Climate Week NYC Recap Highlights, Part 1: Thinking Globally – CleanTechnica

---

Support CleanTechnica’s work through a Substack subscription or on Stripe.

---

---

Climate Week NYC covers topics related to climate change running alongside the UN Climate Summit. I had followed coverage before, but this was my first time covering it. I was a bit naïve in that attempt, as there were almost a thousand official Climate Week events on the calendar, several major events that were not listed, and multiple get-togethers and meetings on the side. And this was not just Ted-talk-style short speeches. Many of these events were hours long with multiple sessions and speakers. Discussions ranged from practical to highly technical, with topics spanning from policy and economic development to education and volunteering. Participants ranged from world and financial leaders to innovators and activists. Much of the discussion was backed by extensive research. A website like CleanTechnica could just cover and follow up on the topics discussed at Climate Week NYC for the next year and still not have them all fully explored by the time the next Climate Week comes around!

Feeling a bit overwhelmed, I tried to sample a range of topics. This is just a small part of the whole, and I intend on following up on many of these discussions in more depth. The following represent some of the highlights of my experience.

A Late Start from an International Perspective

I started the week in Sweden, where I experienced a range of mass transit and electric vehicles. The overall experience was an improvement over NYC, if not yet perfect (most buses and ferries tended to be biodiesel, rather than electric). However, that helped to frame the rest of the week from an international perspective.

On the way home, I received a Bloomberg Green email highlighting the trip of 8 Venture Capitalists to China. Overall, China has come to dominate clean technology development. They asked a pointed question: “(Are) there were any remaining pockets of the clean energy transition where European and US companies still stood a chance of being competitive?… Yes, but only if Western companies include working with Chinese ones as part of their plans to scale.”

This got me thinking about what kinds of international collaboration might be possible and the barriers that stand in the way of progress.

However, after landing, I was confronted with Trump’s foolish address to the UN, what Bill McKibben called “The Stupidest Speech in UN History.”

Here in NYC, people were feeling discouraged. Many thought that the global effort to combat climate change was set back. In the past, the US has been seen as a global leader, with smaller allies falling in line with our policies. Would other countries follow our lead down this destructive path?

Stepping Back to Reset My Perspective

After such a depressing display from the US President, I took part in the fun and surprisingly insightful “Building Influence Without Authority: A LEGO® Serious Play® Workshop for Climate Leaders” from Future Led and Climate Play. During the workshop, we created simple models that helped to map out the challenge, step into the world of the people who we need to influence, and “build a bridge” to connect to their perspective. It can be easy to dismiss these types of exercises as simplistic, but they can often be very helpful, especially at points of frustration. I focused on influencing the people who feel threatened by technological and trade disruptions. This is often legacy industries, the workers within those industries, and the politicians enabled by those interests. The clean technology and trade disruption has developed to the point where it is poised to increase economic benefit and jobs overall. However, the economics and jobs available will change due to creative destruction. The exchange of value in trade tends to provide more value, but national roles change. Standing in the way of change creates a long-term, systemic decline, but people also are afraid of losing their current job or pension tied to legacy industries. I came away with the insight that more work needs to be done to facilitate the transition, retrain, and cushion the side effects of change to ensure people realize the potential benefit.

I then joined a Carbon Graph webinar: “From Data to Decision-Making: Proving the Business Case for Sustainability with Life Cycle Assessments.” This webinar helped illustrate why Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is such an important tool, not only to maximize net impact, but to also maximize impact for each dollar invested. Taking that pragmatic, big picture approach helped to ground my perspective in the information to come.

The World Realigns Toward Multilateral Climate Action

Attention shifted to the UN Climate Summit 2025. The UN Secretary General kicked it off with a reaffirmation of what many of us already know:

“Clean energy is powering jobs, growth and sustainable development. Generating the fastest and cheapest electricity. Insulating economies from volatile fossil fuel markets. Providing energy security and sovereignty. And helping to deliver clean and affordable energy for all.

“Despite vast fossil fuel subsidies distorting markets, clean energy received double the investment of fossil fuels last year.

“The bottom-line: clean is competitive, and climate action is imperative.”

Following the Secretary General, the leaders of different nations spoke, often highlighting their announced or forthcoming National Determined Commitments (NDC’s), setting targets to reduce emissions and address the impacts of climate change.

Lula da Silva of Brazil embraced a global leadership position as COP30 host to bring nations together for multilateral action toward a new, just, prosperous, and sustainable economic paradigm. China made headlines for a speech that largely stayed the course, reflecting previous speeches, with added emphasis on building confidence, living up to responsibilities, and deepening cooperation. Modest NDCs were announced that most expect them to beat again years ahead of time.

Additional speeches covered a wide range of national perspectives. The EU seemed to be balancing ambitious aspirations with political complexities that prevented them from submitting NDCs by the September 25 deadline. Some developing countries emphasized that they were paying the price for the cumulative emissions that made the developed world rich. Developing countries often focused on their efforts to reduce their already relatively small per capita emissions, often seeking financing to take them further on the path of sustainable development. Others were more focused on justice and surviving the impact of climate change on their countries, pleading for more global cooperation. Many larger countries highlighted their technology and major projects, while other smaller countries highlighted practical efforts, like teaching traditional boat building.

The countries had different perspectives. However, all were intent on addressing climate change with a sense of urgency. Whether they were the countries we tend to cast as our allies or those that we tend to frame as opponents, they all sounded more reasonable than Trump.

