That's it from us. This live coverage of the COP27 climate summit was brought to you by the BBC's climate editor, Justin Rowlatt, environment correspondent Matt McGrath, science correspondent Victoria Gill and climate reporter Georgina Rannard - all reporting from Sharm el-Sheikh, together with updates written by Esme Stallard, Patrick Hughes, Greg Brosnan, Elsa Maishman, Thomas Mackintosh and Jen Meierhans.

The page was edited by Heather Sharp, Sarah Fowler, Jeremy Gahagan, Tiffany Wertheimer, Dulcie Lee and Rob Corp.

You can read more on the climate summit here: Climate costs deal struck but no fossil fuel progress

And don't miss Matt McGrath's five key takeaways from the summit.

We'll soon be closing our live coverage of the UN's COP27 climate summit in Egypt. Here's a quick recap of what's been happening:

• After marathon late-night negotiations, nearly 200 countries struck a historic deal to establish a new fund for climate "loss and damage" - it will give money to the nations hit hardest by the effects of climate change
• There was disappointment among some that no new commitments on phasing out fossil fuels and cutting greenhouse gas emissions were included in the summit's overarching agreement
• The existing pledge to try to limit global warming to the key threshold of 1.5C above pre-industrial levels was retained - but there is concern it is slipping out of reach, with UN chief António Guterres saying a "giant leap" on climate ambition is still needed and the planet is still "in the emergency room"

Image source, Getty Images

With living costs rising across large swathes of the world, many people are finding themselves trying to get by on tighter budgets. But there are still changes that will both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and save money - and the BBC has looked at a few of them:

• Reduce your energy use by using a microwave or airfryer not an oven, taking shorter showers, switching to LED lightbulbs or turning your heating down a degree. You could even turn down temperature of the water in your radiators or the brightness of your TV - or raise the temperate in your fridge a little.
• Insulating your home can make a difference - even just reducing draughts can help. There are various schemes in the UK to help improve insulation in low-income homes.
• Buy second-hand: Charity shops have reported a surge in customers as the cost of living crisis combines with a"shift in attitude" towards second-hand clothes. But buying pre-loved also gets rid of all the carbon emissions from producing and transporting new products.
• Cutting down on red meat in your diet reduces your greenhouse gas emissons - and meat can be expensive too. Our colleagues at BBC food have put together these vegetarian recipes costing £1 per serving.

It's been a long couple of weeks for climate delegates, activists and reporters attending the climate summit in Egypt's Sharm el-Sheikh resort. Below are some moments captured from the conference.

Image source, Getty Images

Image source, EPA

Image source, Getty Images

Image source, Getty Images

Image source, Reuters

Image source, Reuters

All eyes next year will be on the United Arab Emirates (UAE) when COP28 will be held in Dubai next November.

The Gulf state, which has grown wealthy largely from oil production, is among the countries with the highest per capita greenhouse gas emissions globally.

COP28 will be held at Expo City Dubai, which the government says aims to be “a model for innovative urban districts” and a “clean and green tech hub”.

The Climate Action Tracker website rates the UAE’s targets and policies as “highly insufficient”, although it is one of the few countries to have submitted updated commitments ahead of COP27.

CAT says the country is on track for emissions to increase by at least 30% above 2010 levels by 2030, despite targets to reduce them.

The UAE plans to scale up oil and gas production, but is also investing in large solar projects, CAT says.

Also, according to the campaign group Global Witness. the UAE was the country with the highest number of fossil fuel lobbyists - by far - in its delegation at COP27.

Esme Stallard
Climate reporter

Much of the negotiations, or certainly the coverage of them, has focused on fossil fuels and the loss and damage fund.

But in the final overarching agreement - called the cover decision - there are a lot of other new commitments that we haven't seen before from previous climate summits:

• For the first time there are explicit chapters on food, oceans and forests. It shows a recognition of the link between protecting nature and climate change.
• The deal stresses that ongoing geopolitical issues such as Russia's invasion of Ukraine "should not be used as a pretext for backtracking, backsliding or de-prioritizing climate action"
• There is added emphasis on the importance of protecting our water resources
• A figure of $4bn has been given for what needs to be invested in renewable energy by 2030
• Commercial banks have been identified as requiring "transformational" change

Earlier we heard from the UK’s summit representative Alok Sharma, who said how “incredibly disappointed” he was the deal didn’t go further to raise global ambition on cutting the use of fossil fuels to limit global warming.

We've now just heard from UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who welcomed progress at COP27 but said there was "no time for complacency" and "more must be done".

Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has also weighed in, saying the “slowing of momentum on action to keep 1.5 alive and pushback against transition from fossil fuels” was "deeply disappointing".

