Column: Patrice Horner On COP30 In Belem

[Column written by Patrice Horner]

COP30 stands for the 30th meeting of the Conference of the Parties [COP] to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change [UNFCCC]. The 30th one opened in Belem November 10th.

Opening event at the COP30 in Belem November 10th, 2025

Afternoon thunderstorms texted the meeting spaces and the ability to hear. However, COP30 in Belem opened with cautious optimism and serious Uber traffic congestion. It is ironic for a climate conference aiming to reduce GreenHouseGases [GHG]. Despite the congestion and shortfall to the targets set by the Paris Agreement in 2018, the UN Climate Change Secretariat yesterday announced a 16% decline in GHG through this year. Based on the total number of 86 NDCs submitted by 113 Parties, total global GHG emissions [with LULUCF] by 2035 are projected to be around 12% below 2019 levels. This compares to emissions expected increase of between 20% and 48% for 2035 without these interventions. Progress has been made, but the pace needs to increase dramatically.

One really needs to see and hear in person at Climate Events the progress being made to comprehend the scale. However, if you are not sanctioned by a country or a National Government Organization [NGO] the weighty discussions are beyond reach. There are other outside meetings being sponsored as well as some virtually, such as the Organization of Economic Development Corporation [OEDC] Virtual COP30.

On the opening day, Monday, Nov 10th, OEDC held a compelling discussion on Aligning Financing Instruments and Policies for Biomanufacturing for Climate Action. The Chemicals industry is older in the world. Here they talk atoms not bytes, building in physical space. It is a huge market and there maybe a method for Bermuda to engage with algae.

Justin Brodie-Kommit, Lichen Ventures, General Partner says that it is possibility to bioengineer with less water & energy than conventional chemical. ‘BIOMADE US’ projects have been catalytic. BIOMADE launched 3 start-ups. Bio Venture Funds [VCs] fund-in the corporate investors as partners with each company that produces the product that a partner will distribute. Loreal started own incubator to customize solutions. Earlier economics are starting to work and with carbon-adjustments bioengineering can reach cost parity.

Richard Kitney, Imperial College London Professor of Biomedical Systems Engineering focused on the move from fossil to biofuels with advanced bioengineering. Another point of impact is sustainable fabric colouring which can offset 20% of GHG coming from textile industry. Start up companies are fundamental and require public funding until they reach $750k when ‘Angel’ financing bcome interested, then VCs can carry the companies to product launch if they make it. Kitney encourage a ‘vertical stage gauge’ across the scale of company development, ie science & business tests such as Lab Genius.

Samuele Ambrosetti, Bio-based Industries Consortium Programming and Innovation Manager stated that EUs ‘Circle Biobase’ funded 100 projects, 20 at industrial scale. There is 1Bil EU from the consortium co-invested with $1bil from industry. It is further levered to 3.5 to 1 resulting in over three times the impact. PPPs are focused on applied research and scale-up for industry. There are ‘Specific Molecule’ pilot plans. Better examples of what can be done might overcome the first mover inertia. However, a demonstrative market demand is most important, then investors chase the opportunities.

Fiona Mischel, SynBioBeta, Director International Outreach believes the Bioeconomy is fundamental for the future of the economy, but it is moving too slow. Large incumbent companies have to adapt products to climate change, and they need large volume of materials. Smaller companies cannot scale up without them. While the large companies need to be incentivized. It cannot be built in modular way, like RE. The technology and scale are significant. Yet returns are positive according to Fiona. “In UK there is a 1:8 times return on R&D to economy.” Remember it took Fossel fuels 100 years to become profitable. What does a return and or a success look like over the 10 year horizon.

There needs to be different incentives for different industries, with both a carrot and a stick approach. There needs to be incentives/discounts for both sides, the makers and the buyers. The start-ups are the most motivated sector. Investors may wait to move forward if there are too many potential solutions. The pull for the market is under appreciated. Understand the customer needs from start. Look at government procurement models is US. Or tax break incentives for big polluters to proceed with the transitions, which are repaid with tax payments when companies succeed. Most importantly get rid of the billion in fossil fuel subsidies, which become trillions when considering externalities. Biologics can be significantly cheaper considering the absence of fossil subsidies.

- Patrice Horner

#ClimateChange #OpinionColumns

Category: All, Environment