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.
The European Commission has asked EU member states to voluntarily cut gas use by 15%, the Guardian reports, warning that a complete shutdown of supplies from Russia is “likely”. It quotes commission president Ursula von der Leyen saying: “Russia is blackmailing us, Russia is using energy as a weapon…It is a likely scenario that there is a full cut-off of Russian gas and that would hit the whole European Union. A gas crisis in the single market, our economic powerhouse, will affect every single member state.” The paper says the commission proposals call for a voluntary 15% cut in demand relative to the average over the past five years, with legally binding reduction targets an option in case of a crisis. The Financial Times says the commission called for the cut in demand to begin from 1 August and continue until next March. It adds: “European energy ministers are due to vote on the proposals at an emergency meeting next week.” It reports: “The EU said it aimed to ‘safeguard supply to households and essential users like hospitals’ and industries that are critical to cross-border supply chains. The plan also outlined that member states should prioritise switching fuels to renewables or coal, oil or nuclear power if needed and suggested that EU capitals could mandate levels of heating and cooling in public buildings.” Reuters says some member states are “sceptical” of the proposals, but they will be passed if a “reinforced majority” of member states agree to them. It adds that households are classed as “protected consumers” under EU rules and would be “shielded from…curbs” in a supply emergency. The Daily Telegraph reports the proposals under the headline: “Turn down your air conditioning or face an energy supply crisis, Europeans told.”
The Financial Times “Europe Express” newsletter says the commission proposals on cutting demand “face an uphill struggle” due to “questions and a dose of scepticism about the modalities and targets” from some member state governments. Reuters reports: “Spain says it will not order consumers to limit gas consumption.” An editorial in the Times says “[Russian president Vladimir] Putin is determined to break western sanctions and energy is his best weapon”. It says “von der Leyen is right to call for rationing but getting agreement will be tough”. The editorial concludes: “The search is now urgent for alternative supplies, energy savings and political solidarity.” The Financial Times says a House of Lords report has called on the UK government to “urgently” strike a deal with the EU “to co-operate on emergency energy supplies in case Russia triggers a severe shortage by cutting off gas exports to the continent”.
Meanwhile, the Financial Times and Reuters report that gas deliveries from Russia to Europe via the Nord Stream 1 pipeline have resumed.
US president Joe Biden called climate change “an emergency” while announcing a series of new measures yesterday, including expanded federal programmes to “help Americans cope with the extreme heat wrought by climate change”, the New York Times reports. The paper says the measures announced yesterday included allocating $2.3bn of existing funds to help communities build resilience to climate impacts and directing the Interior Department to “open the door to building offshore windfarms in the Gulf of Mexico”. It adds: “The modest rollout comes as Biden faces growing calls from members of his own party to declare a national climate emergency, which would give him the ability to halt new federal oil drilling and ramp up wind, solar and other clean energy projects.” The paper quotes US climate envoy John Kerry saying Biden is “very close” to doing this and reports that “the debate within the administration is over when the declaration should be announced and how it should be deployed, rather than if it should be done”.
The Guardian says of Biden’s announcements yesterday that he “stopped short” of declaring a “climate emergency”. It adds that Biden is “facing the disintegration” of his climate agenda following the failure to find support for a climate bill from West Virginia Democratic senator Joe Manchin [or any of the 50 Senate Republicans], as well as the recent Supreme Court ruling that “restricted the ability of the federal government to curb emissions from power plants”. Reuters says Biden called climate change “an emergency but stopped short of a formal declaration, announcing a modest package of executive actions and promising more aggressive efforts”. It says he “told reporters that he would decide shortly on whether to make such a declaration”. Politico says Biden’s “modest” announcements yesterday “sought to keep his faltering climate change agenda”. BBC News, Bloomberg, the Hill and the Independent also have the story. Reuters, Bloomberg and the Independent carry separate stories on the offshore wind plans for the Gulf of Mexico.
Analysis from Politico says declaring a “climate emergency” would “enable president Joe Biden to unleash sweeping actions to restrain greenhouse gas production – such as banning US crude oil exports, ending offshore drilling or speeding the manufacturing of electric vehicles”. The outlet adds: “But some of those steps would be politically explosive, and could even prove ruinous to his party’s fortunes by sending gasoline prices soaring. Others would threaten to alienate European allies looking to US fuel supplies to ease their dependence on Russia. And any executive actions Biden takes would run the risk of falling to the same conservative Supreme Court that has already hobbled his regulators’ ability to rein in carbon pollution.” Protocol says declaring a national emergency over climate change would unlock “sweeping powers that could kickstart the clean energy revolution”. (It adds: “We’ve arrived at this place because Senator Joe Manchin and 50 Senate Republicans stonewalled Biden’s climate legislative agenda.”) Another Politico article says the “fallout” from the Supreme Court ruling is “spreading throughout the executive branch”, creating legal uncertainty.
