Climate

All bags are not created equal when it comes to the environment. And paper might not be as green as you think.

Harold Hamm, President Trump’s energy mentor, wants to take us back to the 1990s.

Scientists say widespread damage to both world heritage-listed reefs is ‘heartbreaking’ as WA reef accumulates highest amount of heat stress on record

• Get our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcast

Australia’s two world heritage-listed reefs – Ningaloo on the west coast and the Great Barrier Reef on the east – have been hit simultaneously by coral bleaching that reef experts have called “heartbreaking” and “a profoundly distressing moment”.

Teams of scientists on both coasts have been monitoring and tracking the heat stress and bleaching extending across thousands of kilometres of marine habitat, which is likely to have been driven by global heating.

Continue reading...

Gene banks are like a survivalist cache: our nation’s safeguard against all future challenges to growing the food we need.

The agency will no longer shut down “any stage of energy production,” absent an imminent threat, a new memo says, and will curtail efforts to cut pollution in poorer areas.

In the March 19th verdict in Energy Transfer v Greenpeace, a North Dakota county jury awarded more than $660 million to “one of the largest… energy companies in North America” because Greenpeace supported the efforts of Indigenous Water Protectors in their protests of the Dakota Access Pipeline.  

This verdict is an outrage because it undermines Tribal leadership and sovereignty. As Natali Segovia, of the Water Protector Legal Collective, said in the New York Times: “At its core, it’s a proxy war against Indigenous sovereignty using an international environmental organization.”  

This verdict is an outrage because it threatens First Amendment rights, including the right to free speech. 

This verdict is an outrage because it rewards a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation), an egregious tactic of silencing and intimidation outlawed in 33 states but not in North Dakota.  

It’s an outrage that jurors’ conflicts of interest did not disqualify them from service in this trial. It’s a further outrage that one of Energy Transfer’s examples of defamation was Greenpeace’s statement that the Dakota Access Pipeline leaked. The court would not allow an expert witness to testify that the pipeline did, in fact, leak. 

Even if Greenpeace wins its appeal, the fact that this suit was allowed to proceed at all is an outrage. This verdict is yet another example of the fossil fuel industry’s agenda being enacted by multiple levels and branches of government. This is more than an outrage. It is a crime that will harm all people and species for generations to come.  

We must stand together to overturn this unjust and outrageous verdict. Here at the Union of Concerned Scientists, we’re resisting through Protect the Protest anti-SLAPP taskforce—and by organizing a climate accountability campaign targeting the fossil fuel industry. 

I’m imagining a few headlines that might have appeared over the past century if social movements had been SLAPPed for successful campaigns against powerful adversaries. 

City of Montgomery Wins Bus Boycott Suit, Awarded Damages

What if you’d opened your newspaper in 1957, one year after the Montgomery Bus Boycott had ended and seen this headline. Would you have been outraged? 

In reality, the Montgomery Bus Boycott ended in triumph when the City of Montgomery ended racial segregation on its buses. It was coordinated by Dr. Martin Luther King and the Montgomery Improvement Association, with the involvement of key civil rights leaders from Ella Baker to Bayard Rustin. It lasted for 381 days and cost the city approximately $3,000 per day in 1956 dollars—more than $13 million today. 

If the city had successfully sued the boycott organizers, would there then have been a Southern Christian Leadership Conference? A Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee? A March on Washington where Dr. King would deliver the speech from which many of our public officials conveniently cherry-pick one quote and one quote only: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character?”  

There might well not have been. And that would have been an outrage. 

Temperance Movement Owes US Lost Revenue, Enforcement Costs During Prohibition

How about this for a 1934 headline? The 1920 enactment of the 18th constitutional amendment banning the manufacture, sale, or transportation of alcohol followed years of activism and lobbying by the Women’s Christian Temperance Union and the Anti-Saloon League, a powerful coalition that included the International Workers of the World and John D. Rockefeller, the NAACP and the Ku Klux Klan. 

