The Clean Energy Ministerial of the G20 is scheduled to end on Saturday with a joint statement on increasing renewable energy deployment, possibly phasing down of fossil fuels and other aspects of climate crisis mitigation. Climate finance, critical minerals and fossil fuels are very sticky issues according to observers. The Russia-Ukraine security crisis could also put a shadow on the release of the joint statement. But the statement is critical ahead of COP28 to be held in Dubai in November, said Dan Jørgensen, Denmark’s minister for climate policy who is attending the ministerial as an invitee. He expects strong language on the 1.5 degree C goal, on fossil fuels and increasing renewable energy allocation. Excerpts:

What are your expectations from the G20 on the climate crisis?

It’s quite clear that as a global community we do need to fundamentally change how we produce and consume energy if we are to stay below 1.5 degree C warming. No doubt G20 countries need to be at the core of this effort since they are responsible for 80% of global emissions. We are a small country and we are not a member of the G20 but we have been invited because of our experiences with green transformations. I hope that the conclusions of this meeting will be ambitious and they will focus on the need to phase out or phase down fossil fuels and at the same time increase renewable energy capacity and energy efficiency. I hope India will lead as a facilitator and be able to get the other countries on board.

G20 has an interesting mix of countries both rich and emerging with very different economic priorities. Do you think they will have consensus on phasing down fossil fuels?

It’s clear that G20 is a mix of very different kinds of countries but we are all on the same boat. A small country like Denmark and a huge country like India has a lot in common because climate change affects us all. We know that climate change is affecting billions of people across the planet right now. There is a momentum and understanding among countries on the need to act now. Another thing that has happened is that renewables technology has developed, they are cheaper and easier and more rational to deploy compared to fossil alternatives. Denmark built an offshore wind farm back in 1991. It was difficult and expensive but today offshore wind can compete with coal. That gives me some optimism that we can agree in spite of different circumstances in countries.

There is a deep trust deficit among rich and emerging countries on the lack of climate finance for energy transition. How do you think that will be addressed?

I think the lack of finance for climate is something that needs to be remedied as soon as possible. Frankly, it’s quite embarrassing that developed countries have not managed to allocate the 100 billion dollars per year as had been promised. My own country, Denmark, will be paying more than our share. I hope this year will be the year when that 100-billion-dollar promise is met and it looks like it will. We need to be better at climate financing with the multilateral development banks. This is one of the important issues for G20.

You as a member of the High Ambition Coalition have called on the G20 to resolve to keep warming under 1.5 degree C. Do you think that will make it to the communique likely to come out today?

I think it’s very clear from science that if we don’t stay below 1.5 degree C then for some countries on this planet it will be a catastrophe. It’s not acceptable. I hope there will be a line among G20 countries acknowledging that we should do everything we can to keep global warming under 1.5 degree C.

Some countries are saying emissions will be phased down as opposed to fossil fuel emissions. Do you think there will be a lot of talk on technologies such as carbon capture and storage going forward?

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says we do need carbon capture and storage if we are to stay below 1.5 degree C. In Denmark we are using carbon capture and storage as a part of our strategy and I don’t really see it as being that controversial. Its not something we should use instead of renewable energy or green transition. It should be used in hard to abate sectors.

One of the most contentious issues is the effort by certain developed countries to say the donor base for Loss and Damage and other climate finance should be expanded to include emerging economies. What are your thoughts on that?

Even though I think that developed countries should pay more, climate financing is not enough. We have to acknowledge it. There is no way around looking at alternative sources of finance. From the Danish government’s side we have suggested why not put a levy on maritime transport? A levy on maritime transport will be good because it will help make transformation to more renewable technologies but also bring substantial revenue to say finance a Loss and Damage fund.

What is your impression of India’s G20 Presidency?

It’s very good for the global discussion on fighting climate change that India has this Presidency. It’s an important year. We are approaching the most important UN Climate meeting (COP) since Paris and what comes of the G20 on these issues will be significant for COP28. I am very impressed with the government’s work on renewable energy. We couldn’t have a better Presidency than we have.