A large group of environmental activists surrounded the site of the ongoing COP31 United Nations climate alarmism conference in Antalya, Turkey, on Tuesday, demanding that the countries participate commit as much funding as possible to addressing the alleged climate “crisis” – and commit to abandoning the use of fossil fuels and nuclear energy.
Swedish climate personality Greta Thunberg was among those protesting in the “Blue Zone,” the designated area outside the conference for the public to express itself.
Thunberg warned that “everything and everyone we love is at stake,” demanding conference participants “act to protect and benefit people rather than constantly sacrificing the global majority.”
Various protesting groups highlighted different grievances with conference attendees. Some opposed the use of nuclear energy, despite its potential to significantly reduce carbon emissions, citing the potential threat of radioactive pollution.
Others opposed the perceived marginalizing of impoverished communities perceived to be at the most threat of climate catastrophe. In a press release shared with Breitbart News, leaders of the groups 350.org, APMDD, Climate Action Network (CAN), the Women and Gender Constituency, Demand Climate Justice and Oil Change International – all of whom joined Blue Zone protesters – encouraged governments to resist the pressure from the fossil fuel industry to decline moving away from the widespread use of oil, gas, and minerals.
We are here to remind governments that the transition cannot happen on the fossil fuel industry’s terms. It must be fast, fair and rooted in climate justice,” Gina Cortes of 350.org said. “The time for promises is over. We need governments to deliver a real plan to phase out fossil fuels and ensure no one is left behind.”
“Governments cannot claim to be delivering an energy transition while continuing to approve new coal, oil and gas projects,” Joao Cerqueira of the same organization was quoted as saying. “The science is clear: we need a rapid and fair phase-out of fossil fuels, not another round of promises that allow the industry to carry on business as usual. … We need to break our dependence on fossil fuels, not simply recreate the same systems of corporate control and inequality under a new name.”
“COP” stands for “Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)” and is the most high-profile global summit to discuss how to address future climate challenges; this year is the 31st iteration of the event. Climate activists have for years derided the event as being too favorable to the interests of fossil fuel lobbies and governments who rely heavily on energy exports, accusing hosts of “greenwashing” polluting industries and demanding more funding, in particular for less developed countries and small island nations allegedly facing rising sea levels. The last three COPs have been especially controversial: oil giant the United Arab Emirates (UAE) hosted in 2023, while 2024 host Azerbaijan used its platform to declare fossil fuels a “gift of God.”
In 2025, Bélem, Brazil, hosted, resulting in a joint statement activists panned as insufficiently committed to heavy investments against climate change. That conference was also marred by substandard accommodations and a violent invasion of the conference building by indigenous protesters, prompting condemnation from United Nations officials.
Host Turkey, which is handling administrative duties alongside Australia as a result of an unprecedented hosting dispute, is expected to welcome nearly 100,000 people to Antalya, many traveling by plane and meaningfully expanding their carbon footprints. The Turkish government has promoted the adoption of a climate plan it has named “35 by 35,” in which participating nations agree to increase the amount of demand for “clean” energy to 35 percent by 2035, up from 20 percent today.
The plan has caused some disagreements as many climate activists perceive it to be insufficient action to prevent a climate catastrophe wiping out a significant percentage of the human population. Others have debated the meaning of “clean” energy – natural gas, for example, has attempted to rebrand as a “cleaner” energy source, outraging some in the green movement.
Still others are demanding a focus on financial action: the funding of governments of countries perceived as vulnerable to climate disaster and of novel, cleaner forms of energy.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.