The Prohibition era lasted for 13 years. In today’s dollars the total cost to the US government in lost revenue alone would be approximately $222.7 billion. 

The consequences of Prohibition went far beyond the cost to federal coffers: among other ill effects, it yielded enormous benefits for organized crime. Do we think today that the broad coalition of Prohibition activists should be held liable for the federal government’s loss of revenue after it enacted their policy demands, or for the tremendous societal costs of strengthened crime syndicates? Or do we think that organizing according to our consciences and beliefs is a fundamental right we must continue to enjoy? 

Boeing Gets $2 Billion in Damages from Machinists Union After 2008 Strike

No, this didn’t happen. What did: the International Association of Machinists (IAM) struck airplane manufacturer Boeing for eight weeks in 2008, with $1.2 billion in net income lost ($1.48 billion today). 

The union struck Boeing again in 2024. Estimated costs for that 53-day action cost Boeing and its suppliers: $9.66 billion. 

These are considerable losses for Boeing and the aircraft industry. But the power to strike is the ultimate power of the labor movement. Yes, a prolonged strike costs union members dearly in lost wages and the risk of losing their jobs entirely, but it costs employers dearly too. It’s a game of chicken, and without the ability to strike, the union isn’t driving a car—it’s a pedestrian. 

So far, industrial actions such as those taken by the IAM are not subject to the increased power of business to sue for damages. But in an environment where business interests often outweigh the interests of workers, public health and safety, and in the case of climate change, future generations, it’s important to watch closely how juries and courts are thinking about these issues. Because a lot of their thinking is outrageous. 

Whose Selfish Agenda Again?

Energy Transfer’s lawyer told the court that Greenpeace had exploited the Dakota Access Pipeline to “promote its own selfish agenda.” I find it hard to contain my outrage. 

Greenpeace’s “agenda” is “to ensure the ability of Earth to nurture life in all its diversity.” This is a public-serving mission. Here I speak as one who knows: the Union of Concerned Scientists is a generous employer, but no one is getting into the top1% of wealth fighting the insatiable greed of the fossil fuel industry.  

Energy Transfer’s agenda is “to safely and reliably deliver the energy that makes our lives possible,” as long as that energy comes from transporting, refining, and ultimately burning the fossil fuels that are wreaking climate destruction now and far into the future. This is a profit-seeking mission. Fossil fuel moguls, from the Rockefellers to the Koch Brothers, have made themselves fabulously rich feeding, and feeding off, its insatiable greed.  

The confusion of public and private interests, of what’s good for a company versus what’s good for a sovereign Tribal nation, or for all inhabitants of our planet—I can’t find words. 

Apart from outrage. 

A new prize recognises the power of storytelling to address the biggest issue of our time

No novelist should ignore the climate emergency, Paul Murray, author of the bestselling novel The Bee Sting, told the Observer last year: “It is the unavoidable background for being alive in the 21st century.” In recognition of the vital role of literature in responding to the Anthropocene moment, this week the inaugural shortlist was announced for the Climate Fiction prize.

The five novels include Orbital by Samantha Harvey, set during one day on the International Space Station and the winner of last year’s Booker prize; time-travelling romcom The Ministry of Time from debut novelist Kaliane Bradley; eco-thriller Briefly Very Beautiful by Roz Dineen; And So I Roar, about a young girl in Nigeria, by Abi Daré; and a story of migrants in an abandoned city in Téa Obreht’s The Morningside. All the shortlisted authors are women.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Continue reading...

PM’s spokesman says more meetings will take place in London next week to ‘accelerate’ planning to enforce any future peace deal

Elections will take place in 23 councils across England on 1 May 2025.

Six mayors will also be elected on 1 May in the West of England, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, North Tyneside, Doncaster and – for the first time – in Greater Lincolnshire and Hull and East Yorkshire.

