fossil fuels condemns us to expensive energy and a reliance on global supply chains, our massive wind and solar potential is the true key to Turkish independence. Real climate leadership means winning the electrification race, not just by talking about clean energy, but by setting a bold and just coal phase-out date as part of a transition away from all fossil fuels.” 

The past decade has seen strong progress in the roll-out of renewable energy and in 2026 unprecedented momentum is being built towards the phase out of fossil fuels, after 57 committed countries came together in Santa Marta in April and the global energy shock brought on by the war on Iran exposed the inherent risk of fossil fuel reliance.

Coinciding with the Bonn Climate Change Conference, Greenpeace International has released a report outlining the rapid growth in renewables since the Paris Agreement and  calling for an accelerated fair, fast and funded just transition through deliberate political choices and strong policy frameworks.[1][2] 

Dr Simon Bradshaw, Senior Climate Advisor, Greenpeace Australia Pacific said: “Ministers Bowen and Kurum must maintain the global momentum towards a phase-out of fossil fuels and ensure that a just transition is at the heart of the COP31 agenda.

“As Minister Bowen said, we are in the middle of a global fossil fuel crisis. Ending the fossil fuel chokehold is the only path towards greater peace and security and the only way to keep 1.5°C within reach. This means no new fossil fuel approvals and a managed phase out of fossil fuel production. 

“Renewable electrification is the path to universal energy access, better health and reducing inequality, but only if the solutions are accessible to all. 

“Nowhere are the benefits of renewable electrification clearer than in the Pacific. For some countries, fuel import costs are equivalent to 25% of GDP. The region has been hit particularly hard by the current global fossil fuel crisis, with multiple Pacific countries declaring a state of emergency over concerns for fuel and power supply.

“The Pacific is already facing the brunt of a climate crisis and now faces the compounding injustice of an energy crisis brought on by fossil fuel dependence. It did not create either of these crises, but is among the most exposed to both. The Pacific is leading the global push beyond fossil fuels, with the aim of becoming the world’s first fossil fuel free region.” 

ENDS

Notes:

[1] Read the Greenpeace Energy [R]evolution+10 report

[2] A Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels: Policy Briefing

Contact:
Beyza Kural, Senior Communication Expert, Greenpeace Türkiye, +90 5336 417 123, beyza.kural@greenpeace.org

Kate O’Callaghan, Communications Manager, Greenpeace Australia Pacific, +61 4062 31892 kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org

Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0)20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org

The death toll and destruction of civilian infrastructure from the US-Israel war on Iran has been devastating and, additionally, the conflict has sparked political turmoil, a global energy supply shock and soaring cost-of-living pressures that are leading to looming economic headwinds.

Inadvertently, now 100 days after the start of the conflict, we can see that it is also supercharging the world’s shift to renewable energy in a global disruption that is now presenting a seismic opportunity to free ourselves of fossil fuel dependency.

But this systemic shift to clean, secure and reliable renewable energy must be planned with a long-term perspective as part of a fair, fast and funded just transition as governments work to meet their Paris Agreement obligations to limit global warming to 1.5°C.

Where we were 10 years ago

The 2015 Paris Agreement was a landmark moment and on its 10th anniversary in 2025, the Agreement was lauded for helping to accelerate the clean energy transition, lower projected global greenhouse gas emissions and reduce the projected temperature increase.

Despite this, our climate has continued to warm and the years 2015-2025 have been the hottest 11 years on record, placing the 1.5°C threshold under threat. That’s the bad news. 

The good news, however, is the rapid pace of change in the renewables sector. Back in 2015, Greenpeace’s visionary Energy [R]evolution scenario was a transformative, nuclear-free blueprint for a 100 % renewable future. It was far more ambitious than the International Energy Agency’s projections and today, we can see that the E[R] scenarios were not far off the mark. 

In fact, in the past 10 years, the energy landscape has changed tremendously and the most visible success of the last decade lies in the sheer velocity of the renewable rollout. For the first time, wind and solar are growing faster than global electricity consumption, actively eating the market share of fossil fuels, mainly due to the significant cost reduction of renewables.

Now, amid the current energy supply crisis, the scale of change witnessed in the past 10 years offers great hope for a renewable future.

Electrification, expanding solar and wind power and lower costs 

Between 2015 and 2025, global solar power capacity increased from 226 Gigawatt (GW) in 2015 to 2,392 GW in 2025. Electricity generation through solar power actually exceeded the ambitious projections made in the E[R] scenario and by far exceeded the modest projections made by the IEA’s World Energy Outlook (WEO).

In the same timeframe, wind power capacity increased from 416 GW in 2015 to 1,291 GW in 2025. Actual wind power generation in 2025 proved to be slightly below the E[R] projections, but was substantially higher than the WEO scenario. Further developments with regard to offshore wind in particular offer hope that in the coming years reality will surpass the E[R] projection.

The reason for such successful renewable electricity growth is the significant cost reduction. The E[R] scenario underestimated the cost reduction potential between 2015 and 2025 for solar and wind. Solar reduced costs per kilowatt by around 70 % while the E[R] projected 42%. Both onshore wind and offshore wind were able to halve costs while the E[R] projected 6% and 27% respectively.  

Political change, the energy transformation and a global supply shock

In the past decade, the failure of governments to reduce global total energy demand has meant, however, that the growth in solar and wind only covered increased energy demand rather than replacing fossil fuel use. 

Now, the war on Iran has sharpened both the urgency and inevitability of a transition to renewables, exposing how an engineered dependence on fossil fuels is a massive geopolitical liability that demands systemic and broad sectoral changes.

After the UN climate talks COP30 spectacularly failed to agree last year on the need to develop a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels despite wide support, 57 countries met in Santa Marta, Colombia, in April 2026 to explicitly discuss how to transition away from fossil fuels.

What we can say is that the geopolitical faultlines are becoming very clear: on one side there are countries like the US that are rusted on to a ‘drill, baby, drill’ approach and on the other, there are countries ready to plan for and implement a post-fossil-fuel future.

But what governments must do now is ensure the policy frameworks are in place to enable a fair, fast and funded transition, because beyond economics, the shift is about resilience.

Decentralised, democratically owned renewable energy systems controlled and owned by the people are harder to sabotage and immune to shipping disruptions, ensuring that even in times of crisis, our homes, schools, and hospitals remain powered and continue to deliver social, economic and environmental benefits for all.

What comes next

What the ambitious vision of the Energy [R]evolution and the staggering acceleration of renewables in the past 10 years show is that the future of our energy transition is bright.

Critically, however, the nations currently leading this transformation and securing the rewards of a clean energy future demonstrate that rapid change is a deliberate result of active political choices and strong policy frameworks.

Read our reports:

The Energy [R]evolution+10

A Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels