Feed aggregator

From Europe to Africa and South America, countries reaffirm commitment to tackle crisis

World leaders, senior ministers and key figures in climate diplomacy have, one by one, reaffirmed their commitment to the Paris agreement this week, in response to the order by Donald Trump to withdraw the US from the pact.

The prospect of the world keeping temperatures to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, as the treaty calls for, was damaged by the incoming US president’s move. Hopes of meeting the target were already fast receding, and last year was the first to consistently breach the 1.5C limit, but the goal will be measured over years or even decades and stringent cuts to emissions now could still make a difference.

Continue reading...

There are 206 coal-burning power plants left in the United States, which supply about 16 percent of the country’s energy. Experts say burning more doesn’t make financial sense.

His executive orders ultimately seek to make the market for oil and gas as big as possible.

Many climate experts see its deserts as a place to build the green-energy future. For two local activists, the price is too great.

Fridays for Future organiser warns conspiracy theories are increasingly taking hold despite effects of global heating

The rise in extreme weather is not generating political support for climate action, Germany’s best-known climate activist has warned, as conspiracy theories increasingly circle after disasters made worse by global heating.

“Like many, I did buy into the idea that big catastrophes would do something to politics,” said Luisa Neubauer from Fridays for Future Germany. “I bought into that – and I’m glad about it – because I was naively believing there was a democratic responsibility that would live through coalition changes and climate changes.”

Continue reading...

President claims to be ‘putting people over fish’ but critics say order could derail years of carefully crafted water policy

It didn’t take long for Donald Trump to reignite the California water wars he waged in his first term.

On his first day in office, Trump directed the secretary of commerce and the secretary of the interior to develop a new plan that will “route more water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin delta to other parts of the state for use by the people there who desperately need a reliable water supply”.

Continue reading...

C.E.O.s, policymakers and billionaires at the World Economic Forum’s conference have long pledged to fight climate change. Has it done any good?

Exclusive: Supporters of bill say Labour has already insisted on removal of clauses requiring UK to meet targets agreed at Cop and other summits

A landmark bill that would make the UK’s climate and environment targets legally binding seems doomed after government whips ordered Labour MPs to oppose it following a breakdown in negotiations.

Supporters of the climate and nature bill, introduced by the Liberal Democrat MP Roz Savage, say Labour insisted on the removal of clauses that would require the UK to meet the targets it agreed to at Cop and other international summits.

Continue reading...

As part of his wide-ranging first-week activities, President Trump issued a barrage of executive orders specifically intended to boost the fortunes of the fossil fuel industry.   

Not for the betterment of the US public, as these actions would freeze, repeal, or actively undermine critical public health and environmental protections. 

Not for the betterment of the US economy, as these actions would undermine billions of dollars of forward-looking investments, cede leadership in innovation, and spike household energy bills. 

Not for the betterment of US energy abundance, as these actions sideline critical clean energy resources and threaten to stall the deployment of more.  

Not for the betterment of US global standing, as these actions would aggravate areas of escalating geopolitical risk and spurn areas of productive geopolitical coordination.  

Not for the betterment of anything beyond boosting the bottom line for a select polluting few.  

Now, there’s a yawning gap between President Trump’s bold pronouncements and his actual ability to see many of these things through. Much of it will simply amount to hot air.  

Still, there’s a roadmap here. And if not by executive order, this administration has made clear from the jump that it will try anything to deliver for fossil fuel interests, no matter the public cost.  

That makes understanding the what and the why critical, to be prepared for all the attacks to come. So here: a look at the Trump administration’s first moves in its whole-of-government approach to selling out the nation. 

A whole-of-government approach to selling the nation out 

The fossil fuel industry’s wish-list is sprawling. So too is the range of new executive orders designed to be to the industry’s benefit.  

On Day 1 alone, President Trump issued executive orders declaring a national energy emergency, exiting the Paris Agreement, halting offshore—and some onshore—wind development, “unleashing” American (fossil) energy, and expanding fossil fuel production in Alaska. These occurred alongside other executive orders striking down large numbers of cross-cutting federal initiatives, including those coordinating climate, environmental justice, and public health protections.  

President Trump has framed these early actions as intended to improve the nation’s economy by lowering energy costs—but the claim is immediately, preposterously undone by the logical incoherence of his actions.  

For at the exact same time President Trump declared an energy emergency, he simultaneously attempted to derail new offshore wind development, which would undermine reliability, and directed agencies to take actions that would decrease the efficiency with which we use energy, which would drive up consumer energy costs. He also froze funding specifically intended to spur the deployment of new energy resources across the country, as well as infrastructure intended to boost energy reliability, resilience, and access.  

