Italy has signed a deal at the COP26 climate summit to end overseas financing for fossil fuels, reports Bloomberg, reversing its position ahead of a planned announcement. The outlet continues: “Italy told the UK, its co-host at the talks, on Wednesday night they were not signing the pledge, according to two people familiar with the matter.” Then, yesterday, Italy’s ecological transition minister Roberto Cingolani said the country had “signed the deal by the set deadline and negotiators have been working to meet it”. Bloomberg adds: “The pact isn’t binding and would still allow limited support for foreign fossil fuel ventures. It excludes some of the biggest funders of fossil-fuel projects, including China and Japan, and allows for exemptions. But it does mark a further tightening of the flow of money from public development banks to oil, gas and coal.” There is continuing coverage of the deal from Reuters, Climate Home News, BusinessGreen and New Scientist, while Politico notes that officials from the UK “were uncertain whether the US would sign on to the statement even as late as Wednesday”. The Guardian reports on a new study that finds that “about half of the world’s fossil fuel assets will be worthless by 2036 under a net-zero transition”. Prof Mariana Mazzucato – professor in the economics of innovation and public value at University College London – has an article in the same paper on how “banks are still financing fossil fuels – while signing up to net-zero pledges”. And a third article in the paper says a new report from Climate Analytics warns that “the escalating rollout of gas for heating, electricity and cooking is turning it into the ‘new coal’ and its use worldwide must be slashed by nearly a third this decade to avoid disastrous climate effects”. And DeSmog notes that “only two of the 35 stalls lauding countries’ green credentials at [COP26] mention the need to cut fossil fuel production”.

In other oil news, the New York Times reports that officials from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, Russia and other oil-producing nations – known collectively as “OPEC+” – “shook off pressure from the Biden administration and decided on Thursday to stick with their previous plan to raise oil production by a modest 400,000 barrels a day next month”. The paper explains: “President Biden and other world leaders have called on countries like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to increase production because oil prices, which collapsed during last year’s pandemic lockdowns, have now reached their highest levels in seven years. Gasoline prices, too, have jumped in the US, Britain and elsewhere. The jump in prices, Mr Biden said Tuesday, ‘is a consequence of, thus far, the refusal of Russia or the OPEC nations to pump more oil’.” The Financial Times reports that a spokesperson for Biden’s National Security Council warned that the global economic recovery “should not be imperilled by a mismatch between supply and demand”. However, Saudi energy minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman told reporters that “oil is not the problem”, says Bloomberg. He added: “The problem is the energy complex is going through havoc and hell.” A senior US Department of Energy official tells Reuters that any decision on whether the US will tap its emergency oil reserve in order to lower crude prices is up to Biden. And the Financial Times has a “big read” on why oil are “soaring” even as “the world turns against fossil fuel”.

Indonesia has pushed back against the UK’s characterisation of an agreement that pledges to “halt and reverse forest loss and land degradation by 2030″, reports Bloomberg. It continues: “While a UK government statement said that was a commitment to end deforestation, Indonesia’s vice foreign minister said his country had only agreed to keep its forest cover steady over the period – meaning trees could still be cut down and replaced. The dispute kicked off after Zac Goldsmith, a minister at the UK environment department, tweeted on Tuesday that more than 100 countries had signed up to ‘end deforestation by 2030’. The next day, Indonesia’s vice minister for foreign affairs Mahendra Siregar said Goldsmith’s tweet was ‘false and misleading’.” In a statement, Siregar said: “Indonesia is willing to engage on forest management at the global level to address climate change…It is important to move beyond mere narrative, rhetoric, arbitrary targets and sound bites.” Siti Nurbaya Bakar, the environment and forestry minister, tweeted that asking Indonesia to stop all deforestation by 2030 was “clearly inappropriate and unfair”, reports the Financial Times. Siti told the paper that halting deforestation was not possible in a country like Indonesia, where a large proportion of the population live in forested areas. She added that any environmental goals must “balance” with the country’s development agenda. Asked about the dispute at a press conference, COP26 President Alok Sharma said he wouldn’t discuss specific countries, but that all nations had joined pledges “in full understanding of what they are signing up to”, Bloomberg adds. Reuters also has the story.