Contests for seats in 14 county councils will take place in Cambridgeshire, Derbyshire, Devon, Gloucestershire, Hertfordshire, Kent, Lancashire, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire, Oxfordshire, Staffordshire, Warwickshire and Worcestershire. Council elections are also taking place in the Isles of Scilly.

There will be eight contests for seats in unitary authorities, including Buckinghamshire, Cornwall, County Durham, North Northamptonshire, Northumberland, Shropshire, West Northamptonshire and Wiltshire, as well as one metropolitan district in Doncaster.

Continue reading...

As Trump pushes ‘drill, baby, drill’ agenda, Greenpeace verdict offers startling outlook for environmental activism

A pipeline company’s victory in court over Greenpeace, and the huge damages it now faces, will encourage other oil and gas companies to legally pursue environmental protesters at a time when Donald Trump’s energy agenda is in ascendancy, experts have warned.

On Wednesday a North Dakota jury ruled that three Greenpeace entities collectively must pay Energy Transfer, which was co-founded by a prominent Trump donor, more than $660m, deciding that the organizations were liable for defamation and other claims after a five-week trial in Mandan, near where the Dakota Access pipeline protests occurred in 2016 and 2017.

Continue reading...

It’s only going to get hotter

• See more of Fiona Katauskas’s cartoons here

Continue reading...

This week, as wildfires break out across Texas, life-saving alerts are being issued by the National Weather Service (NWS), informing evacuations ahead of the advancing threat. On the ground, firefighters are using National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) satellites for wildfire monitoring in real time. This is just one of dozens of emergencies our first responders rely on NOAA and NWS data for on any given week. Simply put: NOAA and the NWS save lives and must be defended against the Trump administration’s ongoing assault.

We are witnessing the vanishing of our own US assets which taxpayers have funded and built over generations to serve the public good. We need those assets and will suffer in their absence. And we may be forced to pay the private sector to dole them back out to us, piecemeal. We need to call the theft, harm and grift what it is—and stop it. 

The theft

Since 1849, when the Smithsonian Institution began furnishing telegraph offices with weather instruments, meteorological data have been continuously and systematically collected in the United States. In 1870, Congress established within the US Army’s Signal Service the very 19th-century named Division of Telegrams and Reports for the Benefit of Commerce and tasked it with issuing weather forecasts and warnings.

Later, the service became a civilian agency when Congress transferred its meteorological responsibilities to the US Weather Bureau under the Department of Agriculture. Today, those duties are carried out by the National Weather Service (NWS), housed at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) under the Department of Commerce. And thanks to the progression of recognizing the value of investing in weather forecasts and warnings, the American people own the NWS, a public service that is paid for with your tax dollars. That investment totals about $1.3 billion dollars annually—or about $7 per person in the United States—and it puts much more than this back into the US national economy.

The NWS’ own assessment in 2017 found that private businesses can derive up to $13 billion dollars in economic value from weather knowledge, and that its freely-available data powers a $7 billion-dollar market that creates tailored weather products for business and people. Economy-wide, the value of weather and climate information to the US economy exceeds $100 billion annually, which is roughly 10 times the investment made by taxpayers through federal agencies such as NOAA, involved in weather-related science and services. 

That weather app on your phone, or the weather report on TV? How about the storm forecast that the airports you fly in or out of receive every three hours for the next 36 hours and are the basis for rerouting or grounding planes? That’s critical for safe air travel, and yes, that was paid by taxpayers and also belongs to you. The 418 people who were rescued last year from incidents over water, land, and in downed aircraft? That was possible because the Coast Guard and the military had access to NOAA’s search and rescue-aided satellites. All of it is powered by NOAA’s free and public data that are available for public safety or business operations.

At UCS, we know full well how valuable the data are—we power our own Danger Season extreme weather tracker using the NWS’s daily-updated data (another free service!)  

