Receive a Daily or Weekly summary of the most important articles direct to your inbox, just enter your email below. By entering your email address you agree for your data to be handled in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
TODAY'S CLIMATE AND ENERGY HEADLINES
Expert analysis direct to your inbox.
Every weekday morning, in time for your morning coffee, Carbon Brief sends out a free email known as the “Daily Briefing” to thousands of subscribers around the world. The email is a digest of the past 24 hours of media coverage related to climate change and energy, as well as our pick of the key studies published in peer-reviewed journals. Sign up here.
UN secretary-general António Guterres has visited several areas of Pakistan ravaged by floods, calling for increased global financial support, reports Reuters. During his two-day trip, Guterres blamed the flooding – which has killed more than 1,391 people and caused damage worth an estimated $30bn – on climate change. “Today it’s Pakistan, tomorrow it could be your country wherever you live. This is a global crisis…it requires a global response,” Guterres told a news conference at the end of his visit, says the newswire. It adds: “Huge areas of the country are still under water and hundreds of thousands of people have been forced from their homes. The government says the lives of nearly 33 million people have been disrupted…Speaking to reporters later in the southern city of Karachi, Guterres said the international community needed to do more to help countries hit hardest by the effects of climate change, starting with Pakistan…’I have seen many disasters around the world but I have never seen climate carnage of this scale…It is a question of justice, Pakistan is paying the price of something that was created by others,‘ he said.” Another Reuters piece reports: “Authorities in Pakistan are scrambling to protect a vital power station supplying electricity to millions of people against a growing threat of flooding, officials said on Monday.”
An editorial in Pakistan’s Dawn newspaper has responded to Guterres’s visit by saying: “Even though the UN has launched a flash appeal for funds to help the most affected people and many countries have dispatched planeloads of relief supplies like tents and food, the world’s initial response to the tragedy has so far been underwhelming at best. That’s not unexpected considering that the rich West, preoccupied with the Ukrainian crisis for several months now, is busy striving to stave off another economic recession amid historic inflation and energy supply disruptions…It would be naive to expect the world to step up to support Pakistan in the post-flood rehabilitation and reconstruction effort in a big way. Much of the cost will have to be borne by the nation itself…At the end of the day, the politically voiceless people are left to fund the cost of recovery on their own.”
African ministers meeting in Cairo two months ahead of the COP27 climate summit have “called for a sharp expansion of climate financing for their continent while pushing back against an abrupt move away from fossil fuels”, reports Reuters. The newswire adds: “A communique released after a three-day forum for finance, economy and environment ministers said Africa benefited from less than 5.5% of global climate financing despite having a low carbon footprint and suffering disproportionately from climate change. It urged rich countries to meet and expand climate pledges, and said poor countries should be able to develop economically while receiving more funds to adapt to the impact of climate change. The document stressed ‘the need to avoid approaches that encourage abrupt disinvestments from fossil fuels, as this will…threaten Africa’s development’.” Al Jazeera also covers the story: “The African continent emits only some 3% of global CO2 emissions, former UN chief Ban Ki-moon noted this week. And yet African nations are among those most exposed to the effects of climate change, notably worsening droughts and floods. The African leaders said the financial aid was needed in view of ‘the disproportionate impact of climate change and nature loss on the African continent’. Africa not only has a ‘low carbon footprint’, they said, but it also plays a key role in capturing greenhouse gases, including in the Congo Basin, which is home to the world’s second-largest tropical rainforest after the Amazon.”
There is continuing coverage in the UK media of the government’s new policies it says are aimed at tackling the energy crisis. The Financial Times reports that “fracking companies have said that Liz Truss’s lifting of a moratorium on the controversial method of shale gas extraction will not resurrect the industry in England without rapid reform of planning and earthquake rules”. It continues: “Ross Glover, development director at Aim-listed fracking company IGas Energy, told the Financial Times that streamlining rules around planning and permitting would be crucial. ‘Development of any form of infrastructure’ in the UK faces a lengthy planning and permitting process, Glover argued. ‘We are not saying get rid of all the regulation, what we are saying is we need to have a proper discussion about how we accelerate the projects.’ IGas shares have surged more than 650% this year, partly on the back of investor anticipation of a reversal of the fracking moratorium.” (See Carbon Brief’s new factcheck, headlined: “Why fracking is not the answer to the UK’s energy crisis.”)
Elsewhere, the Guardian covers new research by the Institute for Government showing that “Britain will be plunged into an even worse energy crisis in a year’s time without an immediate plan to improve leaky homes and dramatically reduce demand for gas”. It adds: “The UK ranks among the worst in Europe for the energy efficiency of its homes, according to new research outlining an urgent need to reduce the amount of heat being wasted.” The Times covers remarks made by Jonathan Maxwell, founder and chief executive of Sustainable Development Capital, who says that Britain could save at least £100bn if it stopped wasting so much energy. The Sun says that “Liz Truss’s rescue package on energy bills will help to bring down inflation – but interest rates will still need to rise further, experts warn”. The Times reports that “a National Grid scheme to avoid blackouts this winter by paying households to use less electricity at peak times is in danger of failing because the proposed payments are too low, leading energy suppliers have warned”. The Sunday Times has a news feature, headlined: “Why are our energy prices so complex?”
Separately, the Daily Telegraph explains its thesis on “how President Macron could scupper Boris Johnson’s legacy”. It wonders whether France is “getting cold feet” on supporting the Sizewell C nuclear power plant: “This week, French media reported that Paris is pushing back against the timeline set out for building Sizewell C, as France battles its own energy crisis and Macron takes over struggling energy giant EDF. EDF’s board of directors have reportedly voted against the government investment decision, negotiated with the French energy giant, to build a pair of nuclear reactors at Sizewell. Meanwhile, Macron’s government has indicated that it will not implement the Sizewell agreement as agreed, within the planned timetable, according to the reports, due to wrangling over audits for the project. EDF was contacted for comment.” Another Daily Telegraph article begins: “Self-imposed green investment rules in the City of London risk holding back the adoption of electric vehicles and battery technology, the industry has warned.” It adds: “Benedikt Sobotka, co-chairman of the Global Battery Alliance, said so-called ESG rules, which encourage investors to put money into green and socially responsible projects, are starving new mining projects of funds because they are perceived as dirty under current rules.”
Finally, DeSmog has three new articles focused on the new prime minister’s policies and appointments. The first says that “campaigners say [new climate minister Graham] Stuart’s green credentials are undermined by his support for wood-pellet burning at Drax power station in Selby, located around 30 miles from his Yorkshire constituency of Beverley and Holderness”. The second says Truss “has appointed multiple advisors with a record of opposing climate action, including a key aide from a thinktank funded by oil giant BP”. The third says that “the leadership campaign of the UK’s new prime minister was partly funded by individuals involved in influential pro-fracking thinktanks and a former Brexit Party MEP who has called climate change a ‘myth’ and a ‘religion’”.
Several outlets cover the possible ramifications of King Charles taking over as head of state, including Prince William formally becoming the heir to the throne. The i newspaper says: “Green energy, climate change and mental health are likely to be key policy areas Prince William will continue to speak out on as he steps into his father’s footsteps as a campaigning heir to the throne. King Charles III, the self-confessed ‘interferer and meddler’, hinted he will no longer be lobbying on matters close to his heart now he is head of state. ‘It will no longer be possible for me to give so much of my time and energies to the charities and issues for which I care so deeply,’ he said in his address to the nation on Friday. He appeared to hand over this responsibility to his son and heir.” Yahoo News also says that the king “seemed to signal an effective end to his decades-long public advocacy for lowering greenhouse gas emissions, which are warming global temperatures”. Climate Home News examines the legacy of the “veteran climate advocate”: “Charles has a mixed record on green technology. The Sunday Times reported in 2005 that he had refused to allow wind turbines to be built on his properties, favouring a biomass plant to generate electricity from burning local trees. He has promoted biofuels and his Aston Martin car runs on ‘surplus English white wine and whey’. None of his keynote speeches at climate talks in Copenhagen, Paris or Glasgow mentioned climate finance.” Writing for Forbes, Nives Dolsak and Aseem Prakash, who are both at the University of Washington, Seattle, “suggest that King Charles III has the opportunity to make his mark as the climate monarch, which would also radically differentiate him from the recently departed and much beloved Queen Elizabeth II. Building on his work as an outspoken environmental advocate, he could undertake subtle climate advocacy, while respecting the boundaries and duties of the monarchy.” Finally, the Sunday Times carries a feature by Ben Spencer and Roya Nikkhah headlined: “What next for the King of climate change?”