Some way to solve a “crisis.” 

When you peel back the rhetoric, it’s clear there’s only one throughline here: actions that would boost the profits of fossil fuel companies, with the costs borne by everyone else. 

And that strategy makes sense when remembering that this is an administration that pledged fealty to fossil fuel executives so long as they opened their wallets during campaign season—which they did. Because ultimately, fossil fuel executives don’t want to drive down energy prices. They want higher earnings, achieved by lowering their costs of doing business while locking in long-term demand for fossil fuels. 

How the executive orders advance fossil fuel interests 

The executive orders attempt to advance fossil fuel interests through two main approaches: first, by making it easier to extract and transport fossil fuels, and second, by making it easier to use fossil fuels—including by making it harder to use clean energy resources instead.  

Making it easier to extract and transport fossil fuels. US fossil fuel production is at record highs. There is no shortage of fossil fuel production, nor—problematically, to our eye—is there any shortage of opportunities for future expansion. But fossil fuel companies object to any constraints on their ability to extract fossil fuels, wherever and however they want.  

Moreover, fossil fuel pipelines crisscross the nation and liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals extend the reach of gas transmission from within the country to around the globe. New pipelines, and new LNG terminals, are actively under construction—the latter of which are already projected to nearly double LNG capacity by 2028. But fossil fuel companies object to standards and accountability around where, how, and to what end those pipelines are constructed, as well as commonsense evaluations of the harmful economic, climate, and health implications of unfettered LNG expansion.  

The Trump Day 1 orders attempt to appease fossil fuels interests on these fronts by opening more areas for leasing; attempting to shortcut the permitting process for fossil fuel infrastructure—both by claiming an energy emergency to sidestep regulatory requirements and by attempting to unwind decades-old permitting processes and requirements; pushing the Department of Energy to advance LNG approvals; and directing agencies to review (and, implied, weaken or fully rescind) regulations governing pollution associated with fossil fuel extraction, processing, and transport.  

Making it easier to use fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are intertwined throughout the US economy—but less so every day. Renewable resources and energy storage are rapidly displacing coal-fired power plants and edging out gas-fired generation. Moreover, people are increasingly pivoting away from fossil fuel-burning end uses, such as vehicles, stoves, and furnaces, to electrified alternatives, such as electric vehicles (EVs), induction cooktops, and heat pumps. This existential threat of obsolescence means that even if fossil fuel extraction and transmission were fully unencumbered, if nobody wants what fossil fuel companies are selling, there’s nothing left to prop up. Queue the out-of-the-gate attempts to force ongoing fossil fuel consumption, following a two-pronged approach.  

First, President Trump directed agencies to discount, ignore, and potentially even outright reject the premise of, the harms of fossil fuel use to public health and the climate, thereby attempting to create a route to justify the weakening of pollution standards—which he also directed agencies like the EPA to reconsider. He also initiated the process of once more pulling out of the Paris Agreement, in so doing pivoting away from the single greatest commitment to global climate action. 

Second, President Trump attempted to derail the competitors to fossil fuel use, namely renewable resources like wind, solar, and storage, as well as energy end uses like EVs and heat pumps that run on electricity or, even, just more efficient use of fossil fuels. This included freezing federal leasing and permitting of offshore wind; freezing the disbursement of funds intended to support the clean energy transition at the individual, community, state, and national levels; and freezing the disbursement of funds loaned to companies investing billions of dollars in new US manufacturing facilities to advance innovative clean energy technologies.  

What comes next 

With these executive orders, alongside a slew of fossil fuel-friendly agency nominees, the Trump administration has made clear who’s once again calling their energy shots.  

However, vanishingly little of what’s been proposed thus far is at all guaranteed of coming to pass. Indeed, the overwhelming majority is directional at best, with no follow-through required. And even where there is follow-through, actual changes resulting from these orders will face substantial hurdles. 

When it comes to unwinding regulations, agencies like EPA will have to justify their actions—and that means actually looking at the science. The Trump administration immediately leapt to undermine that very science on Day 1, too, but even with these bald-faced instructions to outright deny reality, agencies will still have to contend with the facts, as well as the long and winding processes associated with administrative procedures.  

When it comes to halting the disbursement of funds from policies that have already been passed into law, such as those via the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act, that means halting the disbursement of funds that are legally owed. To change the flow of funds, Congress must pass new laws—or the president risks outright violating the constitution. 

Finally, when it comes to popular buy-in, the administration will have to contend with the fact that people overwhelmingly favor clean air and commonsense standards; that people support innovation and advancement of clean energy technologies; and that people want real solutions to the devastating, escalating, staggeringly costly impacts of climate change.  

And those solutions? They sure aren’t this. 

