Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant

According to the 2024 Global Carbon Budget report by the Global Carbon Project, global CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and cement are projected to rise by 0.8% in 2024, reaching a record 37.4 billion tonnes of CO2 (GtCO2).  This is 0.4 GtCO2 higher than the previous record set in 2023.  When including land-use emissions, the total CO2 emissions are expected to reach 41.6 GtCO2, reflecting a growth of 2% over 2023 levels.  This increase is partly due to higher than usual land-use emissions driven by extreme wildfire activity in South America. Developed countries agreed to triple public finance from US$100 billion annually to US$300 billion annually by 2035.  This new goal aims to help developing nations cope with the impacts of climate change and transition to clean energy.  Many developing countries, including India, expressed disappointment with the agreement, calling the amount “paltry” and “insulting” compared to the US$1.3 trillion they believe is necessary.  They felt that the process was stage-managed and that their voices were not adequately heard.  The summit also included agreements on carbon markets, which will facilitate the trading of carbon credits and incentivise countries to reduce emissions.  The talks nearly collapsed as negotiations went into overtime, with developing nations staging walkouts and expressing strong objections to the final deal. This comes back to my original point that the agreement is not worth the paper it is on. Terence Nunis Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant President, Red Sycamore Global

In 2024, global carbon emissions from fossil fuels and cement reached a record 37.4 billion metric tons, an increase of 0.8% from 2023.  Including land-use changes, total CO2 emissions hit 41.6 billion metric tons, a 2% increase from the previous year.  This rise is driven by higher emissions from oil, gas, and coal, despite some progress in renewable energy investments.  There has been progress, though.  The US has seen a 0.6% decrease in emissions in 2024, driven by increased use of clean energy sources.  The country is targeting net-zero emissions by 2050.  The EU achieved a 3.8% reduction in emissions in 2024, thanks to aggressive climate policies and investments in renewable energy.  Despite economic growth, India managed to reduce emissions by 4.6% through initiatives like promoting renewable energy and improving energy efficiency.  On the other hand, China’s emissions increased by 0.2%, but the country is making strides in electric vehicle adoption and renewable energy investments. While some countries are making progress, global emissions are still rising.  The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is projected to reach 422.5 parts per million (ppm) in 2024, which is 52% above pre-industrial levels.  If emissions continue at the current rate, the 1.5°C warming threshold could be breached within the next six years.  It is clear more aggressive measures are needed to curb emissions and mitigate climate change.  We need to implement robust standards and verification processes to ensure that carbon credits represent genuine emissions reductions, and develop clear criteria for the credible use of voluntary carbon credits as part of an overall climate strategy.  This involves engaging with stakeholders, including governments, businesses, and environmental organizations, to establish common goals and standards.  We need to invest in infrastructure that supports the trading and tracking of carbon credits.  This includes developing platforms for transparent and efficient transactions, as well as systems for monitoring and reporting emissions reductions.  This requires providing clear and consistent regulatory frameworks to reduce uncertainty for businesses and investors.  Finally, we need to encourage the use of high-quality carbon credits that meet stringent standards for emissions reductions.  We should consider folding the voluntary market into the compliance market. This allows us to include more sectors and regions in carbon markets to increase the scale and impact of emissions reductions. Terence Nunis Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant President, Red Sycamore Global

The COP29 climate deal includes several key terms aimed at providing financial aid to developing countries.  Developed countries have agreed to triple public finance from the previous goal of US$100 billion annually to US$300 billion annually by 2035.  The agreement aims to mobilise US$1.3 trillion per year by 2035 from both public and private sources.  It does not state exactly where these funds will magically appear from.  The funds are intended to help developing countries cope with the impacts of climate change, transition to clean energy, and adapt to extreme weather events.  The deal includes agreements on carbon markets, which had been a contentious issue in previous COP meetings.  There are provisions for transparent climate reporting for accountability and tracking.  Countries will set new climate targets every five years to keep up with the goals set in the Paris Agreement, but there is no enforcement mechanism. This deal is hastily put together to claim that there was some success.  It is a poor compromise.  The pledge of US$300 billion annually by 2035 is seen as grossly insufficient compared to the US$1.3 trillion that developing countries believe necessary to effectively address climate change.  This shortfall means that many climate-vulnerable nations will struggle to implement necessary measures to combat climate impacts.  The deal lacks clear commitments from developed nations, with much of the funding expected to come from private investments and alternative sources.  This uncertainty makes it impossible for developing countries to plan and rely on the promised funds.  Developing nations argue that the deal does not adequately address the historical responsibility of developed countries in causing climate change.  The financial commitments are seen as a way for wealthy nations to avoid their obligations, rather than providing meaningful support.  That is true.  The negotiation process was acrimonious and lacking transparency.  Developing countries were not adequately consulted and that the final deal was pushed through without proper consideration of their needs. The deal does not include a strong commitment to phasing out fossil fuels, which is crucial for mitigating climate change.  The lack of a clear plan for reducing global fossil fuel use undermines the overall effectiveness of the agreement.  This was a political compromise for public relations purposes.  It is not a real deal, and is far from addressing some of the major concerns of climate change and its effect on the most vulnerable. Terence Nunis Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant President, Red Sycamore Global