“Without faster emissions reductions, the loss and damage of climate change increases,” she tweeted., external

Labour’s shadow climate change secretary Ed Miliband has also accused countries of delaying decisions to tackle global warming, saying: “Yet again we hear the unmistakable sound of the can being kicked down the road on the necessary actions to keep global warming to 1.5 degrees - and as a result it is now at grave risk.”

Miliband criticised the "compete absence" of leadership from Sunak.

Image source, EPA

If you're coming to the COP27 story just as the talks end we've got you. Here's a beginners guide to what it's all been about:

• COP stands for Conference of Parties and this is the 27th one
• Leaders from more than 200 countries met in Egypt to thrash out an agreement on how to tackle climate change together
• It was supposed to last for two weeks but ran over by two days as countries couldn't reach a deal
• Then in the early hours of this morning there was finally agreement on creating a fund to help countries ravaged by consequences of climate change such as flooding, rising sea levels and drought
• It's being called a "loss and damage fund" and the next thing to do is work out who pays what
• The summit stuck to existing commitments to keep global temperatures less than 1.5C above where they were in the 19th Century
• Scientists say say millions more people will face potentially devastating effects if we go above this threshold
• Countries at the summit also didn't get anywhere on making new commitments to reduce emissions by cutting the use of fossil fuels like gas and oil
• Poor countries and campaigners welcomed the "loss and damage" deal with excitement, but the head of the United Nations said the planet is "still in the emergency room"

Global leaders have reacted to the landmark deal struck at Egypt's COP27 summit to financially support the nations worst hit by climate change, with one saying he was "very, very excited".

Zambia's environment minister, Collins Nzovu, described it as a "very positive result for 1.3 billion Africans".

Poor countries had been pushing for 30 years for rich countries to help foot the bill for "loss and damage" caused by global warming.

But Frans Timmermans, the EU's climate policy chief, insisted that more should have been done to cut the emissions that cause climate change.

Esme Stallard
Climate reporter

As we've been reporting, a new fund to help the countries worst-hit by the effects of climate change has been agreed in a historic deal.

We don't know the details yet of how much money it will involve, and where the cash will come from.

However, you may remember lots of discussion about the existing pledge of $100bn (£88bn) of climate funding per year from richer countries - so how does that fit in?

This was a pledge agreed in 2009 - with a commitment from developing countries to be delivering the full amount annually by the end of 2020.

That money was for mitigation - to help developing nations move away from fossil fuels and other polluting activities, and also for adaptation, to help developing nations prepare for the worst effects of climate change.

All countries are agreed that funding needs to go towards mitigation and adaptation.

But until now they couldn't agree that money should go towards the third area - loss and damage.

This money is to help developing countries recover from impacts of climate change that they are already suffering from, such as destroyed homes, flooded hospitals and dried out crops.

How much countries will get from the loss and damage fund - and when - is still undecided.

But the previous $100bn commitment still hasn't been reached two years after the deadline, which has left developing nations wary of this new promise of money.

Despite praise for the landmark deal on funding for countries most vulnerable to the impact of climate change, there has also been a great deal of criticism that COP27 did not go far enough to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

We've already heard strong words from UN chief Antonio Guterres who said "our planet is still in the emergency room". Here is some more reaction:

• France's Energy Minister Agnès Pannier-Runacher said that despite progress on the “loss and damage” fund, the deal was not as ambitious as France would have liked, with "no progress" made on efforts to reduce emissions
• Germany’s Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock expressed frustration that the emissions cut and phasing out of fossil fuels were “stonewalled by a number of large emitters and oil producers”
• Norway echoed those thoughts, with its Climate Minister Espen Barth Eide saying “it does not break with [last year's COP26 summit in] Glasgow completely, but it doesn’t raise ambition at all”
• Maldives Environment Minister Aminath Shauna said she was "disheartened" more progress was not made on cutting emissions. The low-lying islands of the Maldives are threatened by climate change because of rising sea levels.

Meanwhile, COP27 chair and Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry, who has faced some criticism over his handling of negotiations, opened the final plenary session apologising for any missteps, which he said were “certainly not intentional”.But in comments quoted by Egyptian website al-Ahram, he later said the loss and damage deal with "a great success" for COP27.

He said participants were leaving with "renewed hope for the future, the future of this planet, and with collective will and greater determination in order to achieve the Paris Agreement's global warming target".

Victoria Gill
Reporting from COP27

The number 1.5C has been ringing in the ears of us science and climate journalists since the Paris Agreement.

At the Paris climate conference in 2015, nations agreed to limit global warming to well below 2C, preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels.

That’s because the science shows there are much more severe consequences of global warming that goes beyond that threshold.

At COP27, 1.5C has essentially been moved into the “science section” of the agreement. At COP26 in Glasgow, it was in the part of the deal that laid out what countries would aim to do – practically – to drive down emissions. They would point their emission-cutting targets at 1.5C.

Here, as it’s part of a scientific chapter, it’s less clearly an item on the international must-do list.

This is something that is genuinely worrying climate campaigners and scientists who say that keeping the world’s eyes on that target is critical to avoid the most damaging impacts of a warming world.

Does 'low-emission' energy mean more gas?published at 11:55 Greenwich Mean Time 20 November 2022

11:55 GMT 20 November 2022

Esme Stallard
Climate reporter

Image source, Reuters

We've mentioned already this morning that the final agreement text has new commitments on energy.

Countries committed to "enhancing a clean energy mix, including low-emission and renewable energy".

But the phrase "low-emission energy" has caused some concern.

There is no formal definition for what this means, unlike renewable energy - which is a natural source of energy like solar or wind that can be replenished.

This has left it open to many different interpretations.

Could it have just been referring to nuclear energy - which is not a renewable energy source but produces no emissions during generation?

Could it have been referring to hydrogen? The EU considers hydrogen to be a "low carbon" energy source, it can be produced from natural gas but then the emissions are captured and stored underground.

But in its loosest form, this wording could also be seen as a green light for further gas production, because although gas is a fossil fuel it produces fewer emissions than other fossil fuels like coal and oil.

Ultimately this agreement is not legally binding. Many countries will go away, interpret it and develop new pledges and laws accordingly.

Some nations have already promised to stop using all fossil fuels for electricity production by 2040 or sooner, including the UK, US and EU.

Victoria Gill
Reporting from COP27

No-one got everything they wanted out of this COP, but they never do.

But judging by the reaction of climate scientists to COP27, the gap between the science and the politics on climate change appears to be getting wider.

The key target of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5C is still in the agreement but there's concern it may be slipping away. As climate scientist Prof Daniela Schmidt from Bristol University put it: “Our current emission trajectories commit us to further warming and to higher risks.”

“The recent months have shown us the impacts climate change is having now with millions of people displaced by floods and loss of life due to heat and drought,” she continued. “The sense of urgency which these events created regrettably have not translated into action at the COP27.”

The physics of climate change doesn’t shift on promises made by countries. And there is little sign here that the drastic emission cuts that are needed this decade will be bolstered by this deal.

“But weaning the world off the heroin of fossil fuels, said Prof Piers Forster from the University of Leeds, “was never going to be a cakewalk”.

Image source, .

The United Nations' secretary for climate change has given his reaction to the deal on a "loss and damage" fund to help the worst-hit countries.

Simon Stiell tweeted that the agreement should leader to greater things - and fast.

Earlier, UN Secretary General António Guterress said the world "still needs a giant leap on climate ambition" as the planet is "still in the emergency room".

Matt McGrath
Environment correspondent

Image source, Reuters

After 14 days the COP27 summit has finally drawn to a close with a landmark deal to create a "loss and damage" fund to help vulnerable countries cope with the impacts of climate change. What were the most important things from the summit?

1. The new funding deal can be seen as the biggest win on climate since Paris: Establishing the loss and damage fund is about more than money or compensation or reparations, it is really about solidarity and rebuilding trust. Despite the dramatic impacts the rising temperatures will inflict on the world, this fund signals that no-one will be left behind.
2. Missed opportunities over emissions: A sharp U-turn on the language around fossil fuels represents for many a big step backwards in fighting against rising temperatures
3. The spirit of 1.5C is strong, but the text is weak: The EU and other developed countries were willing to die on the hill of strengthening the promise to keep the threshold of 1.5C of warming alive - but these efforts were ultimately in vain.
4. The fossil fuel industry has come out of the shadows: Attendees connected to the oil and gas industry were everywhere at COP27 and their influence was clearly reflected in the final text.
5. Democracy really matters for the climate: The undoubted darling of the COP was Brazil's president-elect Luiz Ignacio Lula Da Silva, who electrified the conference with his promise of zero deforestation by 2030. Retention of the US Senate by President Joe Biden's Democrats ensures his Inflation Reduction Act will not be overturned or watered down - putting the United States' carbon cutting goal for 2030 within reach.

You can read more here.

Esme Stallard
Climate reporter

Emission of the greenhouse gases that cause climate change as still rising, external, according to the UN.