Downing Street says EU’s suggestion of UK joining agreement would not cross its ‘red lines’ for closer ties

• What is the pan-Europe customs area?

Here is Downing Street news release on the government’s plans to limit the extent to which judicial review can be used to hold up infrastructure projects. The plans will cover England and Wales.

The RSPB, which describes itself as the UK’s largest nature conversation charity, has accused Labour of going back on its pre-election promises to protect nature. Beccy Speight, the RSPB chief executive, said:

The PM claims to ‘clear a path’ for building, but this move runs the risk of bulldozing through our chances for a future where nature, people, and the economy all thrive. We know people want bold action on the climate and nature crises, which was Labour’s election platform, and this rhetoric has them veering wildly off course.

We all know that nature underpins economic growth - that is why government and the environment sector has been actively working together, to try and unlock better outcomes for both planning and nature - yet this rhetoric flies in the face of that collaborative spirit.

If we want to grow the economy and fund vital public services, then we have to better balance environmental and community interests with the benefits of development, and do so in a clear and timely way. Reducing the scope for vexatious and unmerited legal challenges, whilst retaining a right to appeal, is a very positive step in achieving this.

Continue reading...

Hughes fire near Castaic Lake broke out on Wednesday and led to evacuation orders or warnings for more than 50,000

Firefighters fought to maintain the upper hand on a huge and rapidly moving wildfire that swept through rugged mountains north of Los Angeles and resulted in more than 50,000 people being put under evacuation orders or warnings.

The Hughes fire broke out late Wednesday morning and in less than a day had charred nearly 16 sq miles (41 sq km) of trees and brush near Castaic Lake, a popular recreation area about 40 miles (64km) from the devastating Eaton and Palisades fires that are burning for a third week.

Continue reading...

While the global PR firm blames ‘economic fears’ for this ‘age of grievance’, the executive class doesn’t seem very fearful

High up in the Swiss Alps this week, an influential public relations executive issued a stark warning to the world’s corporate and political elite. Public trust is “plummeting”, Richard Edelman declared, prompting a global “descent into grievance”.

For the 25th year, the PR agency Edelman released its annual “trust barometer” at the World Economic Forum in Davos. The survey asks respondents in dozens of countries if they trust governments, NGOs, media outlets and corporations.

Continue reading...

The simple truth is that Trump ignored almost every major issue facing this country’s working families in his first speech

I was at the Trump inauguration on Monday, and needless to say, I disagree with almost everything he had to say.

What really struck me, however, is not what he said, which was not surprising given his general rhetoric – but what he didn’t say. The simple truth is that Donald Trump gave a major speech, the first speech of his second presidency, and ignored almost every significant issue facing the working families of this country.

Continue reading...

Most major economies are investing in ever-cheaper solar and wind power. The United States risks further ceding a global market to China.

In this first episode of a new series, David Wallace-Wells joins Patrick Healy to examine what President Trump’s position on climate change tells us about how he plans to wield power more broadly.

Exclusive: Treasury analysis shows ticket prices expected to go up across board with no plans for frequent flyers to shoulder more of the cost

Rachel Reeves’s bid to expand Heathrow airport could add £40 to the cost of an airline ticket, according to the Treasury’s own analysis.

The chancellor’s proposal to minimise the carbon emissions of a bigger Heathrow include the use of sustainable aviation fuels, which experts say are expensive and unlikely to reach the scale needed for aviation expansion.

Continue reading...

From national security to home insurance, the president has quickly changed America’s climate adaptation policies in important ways.

Hughes fire ignites north of Los Angeles late Wednesday morning as Eaton and Palisades fires burn for third week

Additional evacuations were ordered for residents near a large fast-moving wildfire north of Los Angeles, as parched southern California endured another round of dangerous winds ahead of possible rain over the weekend.

The Hughes fire broke out late on Wednesday morning and quickly ripped through nearly 5,000 acres of trees and brush, sending up an enormous plume of dark smoke near Castaic Lake, a popular recreation area about 40 miles (64 km) from the devastating Eaton and Palisades fires that are burning for a third week.

Continue reading...

Report reveals solar power generated 11% of Europe’s electricity, surpassing coal at 10%

Europe made more electricity from sunshine than coal last year, a report has found, in what analysts called a “milestone” for the clean energy transition.

Solar panels generated 11% of the EU’s electricity in 2024, while coal-burning power plants generated 10%, according to data from climate thinktank Ember. The role of fossil gas fell for the fifth year in a row to cover 16% of the electricity mix.

Continue reading...

Mr. Trump had the authority to declare two emergencies. But they also happened to advance his favorite targets: more fossil fuels and less immigration.