But the valuable data and information that we obtain from NWS is at risk of being stolen. The Trump administration, Elon Musk, and DOGE—the black-box entity that has no actual legal authority to dismantle agencies created by Congress—have signaled as much by illegally invading NOAA headquarters, firing thousands of its staff, and canceling leases on some of its key buildings.

Here we are in the era of presidential overreach, where a Republican-controlled Congress is allowing the executive branch to usurp its powers, and a Democratic minority leadership is unwilling to use its remaining power to block these illegal actions. And that overreach has slipped into the judicial branch, where the Trump administration is openly ignoring judges’ decisions and orders to reverse course on illegal executive action. 

But why? The Trump government wants to dismantle the climate and weather science conducted by NOAA because evidence of a warming world resulting from burning their products is a pesky reality for the fossil fuel industry that gave millions to his campaign. In addition, he would like to put behind a paywall those parts that they will not be able to completely eliminate—the NWS. This is not speculation. Just read the chapter on the Department of Commerce in the Trump government’s blueprint for dismantlement, Project 2025.  Or if you can’t stomach the lunacy of the nearly 900-page document, read my blogpost readout of the plan for NOAA and NWS. This is very, very harmful. 

The harm

Where is the harm in dismantling—or even simply compromising—NWS and its parent office, NOAA? Without accurate, updated, and free weather information, we lose the ability to prepare ourselves for potentially lethal extreme weather such as hurricanes, heat waves, floods, and snowstorms.

Travel by air becomes an uncertain activity that could kill you (think of the Age of Exploration, when galleons departed with very little certainty of arriving safely on the other side of the world, much less coming back!), as airports will not have reliable and updated storm forecasts. The national economy suffers because weather events account for impactful fluctuations in the country’s GDP and affect the ability of all sectors to provide goods and services. Planning for weather-related risks requires information that can help reduce uncertainty that is costly for business; its absence hampers emergency managers and first responders.  

As it turns out, we lose quite a bit of life-saving alert information. I took a look at the number of times that the NWS issued an alert that impacted a county (or county-equivalents in the territories) each day between 2010 and 2024, a metric I call county-alert days. I use this metric rather than the raw number of alerts because NWS alerts often span multiple counties, so the raw number does not quite communicate the spread of alerts in counties.

NWS keeps track of nearly 70 different types of extreme weather, so I grouped them into thirteen categories. I am sure meteorologists may disagree with some of my grouping choices, but I think this serves to illustrate my point: Between 2010 and 2024, NWS issued extreme weather alerts that impacted all 3,144 counties (and equivalents) a whopping 3.7 million times.

I also grouped the alerts geographically according to the Fourth National Climate Assessment regions to show how different regions of the country face different kinds of extreme weather. Wildfires in the Great Plains, the Southwest, and the Northwest have prompted thousands of fire weather (also called “red flag”) alerts by the NWS; historically, alerts in the Southeast and the Northeast are mostly related to flood, cold, heat, and wind. The US Caribbean (that’s Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands) have faced floods, dangerous ocean weather and currents, and in the previous two years, extreme heat alerts that were not common before. Note that the small number of storms does not reflect their devastating impact, such as Hurricane María’s in 2017. Finally, Hawai’i and the Pacific Islands have faced much flooding and storms, and in the last few years have seen red flag weather alerts for wildfires such as the terrible Maui fires of 2023. 

NWS alerting us to potential harm: Between 2010 and 2024, NWS issued extreme weather alerts that impacted all 3,144 counties and county-equivalents in the US 3.7 million times. 

Let’s say you live in a coastal community along the Gulf of Mexico. Would you like to know how much storm surge or wind speed you need to prepare for in the face of an incoming hurricane, or when you need to evacuate to higher ground? Well, you could have this information if NOAA could fly their hurricane hunters, those very cool aircraft flown by very brave pilots who soar into hurricanes to collect data that are fed into storm track models to refine projections of intensity, speed, and landfall as hurricanes form, evolve, and intensify rapidly from one day to the next (a hallmark behavior of storms in the climate change era).

