On November 18, 2025, the world’s attention turned to Belém, Brazil, where the COP30 climate summit convened leaders, scientists, and activists amid mounting evidence that global warming is accelerating and its impacts are hitting home in ways few can ignore. The event was marked by the presentation of the latest Climate Change Performance Index, a comprehensive ranking that scrutinizes the climate commitments and actions of 63 countries responsible for 90% of global greenhouse gas emissions. The findings, unveiled by Germanwatch, the NewClimate Institute, and CAN International, sent shockwaves through the summit: the United States, under President Donald Trump, now sits among the bottom four nations in the fight against climate change, alongside Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Russia.
This annual index, now in its 21st year, evaluates countries across four key areas: greenhouse gas reduction (the heaviest weighted), renewable energy development, energy use, and climate policies. Yet, in a telling sign of global inaction, the top three spots remain vacant—no country, the report insists, is doing enough to warrant a gold, silver, or bronze. Denmark, with its strong commitment to renewables, leads in fourth place, followed by the United Kingdom, Morocco, and Chile. Spain, under the stewardship of Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Ecological Transition Sara Aagesen, climbed five places to 14th, earning a “high” performance rating. The report credits Spain’s progress to “substantial emissions reductions with EU law integrated into national action plans,” and highlights the growing importance of green taxation and climate-friendly public procurement.
But it was the United States’ dramatic fall that dominated discussions. According to the index, “The U.S. receives very low ratings across the board, for GHG Emissions, Renewable Energy, Climate Policy, and Energy Use.” The report’s authors attribute this decline to a sweeping rollback of climate policies under President Trump, noting, “With the second Donald Trump presidency, there has been a large-scale rollback of climate policies at the national and international levels.” The president’s open denial of human-caused climate change, they say, has led to the revocation of key policies supporting renewable energy and greenhouse gas reduction, while simultaneously promoting fossil fuel expansion.
Internationally, Trump’s administration has taken a confrontational stance. The United States has withdrawn from the Paris Agreement—a move set to take effect in January 2026—and notably, no U.S. government negotiators were dispatched to COP30. The White House even threatened sanctions and tariffs in October against countries supporting a new tax on emissions from international shipping, further straining global cooperation.
Despite the absence of official U.S. negotiators, American voices advocating for climate action were present in Belém. Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, speaking at the Spanish pavilion, condemned the Trump administration’s close ties to the fossil fuel industry. “The Trump administration is corrupted by the fossil fuel industry,” he declared, as reported by EFE. “It is implementing an agenda that was bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry.” California Governor Gavin Newsom, also in attendance, didn’t mince words: “Trump is temporary, he is reckless, he is chaotic. People need to stand up. You need to stand up to a bully.” Newsom’s remarks echoed a broader sentiment among many at COP30: the fight against climate change must transcend any single administration’s policies.
Yet while the political drama unfolded, scientists and policymakers at COP30 were keen to stress that the climate crisis is not just about carbon dioxide. According to reporting by The Conversation, the summit’s agenda included a critical focus on so-called “short-lived climate pollutants” (SLCPs)—potent gases like methane, tropospheric ozone, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), nitrogen oxides, ammonia, volatile organic compounds, and carbon monoxide. Unlike carbon dioxide, which lingers in the atmosphere for centuries, SLCPs are “sprinters,” packing a fast and powerful punch before fading away in years or decades.
Methane, for example, lasts about 12 years in the atmosphere but traps heat 80 times more effectively than carbon dioxide during that period. Since 2019, atmospheric methane has risen by over 3%, and it’s now responsible for roughly a third of global warming since the industrial revolution. Aggressive cuts to methane and other SLCPs could deliver rapid benefits, slowing warming before mid-century—a timeline that matters most for vulnerable nations already feeling the brunt of climate impacts.
Other SLCPs, such as HFCs used in refrigeration and air conditioning, are also under scrutiny. The 2016 Kigali amendment to the Montreal Protocol aims for an 80% global phase-down of HFCs by 2050, but progress is hampered by the costs of alternatives for developing countries and a persistent black market. Meanwhile, ground-level ozone, formed from reactions involving methane and nitrogen oxides, not only heats the planet but also harms human health, crops, and ecosystems.
Efforts to rein in SLCPs are gaining traction. Initiatives like the Global Methane Pledge, launched at COP26 in Glasgow, aim to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030. However, the pace is lagging—key signatories like the EU and U.S. are not moving fast enough, while major emitters such as China and India have yet to join. New programs, including the Super Pollutant Country Action Accelerator, are helping developing nations curb non-CO₂ emissions, and influential organizations like the Global Methane Hub and Clean Air Fund are pushing the issue at COP30. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is set to release a landmark report on SLCPs in 2027, which could provide the foundation for more ambitious global policies.
All these discussions are not academic. As USA TODAY and The Augusta Chronicle report, climate change is already reshaping daily life for millions. Rising global temperatures, driven largely by burning fossil fuels—coal, oil, and gas, which account for about 68% of greenhouse gas emissions and nearly 90% of carbon dioxide emissions—are pushing up grocery prices due to crop failures, increasing energy bills during heatwaves, and damaging infrastructure through floods and storms. Health risks are growing, with heat stress and respiratory issues on the rise. Longer allergy seasons, higher household costs, and disruptions to outdoor jobs are becoming the new normal.
Extreme weather is also forcing communities to relocate, destroying beaches, and degrading natural areas through wildfires. Crop yields for staples like rice, wheat, corn, coffee, cocoa, and hops are falling, driving up prices and lowering quality. Insurance companies are pulling back from high-risk areas, leaving homeowners with costly or unavailable coverage, while utilities face mounting repair bills from wildfires and storms—costs that ultimately land on consumers’ shoulders.
The message from Belém is clear: the world is at a crossroads. The rollback of U.S. climate policies under Trump has cast a long shadow, but the science and the lived experience of climate change are driving a renewed urgency. Whether through cutting carbon dioxide, slashing methane, or tackling other short-lived pollutants, the tools to slow global warming are within reach. The question, as COP30 participants debate and protest, is whether governments will seize the moment—or let another year slip by while the planet heats up.