Meanwhile, in a frontpage story, the Daily Telegraph reports that the commitment on ending deforestation does not include the “alleged harm to forests done by Drax biomass power station, which burns fuel pellets made from processed wood”. Reuters reports that, according to vice president of the European Union Josep Borrell, Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro’s government has shown new commitment to ending illegal deforestation in the Amazon and is aware it is a hurdle to improved ties with Europe. Borrell met briefly with Bolsonaro and held talks with other ministers on the first visit to Brazil by a senior EU representative in nine years. He told Reuters that “he will is there, because the ministers know that it will be good for Brazil to put an end to illegal exploitation of the Amazon rainforest”. The Economist has a piece on how “Brazil wants more from COP26 than it is willing to give”.

Analysis by the International Energy Agency (IEA) suggests that meeting the climate pledges agreed so far at the COP26 conference could keep the world’s rising temperatures to within 1.8C of pre-industrialised levels, reports the Guardian. The assessment suggests that achieving a flurry of newly announced goals on net-zero and methane would “slash global heating predictions from a rise of 2.7C set out before UN climate talks”, the paper explains. Fatih Birol, the IEA’s executive director, told COP26 delegates that called progress at the talks was “extremely encouraging”, reports the Press Association. He said: “I think we have done enormously better than I would have thought. But, having said that, I think we should be saying to ourselves that unless we do get what we need, we are certainly moving for something above 2C. That’s why what happens here is crucial. And more importantly that people actually do do what they say they are going to do.” The assessment comes just a day after analysis was published by researchers at the University of Melbourne that found meeting the new, more stringent targets could limit warming to 1.9C. However, speaking to Reuters, economist Nicholas Stern cautioned that “all the estimates have their own uncertainties, but also it’s the whole path that matters. You can’t estimate a temperature just from a point”. Bloomberg and Sky News also have the story.

Indonesia will still “be able to continue building coal plants at home” despite signing up to a COP26 pledge to end coal use, reports Bloomberg. Signatories to the UK-led “global coal to clean power transition statement” (see yesterday’s Daily Briefing for more details) had the option to sign four different clauses, the outlet explains, and a statement from COP organisers reveals that “Indonesia didn’t back the clause calling for an end to building and financing new unabated coal”. According to the document, Indonesia will “consider accelerating coal phase out into the 2040s” if there’s additional international financing to do so. The outlet adds: “One UK official speaking on condition of anonymity, told reporters the statement was deliberately flexible from the outset to give as much room as possible to signatories.” The Times says the UK’ government’s press release had said the signatories had committed to phasing out coal “in the 2030s for major economies and 2040s for the rest of the world”. However, it adds, the final wording “has proved to be far weaker than the government had claimed because it adds the words ‘or as soon as possible thereafter’ to the 2030s and 2040s deadlines”. The UK’s shadow business secretary Ed Miliband tells the Press Association that “any progress towards powering past coal is welcome, but glaring gaps remain”. He added: “There is no commitment from large emitters like China to stop increasing coal at home, and nothing on the phase-out of other fossil fuels.” The Daily Telegraph points out that a “quarter of nations” have failed to sign up to the full pledge. The Daily Mail reports the comments of Jennifer Morgan – executive director of Greenpeace International – who said: “If you’re the executive of a coal company today, is a bad day. But not as bad as it should have been.” The Guardian reports that Australia’s emissions reduction minister said the government’s focus was “not on wiping out industries”. Speaking at the COP, Angus Taylor said: “We will supply the products our customers need to bring down their emissions over time. This can’t happen overnight, let’s be clear about this. There is a sensible pathway here, Australia will be part of it.”

Elsewhere, there is continuing coverage of the new coal initiatives launched this week at COP26 from the Independent, New York Times, Reuters, New Scientist and Press Association. The Conversation has an article on “what it would take to end coal power worldwide”. Reuters reports on a study that shows “more than 5,000 South Africans die annually in the nation’s coal belt because the government has failed to fully enforce its own air quality standards”. And Climate Home News reports that financial package to move South Africa’s transition away from coal is “creating a buzz at COP26 climate talks, where campaigners hope it could provide a model for other emerging economies”.