There is continuing coverage of the extreme heat that has struck California, with the Independent reporting: “The intensity of this [California] heatwave was unrivalled – as daily, monthly and even all-time heat records were shattered. In total, nearly 1,400 heat records have been broken in the US over the past seven days. The records are just another reminder of the unprecedented extremes that the climate crisis is bringing…On Tuesday, downtown Sacramento California reached 116F (47C) which is the hottest temperature ever recorded in the city on any date of any year.” The Hill says that “California and [governor Gavin] Newsom passed an initial test – keeping the lights and power on despite triple-digit temperatures covering much of the state that pushed the state’s electrical grid to its limits.” It notes that Republicans across the US have tried to use the situation to attack the state’s use of “wind and solar”. The Hill adds: “Newsom in recent days has pushed back against his critics, arguing the state has never seen such extreme heat for such an extended period of time. He said Wednesday the state will need to keep improving efforts to deal with climate change, but argued actions the state has taken in the last two years, including increasing battery storage and extending lifetimes of backup generators, is what kept the power on.” The Financial Times runs an article under the headline: “Californian heatwave exposes the limits of climate plans.”
Operations at the Russian-held Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine – Europe’s largest – have been fully stopped as a safety measure, Energoatom, the state agency in charge of the plant, said on Sunday, reports Reuters. The agency added that “preparations are underway for its cooling and transfer to a cold state”. The newswire adds: “Russia and Ukraine accuse each other of shelling the nuclear plant, risking a nuclear disaster. Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy has called for the surrounding area to be demilitarised.” Another Reuters article says that, following blackouts, Ukraine has “accused the Russian military of attacking civilian infrastructure in response to a rapid weekend offensive by Ukrainian troops that forced Russia to abandon its main bastion in the Kharkiv region”. A third Reuters article reports that Zelenskiy has said that “Ukraine will look into whether it can urgently supply neighbouring Poland with 100,000 tonnes of thermal coal to help it get through the coming winter”. Meanwhile, the Straits Times covers new analysis by S&P Global Commodity Insights showing that “Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has accelerated clean-energy investments and reduced coal and gas power use, according to a new report that puts a counterintuitive spin on how the war is impacting the global energy crisis”.
Robert Habeck of Germany’s Green party, who is also vice-chancellor, is being criticised by his party members as well as by other ruling parties, such as Free Democrats (FDP) and the conservative opposition, for his decision to keep the nation’s few remaining nuclear plants on standby, though not actively running, until mid-April 2023 as an emergency backup, reports Der Spiegel. “Within the FDP, many lawmakers agree with the conservative opposition that the reactors should continue operating – until spring 2024”, notes the outlet. The article says that “some Greens even voiced suspicions that Habeck is eyeing a run for the Chancellery in 2025 and hopes to campaign as a politician who prioritises the interests of his country above the convictions of his party”. Bild adds that the continued operation of nuclear reactors until next spring would cause Habeck “considerable trouble in the party and jeopardise a good Green result in the Lower Saxony elections on 9 October”. However, Thorsten Frei of the CDU is quoted accusing Habeck of “accepting a blackout because of green ideology”. The Guardian carries an analysis on whether Habeck can “keep the lights on this winter”, referring to energy specialists who are saying that “it is too early to be optimistic.”
Meanwhile, Die Zeit reports that the German federal government’s third relief package was met with “minor approval”, according to a “representative” survey. It shows that 49% of those surveyed said that the government “was doing too little for the citizens in view of the high prices”, while 36% were satisfied with the package. In addition, it says, 68% agree that the federal government “does not provide sufficient support for people with low incomes”. The outlet explains that the “traffic-light” coalition presented a third relief package on Sunday, estimated at around €65bn, with the measures including “one-off payments for pensioners and students and a price cap for basic energy requirements”.