In summary, Shell is planning to sell a majority stake in its carbon offsets business as part of a strategic shift under CEO Wael Sawan.  Shell launched its portfolio of nature-based carbon projects in 2018, aiming to generate 120 million carbon credits annually.  This was in the voluntary market, which accounts for its failure as well.  The carbon offset market experienced a significant decline in demand, leading to a drop in spot prices for REDD+ credits from US$12.50 per credit in 2022 to US$3.60 in 2023.  This reduced demand and price volatility made it difficult for Shell to achieve its financial targets.  Also, there is growing uncertainty about the actual environmental impact of some carbon offset projects.  Investigations revealed that some projects significantly overstated their positive impacts, leading to scepticism and reduced investor confidence. In short, much of it is greenwashing.  Groups like Verra are culpable for this. Under the new leadership of CEO Wael Sawan, Shell decided to focus on higher-return fossil fuel ventures.  This strategic shift led to a reduction in Shell's commitment to carbon offset projects, including shelving a plan to spend US$100 million annually on new carbon credits.  The carbon offset market faces heightened scrutiny and criticism, particularly regarding the effectiveness and transparency of offset projects.  This scrutiny impacts the market’s attractiveness and Shell’s decision to pivot away from these projects.  I posit that Shell was never serious about carbon credits.  They deliberately focused on the voluntary market knowing that there is an inadequacy in the regulatory framework, allowing greenwashing.  Now that the price has dropped, and the framework is being tightened, they exited. Terence Nunis Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant President, Red Sycamore Global

Singapore-based firms raised US$4.05 billion across 369 deals in the first nine months of 2024.  This is a slight decline from US$4.3 billion and 410 deals in the same period in 2023.  Despite the dip, Singapore remains a top destination for venture capital, ranking 7th globally behind Silicon Valley, London, New York City, Tel Aviv, Los Angeles, and Boston.  Singapore captured the largest share of venture capital in ASEAN, accounting for 58% of total deal volume and 68% of deal value.  Local general technology firms secured US$3.2 billion across 273 deals, slightly down from US$3.3 billion and 292 deals a year ago.  Deep technology firms raised US$800 million across 96 deals, compared to US$1 billion and 118 deals in the same period in 2023.  Deep technology refers to high-tech innovation in engineering or significant scientific advances.  The Singapore government announced an investment of S$440 million to attract more venture capital firms to invest in local deep technology startups.  This brings the total government funding under the Startup SG Equity scheme to over S$1 billion. Investments in Singapore’s ESG startup ecosystem have been growing significantly.  In 2021, investments in startups reached S$14.7 billion, growing by more than 45% per annum between 2017 and 2021.  This strong growth trend indicates a robust environment for ESG startups.  Enterprise Singapore (ESG) has been actively supporting startups through various programmes.  In 2021, ESG partnered with 22,100 enterprises to build new business capabilities, innovate, and expand overseas.  This support is expected to catalyse S$17.9 billion in value-add and create 23,300 skilled jobs over the next few years.  The ESG startup ecosystem in Singapore is diverse, with significant growth in sectors like green technology, non-profits, social innovation, social entrepreneurship, and climate change.  These sectors are attracting substantial investments and partnerships.  Singapore-based startups are expanding their reach internationally.  Many enterprises are exploring new markets in China and Southeast Asia, particularly Vietnam, Malaysia, and Indonesia.  This international expansion is supported by ESG’s efforts to engage foreign partners through virtual missions, webinars, and market forums. Terence Nunis Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant Chief Executive Officer, Equinox GEMTZ

