It’s that time again! Countries are gearing up to submit their new Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) by February 2025, and they can’t just be any updates – they need real ambition and have clear commitments to justice. Climate impacts are already here, and world leaders need to prove they’re serious about moving away from fossil fuels and shifting to renewable energy fast and boldly enough.

The best NDCs should take a hard look at the climate footprint of the fossil fuels they export and set out clear steps to reduce it. They need a solid plan for cutting fossil fuel production, with no new extraction projects. And especially for Global North countries, they need to set fair phase out dates – no later than 2031.

 

At 350.org, we’ve huddled over the NDCs from some of the biggest fossil fuels players: Australia, Azerbaijan, Brazil, Canada, Indonesia, Japan, Norway, UAE, Uganda, UK and the US. We want to go beyond just checking boxes: does each NDC set ambitious energy goals? Do they prioritize equity and fairness? Is the process transparent, with space for local communities? These are the questions behind our ‘traffic light scorecard’, where each country earns a rating that reflects how close they are to meeting climate goals. Our traffic light system isn’t just about pass-fail; it shows how close (or far) each country is to meeting those climate justice goals, especially in the energy sector.

What we’re looking into?

NDCs are an opportunity. They can set up countries in the path for creating jobs, attracting global investments, ensuring energy security, building accountability for a just transition and demonstrating climate leadership.

At COP28 in Dubai the decision agreed to by all countries was crystal clear: ‘pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5C.’ – this means that if countries are serious about it, they will develop new climate plans that not only set ambitious targets for 2035 but also revisit and strengthen 2030 targets and long-term strategies: shifting their economies off fossil fuels, halting and reversing deforestation and degradation, transforming food systems, and building resilience in this critical decade. It’s a wide effort, that needs to encompass all fronts.

At 350.org, we are going to focus our analysis on the energy goals and how they are framed. This means we will look into GHG emissions, countries’ plans for moving away from fossil fuels and their targets for increasing the use of renewables in their energy metrics – all that taking into account global and local justice principles. We don’t want to see NDCs committing to any transition, we want NDCs committing to a just energy transition.

These are the three main questions we will analyze:

Does the NDC include an economy-wide Greenhouse Gases (GHG) reduction target, aligned with the 1.5C goal? We want to know if the proposed NDC is aligned with the 1.5C as the threshold for maximum heating of our planet. Being aligned means committing to at least 60% reduction on GHG emissions in comparison to 2019 levels. So another important aspect to consider is if the baseline year accurate. And when countries commit to reduce GHG emissions, how are they planning to do it? Does the NDC rely on dangerous distractions, like carbon capture and storage or blue hydrogen? Does it take into account equity and differentiated timelines for the GN countries? These are some of the questions we’re considering while analyzing the GHG emissions reduction targets in the NDCs.

Does the NDC include fossil fuel phase down/out targets and no new fossil fuel expansion? We know that burning and financing any new fossil fuel projects, anywhere, is unacceptable if we want to stop the climate crisis. So countries NDCs must acknowledge that and commit to a fossil fuels phase out (or, at least a phase down) as soon as possible – without relying on dangerous or unproven solutions, and putting people’s rights always at the forefront of the transition to renewable energy. Governments must enact policies to cut both consumption and production of fossil fuels in a just and equitable way, in line with a 1.5C emissions trajectory, and with a minimum benchmark of not opening new upstream coal, oil, and gas. They also need to that taking into account the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, meaning that rich polluting countries in the global North that have historically contributed the most to the climate crisis must do that even faster. We need to be clear here: we don’t want to replace one broken system by another, so justice principles need to be explicitly mentioned. And we’ll look closely into that.

Does the NDC include measurable and specific renewables targets, aligned with tripling renewables globally and respecting  justice principles? Does it include energy efficiency (also crucial for reducing energy demand)? Does it consider – and consult with — workers, impacted communities and civil society as a whole? Do the plans around consider social, environmental and economic justice? Does the NDC take into account a “just” and “equitable” transition? For an effectively just transition, we need to see countries significantly scaling-up climate finance, to ensure that tripling renewable energy capacity by 2030 is feasible. And, beyond that, we need transparent and detailed plans, backed by strong government policy and action which includes civil society. For the NDCs from rich polluting global North countries, we will also look into common but differentiated responsibilities: does the plan include a fair share of good climate finance – not only for upgrading the energy systems internally, but also for helping the transition elsewhere? A 1.5C world cannot be achieved without significantly ramping up climate finance to support a just transition in lower-income countries. Wealthier countries need to dramatically increase grant-based finance.

 

Based on these questions, we will rate countries’ NDCs as:

Green in the country is on track with clear, ambitious goals, prioritizing fairness.	Yellow if some progress is shown but with room for improvement.	Red if they’re ‘missing the mark’ and bringing us away from the 1.5C heating goal.

 

 

So, how are the big players doing?

The US, Canada, Norway, Australia, and the UK are among the biggest fossil fuel producers, but most still don’t have solid plans to stop digging up and burning fossil fuels. The UK has some groundwork to phase out fuels by 2031, which is a good start. As for the others, we’re not expecting them to submit updated NDCs by COP29.

The UAE, Brazil, and Azerbaijan: often called the ‘Troika’ of oil production, have unique responsibilities in the energy transition. The UAE stands out here – with the economic capacity to manage a fast phase out of oil and gas. So, it could (and should!) move quicker than most countries. In Brazil, civil society groups say the country needs to cut oil and gas use by 38% and 42% by 2035 to hit the 1.5ºC target. Meanwhile, Azerbaijan, with less capacity to transition, may need more time, but it still needs to come to the table with a plan in place.

Then there’s Indonesia, where civil society has raised red flags about the lack of transparency in its NDC. They’re asking for clearer timelines on phasing out fossil fuels, and to keep everything above board. 

 

More than words on paper

Countries have until February 2025 to submit their new NDCs, and they need to be more than words on paper. They must protect communities, support a just energy transition, and drive real progress towards the 1.5ºC goal. The clock’s ticking, and we’re watching closely.