The US president is increasingly putting his country on the wrong side of history. Luckily, the countries at the summit did not seem to want to join him. While some may lament the US demise as the claimed “leader of the free world,” we could be seeing the start of a more multilateral, equitable, and sustainable world order.

New Hope in Trade

With renewed faith in global leadership, I started a new day with “Accelerating Climate Action through Global Trade” from the New York Climate Exchange and Pace University, moderated by Dr. Stephen Hammer.

Professor Dan Esty of Yale Law School and the Yale School of the Environment, formerly with the World Trade Organization (WTO), started off with a speech highlighting how trade has shifted from being the source of problems to the creator of resilient economies. The UN seemed to be going through a low point after Trump’s speech. However, law still matters, rules-based trade still matters, and international institutions still matter, even if some are “willfully ignorant of history and why we have these institutions.”

Esty highlighted that many headwinds represent opportunities. While there are issues with trade structure, that creates opportunities to advance the climate change agenda. We can rebuild from non-cooperation to take the mission more seriously. The purpose of promoting sustainable development can become more of the focus, rather than gaining a trade advantage. The system can be better fit for purpose. “Free riders” with uninternalized externalities can be addressed. Penalties, such as countervailing tariffs, can shift how we subsidize to support sustainability, rather than fossil fuels.

This then led to a panel discussion, starting with a legal overview from Professor Nicholas Robinson, a global pioneer in modern environmental law. He highlighted a unanimous advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice that clarified an interconnected, integrated approach where every state holds responsibility. Not cutting emissions is a breach of those responsibilities. Countries need to reduce environmental impact with assessment tools, and subsidies for fossil fuels are unlawful. While the court’s opinions are non-binding, and change can take time, they set the stage for further change. As a result, penalties and trade barriers could increasingly be implemented on countries for subsidizing fossil fuels, whereas they now often tend to be applied to countries subsidizing clean technology. As a result, it could “set up a series of dominoes” where it becomes inevitable that “change is going to happen.” Nepal was mentioned as an example, having removed trade barriers for electric vehicles, while increasing taxes on fossil fuels, leading to adoption that is leapfrogging developed countries.

The topic then shifted to the developing world ​with Chinelo Anohu of Mutandis Africa Group and Africa Investment Forum, who focused on equitable, sustainable development. She emphasized that those who have benefited from development using fossil fuels have a responsibility to those impacted. In applying investment, it is important to ensure infrastructure is fit for purpose and that the private sector takes a cleaner perspective. Each country and community has different needs and dynamics. The approach cannot one-size-fits-all.

To foster sustainable development, there is an overall need to bring certainty and transparency. More finance should be mobilized with longer terms to leverage investments. Not only for the transition to sustainability, but also to ensure a just transition, to get the development to work for people. The perspective should also extend beyond clean energy to support a broader approach, including biodiversity. Educating people and aligning with their needs will help make standards stick.

In the Q&A section, I went back to my workshop insights. If countries embrace their emerging roles in a more sustainable world, then they will tend to end up further ahead overall. If countries try to do it alone, then they will be left behind in the transformation. However, the transition and associated creative destruction will not be painless. This can lead to backlash that serves as a barrier to green free trade. What measures are associated with facilitating and financing the economic transition that goes with the green transition?

The response was that focusing on the economic transition was “essential.” For example, in Nigeria, the National Pension Commission disassociated pensions from jobs, setting up a contributory pension scheme. Despite some resistance, this type of safety net program helps to weaken ties to legacy industries and enables a more dynamic economy that better meets climate objectives. “While pushing what is good, (we should) take a human face” to reduce negative consequences. Facilitating the transition needs to be included as part of development strategies but is often missing.

To achieve medium- to long-term impact, increasing access to financing and addressing short-term challenges was seen as vital. The need for this financing of the economic transition is currently a gap in the data. However, it was emphasized to not let imperfect data get in the way of acting on good data. Tools need to be developed to provide protection. In communities, people are suffering differently from their leaders. There is an urgency for change, and a need to create a new paradigm that incorporates the public sector, the private sector, and the people impacted. Cooperating to support the “human face” will foster a circular economy and social equity.

However, youth is an asset in the developing world. Young people can drive the transformation from legacy industry and engage in new trade dynamics. They need to understand the power within them, embrace the fast-rising technology, and change the economic narrative.

The Global Rise of Clean Technology

As the week was coming to an end, Bloomberg’s Zero Podcast came out with “The Extraordinary Rise of Electric Cars in Developing Countries,” incorporating insights from the Electric Vehicle Outlook 2025 report. Overall, the fastest moving countries, like Ethiopia and Nepal, let China in and let the consumers decide. Letting consumers decide was once an argument against EVs, but now it is an argument for them. The role of China brings up another topic that I heard discussed several times. Beyond looking at a country’s emissions, metrics should be developed to look at their overall impact on global emissions. Some countries with low emissions within their borders enable massive emissions globally through the sale of fossil fuels. Meanwhile, China is the largest current overall emitter, despite having half of the per capita and half the cumulative emissions of the US, as well as a rapid rate of clean technology adoption. However, they are also enabling massive emissions reductions and sustainable development globally with the clean technology being developed and produced.

That sets up part two of my recap, which will focus more on state and local policy, the development of clean technology, and the action being taken in communities.