Frankly, people who take financial advice from these people are idiots.  During a parliamentary session on 13th November 2024, MAS board member, Alvin Tan Sheng Hui, emphasised the need for tighter oversight of financial influencers (finfluencers).  The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has issued guidelines clarifying that any individual who is remunerated for making recommendations or expressing opinions on buying, selling, or holding investment products will be considered as providing financial advice.  Even if the individual is not remunerated, they will be considered to have provided financial advice if they make such recommendations regularly.  Over the past three years, MAS has taken enforcement action against six individuals for providing unlicensed financial advice.  MAS regularly advises the public to deal only with individuals and institutions regulated by MAS.  They maintain an Investor Alert List to highlight unregulated individuals who may have been mistakenly perceived as being licensed. In 2022, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) took action against an individual who was providing unlicensed financial advice through social media.  The individual promoted high-risk investment products without proper disclosure, leading to several complaints from followers who suffered financial losses.  Another case involved a finfluencer who promoted a particular investment fund without disclosing that they were being compensated by the fund’s management company.  This lack of transparency led to MAS issuing a warning and requiring the influencer to cease such promotions until proper disclosures were made.  MAS has also received complaints about finfluencers who share general financial tips and insights, which followers misinterpret as personalised financial advice.  While these influencers were not providing direct financial advice, the confusion led to concerns about the potential risks to consumers. The Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre (FIDREC) reported a significant rise in scam-related claims, with many involving financial influencers.  Scammers also use the credibility of finfluencers to promote fraudulent schemes, leading to an increase in complaints and enforcement actions by MAS. Terence Nunis Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant Chief Executive Officer, Equinox GEMTZ

On the 14th November, at 1300h, I will be a speaker at AlterCOP29.   Climate change is an existential threat to our quality of life.  Addressing climate change is also an unprecedented economic opportunity.  We have had four industrial revolutions, with the last being AI.  Could this be the fifth?  A necessary advance to meet the challenge of the age?  The carbon trading system and the carbon tax, as we have it now, is not enough.  The voluntary market is not working.  We need a new paradigm. We cannot depend on contributions to the Loss & Damage Fund to meet the costs of addressing the projected GDP loss due to climate change.  It is time to democratise the process, create a fungible carbon trading market, and build a secondary market so that we can generate the capital to fund the developments we need to meet the threat of inclement weather, rising sea levels and potential loss of food security.  I intend to lay out a skeleton of such a framework so that we can get that conversation moving forward.  We are all stakeholders in this. It is our right to have a seat at that table of carbon credits – the new oil.   If you are interested, please register here: https://lnkd.in/gq___rPC.  The event was fully subscribed, but the organiser has kindly agreed to open up more seats. Terence Nunis Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant President, Red Sycamore Global

A look back at COP28, at Dubai.  Climate change financing is at a crucial juncture.  It is our hope that we can break the deadlock between the developed countries and the Global South, although I am doubtful.  There is still much to be done, and we are far from it.  Perhaps, after all that was said and done, a lot has been said, but little has been done.  The onus is upon us to push that discussion as stakeholders.  We are all citizens of this one planet. Terence Nunis Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant President, Red Sycamore Global

Thanks to the hard work of The Philippine Embassy in Singapore and One East Asia, in partnership with Chez Suzette, for bringing Didier Alarcon’s “In Your Eyes”, a visually compelling love letter from a father to his daughter under the banner of ART Trek 1.  I highly recommend the food at Chez Suzette. Terence Nunis Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant Chief Executive Officer, Equinox GEMTZ

“Excess” forest cover does not mean excess carbon credits, or even if there are carbon credits.  That is not how this works.  Forests may be a basis for nature-based solution, the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) carbon credits for the voluntary market. The first step is to establish baselines.  Baselines are determined by estimating the emissions that would occur without REDD+ activities.  This involves historical data on deforestation rates and carbon stock levels in forests.  From there, monitoring and verification are conducted using satellite imagery, ground surveys, and other methods to track changes in forest cover and carbon stocks.  This is the data used to calculate the actual emissions from deforestation and forest degradation.  The difference between the baseline emissions and the actual emissions represents the emission reductions achieved through REDD+ activities. Independent third-party organisations verify the emission reductions to ensure accuracy and credibility.  Certified credits are issued based on the verified reductions.  The problem is that many of these verification and validation entities have had some controversies and credibility issues.  Verra is the most egregious example. REDD+ credits, often referred to as TREES Credits under the Architecture for REDD+ Transactions (ART), are issued to represent the verified emission reductions.  For there to be carbon credits, it must be established that there is additionality and permanence.  Additionality is ensuring emission reductions are additional to what would have occurred without REDD+ activities.  Permanence is ensuring emission reductions are long-lasting and not reversed over time.  The third major factor for consideration is leakage, preventing unintended increases in emissions outside the project area. Examples of REDD+ projects include projects that prevent deforestation in the Amazon rainforest, and initiatives that promote sustainable logging practices and reforestation.  Both have some controversy, and there remains scepticism about whether there really is additionality.  As it is the verification and validation standards are cursory, because we are dealing with the voluntary market.  These credits are worth very little.  There is plenty of reports and data that call the effectiveness of REDD+ system into question. Terence Nunis Terence K. J. Nunis, Consultant President, Red Sycamore Global