European Union’s chief negotiator has said that the first days of negotiations at COP26 have yielded some promising “early signs” on finalising the rules to implement the Paris Agreement, reports Reuters. Speaking at a news conference, Jacob Werksman said: “It’s a bit early to say whether we’re on track for a fully successful COP, but the early signs seem reasonably good.“ Werksman added that envoys now had negotiating texts for each of the key issues they would attempt to finish the rules on – including talks on transparency and carbon markets, the newswire reports.

However, Bloomberg reports that talks on international carbon markets are “running into an obstacle” regarding “a row over how big a share of revenues from trading should be funnelled toward countries that need money to adapt to climate change”. The outlet explains: “Developing countries want a percentage of the proceeds from trading all types of carbon credits to be channeled to poor nations. That sort of transaction tax already applied to a previous United Nations offset programme and is widely expected to continue in any new market. But developing countries say it should also apply to the exchange of carbon credits between countries. And that’s a red line for the European Union.” The chances of a deal “had been looking up”, Bloomberg says, with Brazil showing “some flexibility”, but “as negotiators started talking in Glasgow, it quickly became evident that reaching a deal will be no easy task”. Tanguy Gahouma-Bekale, chair of the African Group of Negotiators on Climate Change said “we need to have a clear predictable finance flow for adaptation and this is the only way that we can have it”, the outlet reports. Also on the “Article 6” rules for carbon markets, researchers Dr Kate Dooley and Kate Mackenzie have a piece for Climate Home News on why “big business must not be allowed to set the carbon trading agenda at COP26”. (For more on Article 6, see Carbon Brief‘s explainer. And also see Carbon Brief’s “who wants what at COP26” interactive.)

Elsewhere, Reuters reports that COP president Alok Sharma has said that “negotiators…must make an extra push over the next 24 hours to ensure sufficient progress is made to allow a successful outcome next week”. Also, US climate envoy John Kerry has repeated a claim from earlier this week that richer nations will be able to deliver $100bn of climate finance to developing countries every year from 2022 – a year earlier than expected, reports the Press Association. Speaking at a dinner hosted by the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), Kerry said that Japan had promised to pay $2bn a year for the next five years. This would unlock another $8bn every year in loans from banks and other private organisations, he added: “That means for 2022 we now have the full $100bn we wanted to have, and $100bn going forward, so we take that issue off the table and that changes the dynamics.” However, he warned that “no government in the world has enough money” to cope with climate change, and that trillions in private finance needs to be unlocked, the outlet notes.

In other COP news, the Reuters that US interior secretary Deb Haaland challenged nations to join the US in setting aggressive goals to expand electricity production from offshore wind. The Times reports that actor and former governor of California Arnold Schwarzenegger appears to have cancelled his plans to attend in person. The Hill says a group of Republican lawmakers is heading to COP26 “even as their party remains largely opposed to domestic actions aimed at fighting climate change”. The New York Times reports that “first time at a major United Nations climate conference, human health is emerging as a leading issue, a reframing that brings climate change’s far-reaching and long-lasting effects to the forefront”. And the i newspaper reports that UN organisers have refused to confirm how many delegates have tested positive for Covid-19, but say it is “not a substantial number”.

The cost of adapting to climate change in the developing world could be up to $300bn per year by 2030 and $500bn by 2050, says the Independent, citing the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) “adaptation gap” report. This is between five and 10 times higher than the financial aid richer countries are giving in support, the paper adds. It quotes UNEP executive director Inger Andersen saying: “We need a step change in adaptation ambition for funding and implementation to significantly reduce damages and losses from climate change. And we need it now.” The Press Association says the impacts of climate change, such as wildfires and floods, will increase even if warming is limited to 1.5C, according to the report. It adds: “UNEP said that despite growing urgency, the flow of finance directed at adaptation ‘seems to be levelling off’.” The i newspaper notes that current levels of climate finance, covering both mitigation and adaptation, are not expected to reach the pledged $100bn a year until 2023. UNEP says the opportunity of using Covid recovery packages to boost climate resilience is being “squandered”, reports BusinessGreen.

