Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share OT26: The $9.5 Billion Contradiction - Why We Fund Fossil Fuels Over Clean Air
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
OT26: The $9.5 Billion Contradiction - Why We Fund Fossil Fuels Over Clean Air
Welcome back to Air Quality Matters and One Take, where we unpack the latest research and reports shaping our understanding of indoor air and the built environment.
This week, I'm diving into the seventh edition of a critical annual report that reads like a global health check—not for people, but for policy. The State of Global Air Quality Funding 2025, produced by the Clean Air Fund and the Climate Policy Initiative, follows the money trail to reveal whether our global investments actually align with our stated goals for clean air, health, and climate action.
The diagnosis? It's deeply concerning and frankly contradictory.
The Shocking Reality:
While the world talks endlessly about the air pollution health crisis, direct funding for outdoor air quality projects has plummeted by 20%, now representing just 1% of all international development funding. Meanwhile, fossil fuel-prolonging funding—money that actively entrenches our dependence on fossil fuels—has surged by 80% in a single year, reaching $9.5 billion.
The Contradiction in Action:
In 2023, development funders spent more than 2.5 times more money on projects that prolong fossil fuel use than on projects specifically designed for clean air. It's like trying to bail out a sinking boat with a teacup while someone else uses a power drill to punch holes in the hull.
Case Study - Bangladesh:
A country with some of the world's worst air pollution received $1.1 billion more in fossil fuel-prolonging finance than in all air quality projects combined. The contradiction is staggering.
The Glimmer of Hope:
Funding for projects with air quality co-benefits—like metro systems or renewable energy where clean air is a happy side effect—rose by 7% to nearly $29 billion. The report argues we need to stop letting clean air be a happy accident and integrate air quality targets into these massive projects from the beginning.
The Inequality Crisis:
Just three countries (Philippines, Bangladesh, China) received 65% of all direct outdoor air quality funding. Meanwhile, of the 10 countries with the world's highest PM2.5 concentrations, seven received less than $1 per person in total air quality financing. Sub-Saharan Africa's situation is particularly dire, with funding dropping by 91% and now receiving less than 1% of the global total.
The Fundamental Question:
This report isn't just a collection of data—it's a mirror held up to our global priorities. And right now, that reflection shows a world trying to treat a disease with one hand while actively feeding it with another.
Air pollution isn't just an environmental or health issue, but a fundamental development challenge. The question this report leaves us with: What are we going to do to change the picture?
The One Take Podcast in Partnership with
SafeTraces and Inbiot
Do check them out in the links and on the Air Quality Matters Website.
View all episodes
By Simon JonesWelcome back to Air Quality Matters and One Take, where we unpack the latest research and reports shaping our understanding of indoor air and the built environment.
This week, I'm diving into the seventh edition of a critical annual report that reads like a global health check—not for people, but for policy. The State of Global Air Quality Funding 2025, produced by the Clean Air Fund and the Climate Policy Initiative, follows the money trail to reveal whether our global investments actually align with our stated goals for clean air, health, and climate action.
The diagnosis? It's deeply concerning and frankly contradictory.
The Shocking Reality:
While the world talks endlessly about the air pollution health crisis, direct funding for outdoor air quality projects has plummeted by 20%, now representing just 1% of all international development funding. Meanwhile, fossil fuel-prolonging funding—money that actively entrenches our dependence on fossil fuels—has surged by 80% in a single year, reaching $9.5 billion.
The Contradiction in Action:
In 2023, development funders spent more than 2.5 times more money on projects that prolong fossil fuel use than on projects specifically designed for clean air. It's like trying to bail out a sinking boat with a teacup while someone else uses a power drill to punch holes in the hull.
Case Study - Bangladesh:
A country with some of the world's worst air pollution received $1.1 billion more in fossil fuel-prolonging finance than in all air quality projects combined. The contradiction is staggering.
The Glimmer of Hope:
Funding for projects with air quality co-benefits—like metro systems or renewable energy where clean air is a happy side effect—rose by 7% to nearly $29 billion. The report argues we need to stop letting clean air be a happy accident and integrate air quality targets into these massive projects from the beginning.
The Inequality Crisis:
Just three countries (Philippines, Bangladesh, China) received 65% of all direct outdoor air quality funding. Meanwhile, of the 10 countries with the world's highest PM2.5 concentrations, seven received less than $1 per person in total air quality financing. Sub-Saharan Africa's situation is particularly dire, with funding dropping by 91% and now receiving less than 1% of the global total.
The Fundamental Question:
This report isn't just a collection of data—it's a mirror held up to our global priorities. And right now, that reflection shows a world trying to treat a disease with one hand while actively feeding it with another.
Air pollution isn't just an environmental or health issue, but a fundamental development challenge. The question this report leaves us with: What are we going to do to change the picture?
The One Take Podcast in Partnership with
SafeTraces and Inbiot
Do check them out in the links and on the Air Quality Matters Website.