In more energy news, Financial Times reports that a second German gas supplier, VNG, has said “it will request a bailout from Berlin after it was forced to absorb heavy losses caused by reduced deliveries from Russia’s Gazprom”. VNG’s appeal comes weeks after Uniper, Europe’s largest buyer of Russian gas, “was rescued” by the German government, notes the article, adding that Uniper received a support package worth €19bn. To help businesses struggling with debts due to high energy costs, Germany’s justice minister is planning a temporary relaxation of insolvency rules “to help keep companies afloat”, reports Reuters.
Elsewhere, Die Zeit reports that Green party leader, Ricarda Lang, is pushing for the nation’s exit from coal to be brought forward: “It is necessary for us to get out of coal by 2030 – if only to achieve our climate goals”. A secure energy supply and the fight against the climate crisis are “two sides of the same coin”, emphasised Lang, according to the article. She is also rejecting calls for the promotion of shale gas in Germany, saying that “fracking is of no use in the current situation”.
Finally, the Express Tribune reports that Germany has announced a €1m aid package for flood victims in Pakistan urgently needed food, hygiene products and medical supplies, according to a tweet shared by the German ambassador to Pakistan, Alfred Grannas.
China’s silicon industry trade association “stopped releasing prices of a key solar material” after “surging costs threatened the country’s ambitious renewables plan and led to a government crackdown”, reports Bloomberg. The China Silicon Industry Association decided to “suspend” its price postings this week to “avoid “over-interpretation and misunderstandings” of its data, Bloomberg adds, according to the association’s statement.
Meanwhile, Reuters reports that oil demand in China, the world’s “biggest energy consumer”, could “contract for the first time in two decades” this year as Beijing’s “zero-Covid” policy “keeps people at home during upcoming holidays and reduces fuel consumption”. Lockdowns in “key cities such as financial hub Shanghai already hurt China’s oil demand” in the second quarter, while “recovery for the rest of the year is expected to be slow as China sticks to its zero-Covid policy”, the newswire writes, adding that this could “cap intake of the world’s top crude oil importer and dent global oil prices”.
Separately, the South China Morning Post says that “floods, heatwaves and rainfall-induced landslides are the top concerns in Southeast Asia on climate change with almost half of its citizens – 49.3% – saying there is a lack of political will to mitigate the threats”, according to a new report released by the Singapore-based ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute. Another article by the outlet says that asset securitisation deals in China “backed by green buildings surged to 110bn yuan (US$15.8bn)” in the first half of the year, compared with 123.3bn yuan for the whole of 2021, according to a report released by Fitch, a provider of credit ratings. The article adds that the building sector currently accounts for “half of the country’s carbon emissions” and will need to “contribute to a 13.5% reduction in its energy consumption over the 2021 to 2025 period”.
Finally, the state-run industry newspaper China Energy News reports that, according to the Chinese Passenger Car Association, the wholesale sales of electric vehicles reached “632,000 units in August, up 103.9% year-on-year”.
Writing in the Guardian, author Fatima Bhutto focuses on the damage caused by the extreme flooding in Pakistan: “This is a tragedy of nightmarish proportions and yet if you live outside Pakistan, you probably haven’t heard much about it. Given its near total lack of interest in the fate of Pakistan, it would seem that the rest of the world hasn’t considered that this epic humanitarian crisis is a peek into the apocalyptic future that awaits us all. No nation need have any special feelings towards Pakistan, but the horrors faced by the country today are a clear warning of the consequences of universal and rapacious climate breakdown…Our voracious burning of fossil fuels, obnoxious disregard for the wild and natural world we inherited, and criminal consumption means that no country, no matter its wealth, will be immune from the consequences of global heating. Today it is Pakistan, tomorrow it will be California, France, Australia, the world…Forget solidarity: the global south will not survive this century without climate justice. You in the west are talking about paper straws, we in the global south are talking about reparations. Our countries and our lives are dispensable for the world at large. We have always known this, but we are simmering with rage now. What else can you feel when $880m was raised in a day and a half after the cathedral of Notre Dame suffered a fire in 2021 but an entire country of drowning poor must beg for climate aid and assistance?”