Youth activists are taking to the streets of Glasgow today to demand action on climate change from leaders and politicians as the COP26 talks continue, report the Press Association. It continues: “Campaigner Greta Thunberg, fellow activist Vanessa Nakate and other young campaigners, as well as local trade unionists will speak to crowds at the end of the march through the city where the UN summit is being held. The climate strike organised by Fridays for Future Scotland…comes as the COP26 talks feature events highlighting the voice of young people and education in climate action.” Today’s protest comes ahead of marches on Saturday, the outlet adds, “where tens of thousands of people are expected in Glasgow, with other marches in London and cities around the UK, as well as across the world”. The Press Association also reports that Prince Charles has been invited to today’s protests, but said taking part would be “difficult”. Speaking from Glasgow’s Kelvingrove Art Gallery, he told negotiators: “There’s a lot of anger and a lot of frustration. There’s a big march tomorrow, which some people have said I should join – that’s more difficult – but the point is, please don’t forget these people out there. Don’t forget that it’s their future.”

Meanwhile, speaking at a New York Times panel event chaired by actor Emma Watson yesterday, Greta Thunberg said “change will not come from inside any of these conferences”, reports the Independent. She continued: “Without massive pressure from the outside, they will continue to get away with not doing anything and continue going ‘blah blah blah’ and not being held accountable.“ Nobel Peace Prize winner Malala Yousafzai and fellow campaigners Vanessa Nakate and Leah Thomas said being called “inspiring” was now just empty words, reports the Press Association. Nakate said: “I think almost every activist has been called inspiring, and almost every activist has been told that they’re going to change the world. But I think that when leaders do that, they are giving us the responsibility to save the world.” She said she was “sending back the responsibility to them”, adding: “I don’t really buy when leaders praise young people for activism.” Finally, in a piece for the Financial Times, writer, student, ornithologist and activist Mya-Rose Craig says that “young climate activists are tired of mere lip service”.

China’s coal policy features heavily on domestic and international media outlets. Sky News’s Asia correspondent, Tom Cheshire, has visited Shanxi province – China’s largest coal-producing region last year – to find out how China is boosting coal production capacity to tackle power shortages. The article says: “We see literally hundreds of trucks carrying coal from mines to power stations, or further afield in China. They thunder along the roads.” Cheshire and his team found three “zombie coal power” – whose operation had been halted in 2017 “restrict coal power” – starting producing coal again. A separate Sky News report analyses why China, India and Australia “are reluctant to ditch coal”. The piece says: “Some 190 nations may have signed up to the ‘end of coal’ agreement but the only country that really matters isn’t among them.” Reuters reports that China’s daily coal output “hit 11.2m tonnes on 3 November, rising around 1m tonnes from early October” due to “a raft of measures” to boost production capacity. The newswire cites the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), the state macroeconomic planner.

Staying on the topic of coal, Politico says that “the UK has helped secure a 190-strong coalition of countries and organisations at COP26”. It adds: “However the absence of Australia, China, India and the US from the deal has received criticism.” CNBC says that 28 countries have signed up for the Powering Past Coal Alliance (PPCA), an international alliance dedicated to phasing out coal. “However, China, India and the United States, the three biggest burners of coal worldwide, have not signed up to the PPCA,” the network reports. According to the Washington Post, officials in China’s steelmaking hub, Tangshan, have been going from door to door to “confiscate” coal from households in a bid to prevent residents from burning the fuel in an emission-reducing campaign. The Financial Times reports that China’s coal miners “pledged to sell at a discount” after the central government “intervened” in the energy markets to tackle a domestic “power crunch”. The newspaper cites the NDRC. China Dialogue looks at whether or not the recent power shortages will slow China’s progress to carbon neutrality. The New Statesman asks: “Can the world trust China on climate change?”

In China’s state media, China News Services zooms in on Ordos – a coal mining hub in Inner Mongolia, China’s second-largest coal-producing region in 2020. The state-run newswire says that Ordos is “helping China’s coal to operate healthily” by implementing the country’s order to increase the fuel’s production capacity. Xinhua News Agency reports that China’s special climate envoy Xie Zhenhua and deputy ecology and environment minister Zhao Yingmin “continued dialogue” over potential China-US climate change cooperation with John Kerry – US president Biden’s special envoy on climate change – at COP26 yesterday. In another piece, the state news agency says that the coal stock at China’s centralised managed coal-fired power plants was enough to sustain national usage for 20 days as of Wednesday. JW View reports that the coal stock at Qinghuangdao port – China’s largest coal hub – exceeded 5.1m tonnes on Wednesday, setting a new high for this year. Securities Times reports that China Energy – a state-owned mining and energy company – produced 50.64m tonnes of coal in October, a 9.1% year-on-year growth. The figure sets a “historical record high”, the outlet says.