But guess what? There is no certainty we will have such information this hurricane season. In February, flight directors and other pilots were fired, but news media reported that some were rehired in March. No clear information is coming through from the administration, so it’s anybody’s guess if there will in fact be planes, pilots, and a flight plan ready to go if and when hurricanes threaten populated areas in the Gulf of Mexico. 

For other types of extreme weather worsened by climate change, harm will follow as well: farmers will lose drought monitoring that they rely on to plan and prepare for the season; forest managers and wildfire first responders will lose seasonal and monthly wildfire risk outlooks. Alerts about rapid-onset events such as extreme heat domes and flooding are also at risk of being lost.  

Hurricane season and the time of the year when climate change makes extreme weather more likely (we call it Danger Season) are right around the corner. Without our hurricane hunters and their pilots, weather balloons, and forecasters, we are going impaired into seasonal climate and extreme weather dangers that we already know are destroying lives and property.  

The presidential grift of what’s ours

So… <deep breath>. Let’s take Project 2025 seriously about its goal of privatizing NWS—which we definitely should take seriously, since in the first two long months of the Trump administration it has reliably been its modus operandi. According to pages 674-677, it appears that the theft and the harm will be followed by the further crime of privatizing what we own and pay for already.

What we already own and pay for is giving back dividends in lives and property saved, increasing prosperity, reducing uncertainty about extreme weather impacts, and providing the scientific bedrock of knowledge that can inform how to safeguard us from a climate-changed world. And the unilateral and illegal actions of the administration intend to put this service behind a paywall to make us pay again for it?

Public services exist to provide parity in access to all people in society without regard to their ability to individually fork out money for such a service—so those unable to pay will end up paying twice: once with their tax dollars, and once with their wellbeing or with their lives. Paywalled weather alerts will deprive individuals, households, or towns with lower incomes of access to life-saving services.

And there are early indications of the privatization to come. The private company WindBorne Systems has offered to backfill atmospheric data no longer collected by weather balloons in Alaska after the Juneau local NWS office lost 10% of its staff due to downsizing. While this may look like good corporate citizen action from a technically-savvy and well-resourced private company, businesses exist to make money, so it is a bit hard to see how WindBorne will be willing or able to permanently fill the gap in data collection in Alaska without compensation.  

Is this the wasteful spending that President Trump and Musk pledged to root out? Are we supposed to accept the demolition of the jobs, the infrastructure, and the data that saves lives and property and increases prosperity, under the pretense of rooting out a federal workforce that is falsely vilified as being lazy, leeching the system, and wasting taxpayers’ money?

There is a perverse psychology of revenge at play here. In dismantling the federal workforce, the administration’s goal has been, in the words of director of the Office of Management and Budget Russell Vought (and architect of Project 2025), for “the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected.” This vengeful discourse has been embraced by a significant part of the country who gleefully watch the administration’s actions inflicting pain on the federal workforce across the board.

Year after year, billion-dollar disasters, many of them worsened by climate, destroy and displace communities across the country. And as Danger Season and the heat waves, hurricanes, floods, and wildfires it brings loom over us, people across the country and territories—regardless of political persuasion—will suffer under extreme weather disasters without life-saving information, and without adequately-funded and staffed emergency management, recovery, and reconstruction services.

The life- and property-saving value that federal workers bring to the people of this country is on the line, and I fear that the consequences of dismantling the country’s weather and climate forecasting enterprise as well as disaster assistance and recovery agencies will strike a blow to communities still reeling from previous years’ extreme weather in addition to this year’s worsening economic challenges related to market uncertainties and cost of living increases.  

The Trump administration is dismantling institutions, firing expert staff, and stealing data paid for out of our own pockets. Such theft will lead to harm as we lose the information that saves lives, protects property, and enables prosperity across many aspects of daily life in the US.  It will also change how the US has regarded science and the NWS as a beloved and public good.