It says they are set to go up more than 10% from 2010 levels by 2030, but to avoid breaching that key threshold of 1.5C global temperature rise, they need to fall by 45% in the same timeframe.

So where are all these greenhouse gas emissions coming from?

China is currently the biggest emitter. In 2021, it produced 12.5 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide, the gas that contributes the most to climate change.

But China has a far bigger population that the US which is second on the list.

If we look at emissions per person - so dividing the total emissions by a country's population - we find that the US is higher than China, followed by Russia.

So, if everyone in the world used the same emissions as the average person living in the US, global carbon dioxide emissions would be far higher.

Also, these figures are just a snapshot of what is happening now.

Developed nations have been producing high volumes of emissions since the industrial revolution, around 1850, whereas developing nations have only started doing this more recently.

If we look back at historical emissions since 1850, the US is responsible for 20% of all emissions ever, China (11%), Russia (7%), Brazil (5%) and Indonesia (4%), according to analysis from Carbon Brief., external

Image source, Getty Images

We've been hearing a lot about keeping the global temperature rise to 1.5C to avoid the worst impacts of climate change - but what does it mean?

The figure refers to how much higher, on average, global temperatures are than in the 19th Century, before the industrial revolution.

The planet has already warmed about 1.1C since then. The IPCC, the UN’s panel of climate scientists says many impacts of global warmingare already “irreversible”, with 40% of the world's population now "highly vulnerable" to climate change.

Also, the IPCC and Nasa say a rise of 2C, compared to 1.5C would mean:

• 10 million more people would be at risk of coastal flooding
• Up to twice as many people would struggle to access water because of climate change
• More than a third of the world's population would be exposed to severe heatwaves once every five years - compared to a seventh at 1.5C
• The Arctic would be free of sea-ice once a decade - compared to once per century at 1.5C
• Coral reefs would become virtually non-existent, compared to declining by 70-90% at 1.5C

Also, small island states have long argued that keeping temperatures below 1.5C is critical to their survival.

Georgina Rannard
Reporting from COP27

The sun has come up again here, ending long two nights in Sharm el-Sheikh. There have been exhausted negotiators, high peaks of drama and low moments of confusion.

Talks were deadlocked until Thursday when the EU put forward a proposal that rich nations would pay for climate damage in poor countries. But progress was slow on Friday, and the 1800 deadline slowly ticked by - cue the start of bets on how late this COP would go.

Saturday

Suddenly on Saturday, the EU, quickly followed by other nations, dramatically revealed they were willing to walk away from COP without a deal. I spent the morning lurking around country offices trying to find out what was happening. The New Zealand delegation office kindly supplied me with an excellent coffee - but the important questions was - is COP collapsing?

Image source, Reuters

At lunchtime I saw Pakistan's climate minister Sherry Rehman, a key player, slumped on a chair outside a plenary hall. "We were up all night," she told me.

Rumours continued. Journalists and activists staked out meeting rooms to find the leaders to pick up any hints of the action - I saw what seemed like fury on the face of UK negotiator Alok Sharma rushing between rooms.

Sunday

As the clock ticked into a second night, speculation swung back and forth. A deal was close, then it was hours away.

As energy ebbed away, teams made decisions to stay at COP or come back the next morning. The COP27 presidency said a final meeting would start at 0300 local time, but no-one really believed it.

Image source, Getty Images

And suddenly at 0330 local time, after a fitful nap, it was all go. Leaders filed into the plenary and COP27 President Sameh Shoukry began rapidly gavelling the decisions - that means adopting them with a tap of a small hammer, or gavel.

Journalists and activists rushed back in, and at the crucial moment when the historic loss and damage deal passed, exhausted nations clapped.

It wasn't over yet though. Switzerland immediately called for a suspension of proceedings, saying nations had not had time to read the final political agreement. It seemed a fight could be coming. Nations huddled together. The UK's Alok Sharma strode over to the EU and US delegations - doubtless discussing how far they would compromise on ambition to reduce fossil fuel reliance.

Ministers returned to their seats, their positions clear, and the Sharm el-Sheikh agreement was finally passed.

Esme Stallard
Climate reporter

It has been a long few days, and years some would argue, to get this deal over the line.

And UN Secretary General António Guterres has praised the work of those who have been working and pushing from the sidelines.

In a tweet he said he wanted: "to pay tribute to the women, youth, indigenous people and all members of civil society".

Despite praise for their role, BBC analysis conducted earlier this week, found that the participation of women in the negotiations still remains very low and was down on last years' summit in Glasgow.

Of the 110 world leaders that attended at the beginning of week one - just seven were women.

COP27: Lack of women at negotiations raises concern