At COP29 in Baku, countries called on all actors to work together to scale climate finance for developing countries from public and private sources to at least $1.3 trillion per year by 2035.¹
The goal did not end in Baku.
The COP29 and COP30 Presidencies developed the Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T.² At COP30 in Belém, the Parties decided to urgently advance action to make that $1.3 trillion annual flow possible.³
Money on this scale is therefore already being contemplated at the highest level of international climate policy.
The question is how capital on this scale can have the greatest effect.
This capital can finance action after environmental damage has occurred.
This capital can also give consumers and producers a financial interest in preventing environmental damage from occurring.
Prevention is less costly than repair.
So, pay consumers the Pilot’s Wage.
The Pilot’s Wage
The Homepage introduced the Pilot’s Wage: the consumer receives one third of the ecological value of a purchase as a reduction in the price paid.
The higher the ecological value of a product, the higher the Pilot’s Wage received by the consumer.
The consumer therefore acquires a financial interest in choosing products with the highest ecological value.
What can $1.3 trillion do?
Suppose $1.3 trillion were used to pay the Pilot’s Wage.
Divided among 1.3 billion consumers, $1.3 trillion would provide $1,000 in Pilot’s Wage per consumer.
The Pilot’s Wage is one third of the ecological value of the goods and services bought by the consumer.
A Pilot’s Wage of $1,000 therefore corresponds to $3,000 of ecological value in those purchases:
$1,000 × 3 = $3,000.
Now take one consumer.
Suppose, merely as an example, that the ecological value of the goods and services bought by that consumer averages 12.5 percent of their production costs.
For the consumer to buy goods and services containing $3,000 of ecological value, the consumer would spend $24,000:
$24,000 × 12.5% = $3,000.
The Pilot’s Wage would be one third of that ecological value:
$3,000 ÷ 3 = $1,000.
The consumer has therefore spent $24,000 and received $1,000 in Pilot’s Wage.
Now multiply the calculation by 1.3 billion consumers.
Paying 1.3 billion consumers $1,000 each in Pilot’s Wage would give them a financial interest in the ecological value of $31.2 trillion of purchases:
1.3 billion × $24,000 = $31.2 trillion.
The $1.3 trillion in Pilot’s Wage would not become $31.2 trillion.
The $1.3 trillion would give 1.3 billion consumers a financial interest in the ecological value of the goods and services on which they spend $31.2 trillion.
That is the economic leverage created by the Pilot’s Wage.
What would that mean for the European Union?
The European Union has roughly 450 million inhabitants.⁴
Using the same illustration, providing $1,000 in Pilot’s Wage for 450 million people would require:
450 million × $1,000 = $450 billion.
Those 450 million people, each spending $24,000 under the assumptions used above, would make purchasing choices involving:
450 million × $24,000 = $10.8 trillion.
A capital flow of $450 billion in Pilot’s Wage could therefore give consumers a direct financial interest in the ecological value of $10.8 trillion of purchases.
The comparison with another European expenditure shows that sums of this order are not beyond the scale of public action.
Since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine, the European Union and its Member States have mobilised more than €200 billion in support for Ukraine.⁵
The purposes are entirely different. The comparison does not suggest that money for Ukraine should be transferred to the Pilot’s Wage.
The comparison demonstrates something simpler:
When Europe considers an objective sufficiently important, Europe can mobilise capital measured in hundreds of billions.
Safeguarding the natural conditions on which Europe’s economy and population depend deserves financial action on the same scale.
Repair or prevent?
Money spent repairing environmental damage acts after the damage has occurred.
The Pilot’s Wage acts before the damage occurs.
Paying the Pilot’s Wage makes preventing environmental damage financially attractive to both sides of the market.
COP29 and COP30 demonstrate that mobilising finance on the scale of $1.3 trillion a year is already an objective of international climate policy.¹ ² ³
The question is therefore no longer whether capital on this scale can be contemplated.
The question is what we want that capital to accomplish.
Why spend money repairing environmental damage after the damage has occurred when capital on the same scale can give billions of consumers and producers a financial interest in preventing environmental damage?
Do!
Pay the Pilot’s Wage.
Give consumers a financial interest in choosing goods and services with the highest ecological value.
Give producers a financial interest in providing goods and services with the highest ecological value.
Use the financial flow created by billions of everyday purchases to guide the development of the economy towards living within the limits of Nature.
References
1. COP29 — UNFCCC. Decision 1/CMA.6 called on all actors to work together to enable the scaling up of financing for climate action in developing countries from public and private sources to at least $1.3 trillion per year by 2035.
2. COP29–COP30 — UNFCCC. Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T. COP29 launched the Roadmap under the guidance of the COP29 and COP30 Presidencies to advance the $1.3 trillion climate-finance objective.
3. COP30 — UNFCCC. At COP30, Parties decided to urgently advance actions to enable climate finance for developing countries from public and private sources to reach at least $1.3 trillion per year by 2035.
4. Eurostat. The population of the European Union was estimated at 452.0 million on 1 January 2026. The figure of 450 million used in the illustration is rounded.
5. European Commission. Total EU support to Ukraine since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale war exceeded €200 billion by August 2026.