The country has invested in, and innovated through, this scientific public service for over a century, not for selling it to the highest bidder, but for the common good. Dismantling NOAA and the National Weather Service is a presidential grift that we must oppose. 

When we save science, we save lives. Take action to tell the Trump administration to stop its all-out war on our science and our scientists.

Vast quantities of climate and environmental information have been removed from official websites in the past months. Scientists are trying keep it available.

Amid dizzying changes caused by a warming climate and global attention, Greenlanders don’t want to have to choose between embracing the future and honoring their heritage.

Unesco report highlights ‘unprecedented’ glacier loss driven by climate crisis, threatening ecosystems, agriculture and water sources

Retreating glaciers threaten the food and water supply of 2 billion people around the world, the UN has warned, as current “unprecedented” rates of melting will have unpredictable consequences.

Two-thirds of all irrigated agriculture in the world is likely to be affected in some way by receding glaciers and dwindling snowfall in mountain regions, driven by the climate crisis, according to a Unesco report.

Continue reading...

A Times reporter co-wrote a guide to buying a home in an era of record heat, floods and billion-dollar disasters.

The ancient Mediterranean city is at risk as sea levels rise. But most people in the vulnerable fishing village of El Max believe it will always weather the storms of time

On a sunny January morning in El Max, west of Egypt’s second city, Alexandria, where a canal meets the Mediterranean Sea, Ahmed Gaz is untangling his fishing net on the beach after landing his catch at dawn.

Like almost everyone in the neighbourhood, Gaz was born and raised by the water, destined to fish for a living: “My whole life is in the sea. My life, my work and my livelihood.”

Continue reading...

The run-up to 2016 shows ‘common sense’ isn’t enough. Even ignorant, reactionary arguments must be properly countered

Kemi Badenoch’s speech on climate this week was not interesting of itself: she said net zero couldn’t be achieved by 2050 “without a serious drop in our living standards or by bankrupting us”. She has no expertise in climate science, no background in renewables or apparent familiarity with the advances made in their technology, no qualification in economics – just about the only bit of that sentence she knows anything about is bankrupting us.

Yet even if Badenoch can take its particulars and shove them, the fact of its existence is interesting for a number of reasons. First, this attack on net zero has been predicted, not secretly by new-Conservative fellow travellers, though conceivably them too, but by progressives – and for years. Among the first was the Cambridge academic David Runciman, who predicted a backlash against action on the climate crisis as the new galvanising issue on the radical right after it had moved on from Brexit. On his Talking Politics podcast, he was in conversation with Ed Miliband, who took that point but said he hoped Runciman was wrong. He was not wrong.

Zoe Williams is a Guardian columnist

Continue reading...

As birds begin long journey north, climate-driven seasonal changes may leave late arrivals struggling to find food for young

Thursday is the spring equinox, when day and night are more or less equal all over the world. For naturalists, it marks the official start of spring, though judging by the birdsong in my Somerset garden, the season began several weeks ago.

As we eagerly await the return of swifts, swallows, warblers and flycatchers – all long-distance migrants from sub-Saharan Africa – we should reflect on how shifts in the world’s climate are causing them problems.

Continue reading...

The environmental group had said the lawsuit, over its role in a protest movement, could mean an end to its operations in the United States.

Non-profit, which will appeal decision, says lawsuits like this are aimed at ‘destroying the right to peaceful protest’

A jury in North Dakota has decided that the environmental group Greenpeace must pay hundreds of millions of dollars to the pipeline company Energy Transfer and is liable for defamation and other claims over protests in the state nearly a decade ago.

Energy Transfer Partners, a Dallas-based oil and gas company worth almost $70bn, had sued Greenpeace, alleging defamation and orchestrating criminal behavior by protesters at the Dakota Access pipeline in 2016 and 2017, claiming the organization “incited” people to protest by using a “misinformation campaign”.

Continue reading...