BBC News environmental analyst Roger Harrabin reflects on progress at COP26 so far, noting that “expectations for this conference were low, but seasoned COP observers have been pleasantly surprised by a slew of announcements which suggest the world is on an unstoppable path to a low-carbon future”. Pete Betts, the former EU lead negotiator on climate change, tells Harrabin that “the mood of the conference is good…The trend towards a zero-carbon world is irreversible. The question is when we get there, and what the climate will be like by then”. Harrabin runs through the various commitments made so far – a Reuters “factbox” article does something similar – and notes that it is “so far so good”, but “there have been disappointments”. He explains: “It had been expected that China would improve its offer to peak emissions by 2030. At least a token gesture was anticipated, but it’s brought nothing. The only consolation for the COP is that China usually over-delivers on its promises – unlike some others.”

Relatedly, Washington Post columnist Josh Rogin writes that the Biden administration is “reportedly divided over how to persuade China to cooperate on climate change. But Chinese president Xi Jinping is making it crystal clear he’s not interested, at least for now”. Rogin says the US “needs to pivot to a climate change strategy that is clear-eyed about China and doesn’t make America’s energy future dependent on good relations with Beijing”.

In other COP-related comment, Gillian Tett – chair of the editorial board and editor-at-large, US, of the Financial Times – explains why the “green transition may depend on auditors”. She writes: “At this week’s COP26 climate talks in Glasgow, government ministers, finance officials, green activists and corporate leaders have paraded across the stages. One group that has not been highly visible, however, is the world’s auditors and accountants. That is a mistake.” She continues: “For while the corporate and government pledges emanating from the talks have often provoked as many questions as answers, one issue is already clear: climate change action is about to put corporate auditors under the uncomfortable – and unaccustomed – glare of the spotlight. That is because companies are facing rising pressure to come clean about their carbon emissions (and other green issues). Yet the framework for measuring this is still fluid, at best. So the onus is now on auditors to make all manner of judgment calls about green issues, to a degree that few ever expected – or have been trained for.” Larry Elliott – the Guardian’s economics editor – writes that “COP26 will be derailed unless the rich world meets its obligation to the poor”. And a Times “Thunderer” column by freelance writer Jawad Iqbal criticises Greta Thunberg’s “foul-mouthed attack on world leaders gathered in Glasgow” earlier this week. Iqbal writes: “If eco-warriors like Thunberg and her fellow travellers really believe in the imminent collapse of civilisation and are serious in wanting a better future for everyone, they need to grow up and start to work with governments and world leaders before it really is too late.”

Finally, Jeremy Warner – assistant editor of the Daily Telegraph – writes that “nobody is standing up to the hysteria of green activists and admitting: we still need hydrocarbons”. And an editorial in the Spectator criticises the UK government for enshrining its “carbon-reduction pledges into law”. The outlet says: “This leaves Britain with a very serious problem: what to do if some of the technology which will be required to reach net-zero disappoints? It is very noble to want to set an example to the rest of the world by legally committing yourself to eliminating carbon emissions. It will not look so clever in, say, 15 years’ time if we are still struggling to store copious quantities of energy generated on sunny and windy days for sunless and becalmed days when our wind farms and solar farms are generating next to nothing.”

A new study finds that the updated national climate pledges, known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), “provide a stronger near-term foundation” for limiting global temperature rise to well below 2C in accordance with the Paris agreement. Scientists analyse more than 120 updated NDCs submitted to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change as of 30 September this year and model the warming that would result if each country stuck to its updated pledge. They find that the updated pledges do substantially increase the likelihood of keeping warming below 2C, especially if countries build on that ambition over subsequent NDCs. They write that technological advances and more ambitious policy “could drive down costs and enable more cost-effective and stronger mitigation in the long term”.