In other comment, Adam Morton, also writing in the Guardian, lists his “reasons for (cautious) optimism: the good news on the climate crisis”. First among them is “falling emissions in China”. He says: “While Australia’s emissions increased in the most recent data, China – the world’s biggest annual carbon polluter – recorded an 8% fall in the June quarter and a 3% cut year-on-year. As reported by analyst Lauri Myllyvirta in Carbon Brief, the drop compared with the same period in 2021 was 230m tonnes – equivalent to nearly half Australia’s annual emissions, and the largest cut in Chinese carbon pollution in at least a decade. It was driven by both short and long-term trends: a real-estate slump, Covid-related restrictions, weak growth in electricity use and continued renewable energy expansion. It is too early to say whether this is a permanent decline – a recently announced stimulus package may encourage construction and both clean and dirty energy use – but it is the fourth straight quarter in which pollution has fallen.”
Allegra Stratton in Bloomberg argues that South Africa is “key to global net-zero”, saying: “Africa’s third largest economy is also the world’s 12th most serious emitter of carbon dioxide. At COP26 in Glasgow last November — where I worked with the British government — the UK, US, France, Germany and the rest of the EU joined together to allocate $8.5bn in seed money to South Africa. It’s the world’s first Just Energy Transition Partnership, a crucial effort to ease the economic and social disruptions that poorer countries face as they attempt to lower their carbon footprints. The money is meant to allow South Africa to retire a colossal but creaking (and corruption-riddled) fleet of coal plants. Just as importantly, the funds will support the workers who will need to find new jobs…If South Africa can pull this off, it will become a template for action elsewhere.”
Finally, climate-sceptic publications publish their own commentary. An editorial in the Wall Street Journal focuses on Europe’s “latest carbon fiasco”, claiming “its emissions-trading system raises energy costs for no reason”. And the Daily Telegraph carries a comment piece by Matthew Lynn attacking environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing, headlined: “If Florida can ban ‘ethical’ investing, then Britain should do the same.”
The Observer’s Will Hutton says “of course, the two-year £2,500 price cap [announced the new UK government last Thursday] is welcome…but you don’t win wars and reset economies with daffy libertarianism”. He continues: “Europe is in a de facto war with Russia over Ukraine, as it threatens a price cap on Russian gas. Putin responded by saying in Vladivostok that at the limit Russia will export nothing – no gas, no oil, no food – to Europe. This is economic rather than battlefield war, but it is war nonetheless. Britain’s energy policy is not serious, it betrays the cause…Consumers could have been told to tighten their belts with ministers giving a lead and a rationing system rolled out if needed. There should be a state-led crash programme of building onshore and offshore windfarms, – the fastest and lowest cost route to boosting energy supplies – along with accelerating the home insulation programme. For libertarians, every such measure sticks in their craws.” In the Daily Mirror, environment editor Nada Farhoud argues that “fossil-fuel loving Jacob Rees-Mogg is the last person who should be managing climate”. In the Sunday Telegraph, Liam Halligan argues that “we’re going to have to ration our energy consumption this winter”. He adds: “What’s clear is that UK energy policy will become a lot more hard-headed – with Truss lifting the fracking ban, as well as suspending renewable household levies. We’ll be hearing a lot more about new nuclear capacity, as energy security comes to the fore. What we’ll also see, though, is self-imposed energy rationing, as businesses limit operations and households try to use less. This energy support package may prevent widespread destitution and bankruptcy. But it won’t save us from eye-watering bills this winter and serious energy cutbacks.” Meanwhile, the Daily Telegraph has a comment piece by Ben Marlow headlined: “In praise of Jacob Rees-Mogg and the common sense way to lower bills.” And the Times has a comment piece by Dominic O’Connell headlined: “Liz Truss’s energy subsidy is a blank cheque until gas prices settle down.”
New research suggests that Republicans perceive politicians who link worsening wildfires to climate change as “less capable of addressing weather-related disasters”. The authors survey “a representative sample of American adults”, and find that “seeing a statement linking wildfires to global warming also makes Republicans less willing to support a tax intended to protect against future wildfires and other natural disasters”. The paper adds that “politicians do not significantly improve their image among Democrats when they reference climate change”.
Expert analysis direct to your inbox.
Get a round-up of all the important articles and papers selected by Carbon Brief by email. Find out more about our newsletters here. By entering your email address you agree for your data to be handled in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Your data will be handled in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Published under a CC license. You are welcome to reproduce unadapted material in full for non-commercial use, credited ‘Carbon Brief’ with a link to the article. Please contact us for commercial use.