It’s almost 34 years since the initial signing of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The convention’s stated purpose was to stabilise “greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere”.
That has not happened.
We know that stabilising the most important greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide: “CO2”), requires a total cessation of unmitigated fossil fuel consumption.
That has not happened.
We know that stopping fossil fuel consumption would initiate a reduction of atmospheric methane.
That has not happened.
What has happened is that organisations around the world have spent vast amounts of other people’s money on irrelevant activities, claiming to advance the goals of the UNFCCC.
The UNFCCC is not only a piece of paper (which no doubt has been photocopied, scanned, pdf’d, and printed many thousands of times). It is also a bureaucracy (based in Germany). Like all bureaucracies, the UNFCCC gobbles great gobs of cash simply by being itself. The UNFCCC’s annual “Conference of the Parties” attracts many thousands of bureaucrats, diplomats, politicians, lobbyists, media, and others. More than 56,000 people attended the 2025 UNFCCC conference in Brazil. High accommodation prices prompted the Brazilian government to arrange accommodation on cruise ships. A new motorway was built to handle conference-related traffic.
A total of 198 countries are party to the UNFCCC. In each of those countries, vast bureaucracies have evolved around activities such as carbon accounting, offsets, and the promotion of energy efficiency, none of which advance the UNFCCC’s core purpose: Greenhouse gas stabilisation. In countries with multi-level governments, such as New Zealand, each level of government has its own climate mitigation bureaucrats.
What the world really needs
Effective climate mitigation begins with a sinking lid on sales of fossil-based energy products, together with effective mitigation of human-made mineral carbon dioxide emissions*.
These two actions (fossil fuel phase-out and mineral CO2 mitigation) are necessary and probably sufficient to achieve the goal of temperature stabilisation. There is time to stabilise sea levels within a few metres of their present-day levels, but only if the phase-out begins soon.
The UNFCCC is trying to apply various “emission reduction” strategies (such as emissions pricing and emissions trading) to carbon dioxide. This is completely irrelevant. The goal of stabilisation requires a total cessation of net CO2 emissions. Trying to achieve that by reducing emissions is like trying to cut steel with a plastic spoon. Reduction strategies can reduce emissions to some “sustainable” non-zero level. If the goal is total cessation, reduction strategies are guaranteed to fail. What happens is that governments set up bureaucracies to keep track of “reductions”. Those bureaucracies do whatever they need to do to protect their own existence. It’s not in a climate bureaucracy’s interest to advance the goal of stabilising atmospheric CO2. Achieving net-zero CO2 would put these immense organisations out of business.
Expecting the UNFCCC, with its vast interwoven baggage, to deliver climate stabilisation calls to mind a popular definition of insanity: Continuing to do the same thing, while expecting a different outcome.
A Climate Task Force
We need a new international agreement with the core goal of phasing out sales of products made from fossil raw materials (including electricity and battery electrodes made by burning coal), and phasing out net emissions of mineral carbon dioxide.
Countries which face major losses due to sea level rise, such as Pacific island nations, might be keen to join the Climate Task Force. Plenty of others would sign up.
I see no reason to keep any part of the UNFCCC, or associated organisations such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Some people might argue that their scientific reports should be carefully archived. I disagree. We can make a fresh start ONLY if these organisations are totally shut down. People will voluntarily archive any genuinely useful documents. Nothing important will be lost.
The World Meteorological Organisation monitors atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. This monitoring work will be important to the work of the new Climate Task Force. It won’t stop merely because the UNFCCC and the IPCC no longer exist.
We need to remain sympathetic toward “climate adaptation” programmes. Adaptation is a separate issue, outside the scope of this blog post.
How to start
We know enough. There’s no need for new science. There’s also no need for new inventions. What’s needed is an agreement between the Governments of all major economies to impose a sinking lid on sales of fossil fuels, together with a mineral CO2 mitigation programme. That agreement needs to include a commitment to ensuring the proper functioning of energy and transportation markets, free of government interference (such as subsidies or excise taxes) and monopoly manipulation.
I’m well aware that the global political environment makes climate mitigation seem impossible. That’s no reason to avoid the issue. Dictators do not stay in power forever.
As with any project, the important thing is to make a start. Governments should start by withdrawing from the UNFCCC (and its subsidiary agreements) and closing their climate mitigation and greenhouse gas reporting bureaucracies.
The next step is to draw up that international agreement and start collecting signatures. This does not require a vast bureaucracy. The work can be done by a small team of diplomats, perhaps one or two from each country that signs the agreement.
I’m picking that such a team could achieve more in the next two or three decades than UNFCCC bureaucrats have achieved in the last three.
The UNFCCC has failed to address the goal that was set for it back in 1992. It’s time to scrap it.
Time to set up a new Climate Task Force with one (and only) clear goal: Phasing down fossil fuel sales and net mineral CO2 emissions to achieve Net Zero CO2.
We are technorg.
* Mineral carbon dioxide comes from manufacturing processes such as cement manufacturing. These processes involve transforming carbonate rock (such as limestone) into useful products by driving carbon dioxide out of the rock itself. Mineral carbon dioxide emissions make only a small part of net human-made carbon dioxide emissions.