Meanwhile, the Hill reports that the US Postal Service “will order more than twice the number of electric vehicles initially projected for its new fleet, the agency announced Wednesday”. The agency will make at least 40% of its fleet electric, the publication says, up from initial plans for 10%.
Around 100 million Americans “from New York City to Las Vegas” are facing temperatures above 100F (38C), Reuters reports, adding in its first line that this is “part of a trend of extreme weather made worse by climate change”. The newswire says the heat warnings from the National Weather Service “follow conditions in Europe this week that have touched off wildfires and set record temperatures in the kind of weather event that scientists say will become more frequent with climate change”. The Hill says Oklahoma and Texas have reached 115F (46C) and that heat warnings are in place in 28 states. The Independent says “one in three Americans” are under heat alerts. The Hill has an article titled: “Where the scorching July heatwave is hitting the US hardest.” Meanwhile, the Guardian reports that the “ferocious heatwave” in the US “has highlighted an uncomfortable, ominous trend – people are continuing to flock to the cities that risk becoming unlivable due to the climate crisis”. It adds: “San Antonio, Texas, which added more to its population than any other US city in the year to July 2021, has already had more than a dozen days over 100F this summer and hit 104F on Tuesday.”
Separately, Reuters reports that “key entities of the US power grid network were working to improve resilience of the power grid network as climate change drives more extreme weather”, citing the latest “state of reliability” report from the North American Electric Reliability Corp (NERC).
Wildfires are “raging across Europe”, BBC News reports, with a heatwave intensifying drought conditions. It says firefighters are “still tackling blazes in Greece, Spain and Italy” but adds: “The fires in France’s badly hit south-west have started to be brought under control.” Reuters reports: “Emergency services battled wildfires across swathes of southern Europe amid mass evacuations on Wednesday, as warnings sounded in London after Britain’s hottest day that the fight against climate change needed to be stepped up.” Further Reuters articles report on wildfires in Greece and Italy. EurActiv also has the story.
Another Reuters article reports that French president Emmanuel Macron has “pledge[d] to step up fight against climate change as he visits wildfires”. The newswire says a French minister called for more investment in fighting wildfires.
UK Cabinet Office minister Kit Malthouse has said the country must learn to live with extreme weather, the Guardian reports. It quotes him saying: “We do recognise that we are likely to experience more of these incidents and that we should not underestimate their speed, scope and severity…Britain may be unaccustomed to such high temperatures but the UK, along with our European neighbours, must learn to live with extreme events such as these. The government has been at the forefront of international efforts to reach net-zero, but the impacts of climate change are with us now.” The Press Association reports the comments of COP26 president Alok Sharma, who said this week’s heatwave and fires were a “wake-up call for everyone” about the impact of climate change. Another Press Association article says firefighters also called the events a “wake-up call” on climate change. The Independent says the government has delayed its plan for dealing with such emergencies until a new prime minister is in place. The Guardian says the heatwave led to “London firefighters’ busiest day since second world war”. Reuters reports: “At least 13 people have died in Britain while swimming during a spell of record-breaking hot weather that sparked wildfires, damaged train tracks and triggered warnings that efforts to tackle climate change needed to be stepped up.” The Times reports that the number of wildfires in the UK in 2022 to date was already twice as large as in the whole of 2021: “As of yesterday, there had been 420 fires in England and Wales since the start of the year, according to the National Fire Chiefs Council. There were 247 in the whole of 2021, and 200 the year before that.” A comment for the Conversation says while wildfires are becoming more common, “the threat can be managed”.
The Financial Times says the resilience of the UK rail network “faces review after heatwave disruption”. The Guardian says rail services have been “severely disrupted as heatwave damage is repaired”.
Numerous papers look back on events over recent days, with the Guardian reporting from the scene of one of the fires under the headline: “‘This doesn’t happen in Wennington’: residents and fire services reel after homes lost in blazes across England.” The Independent says: “Villagers devastated by fire on UK’s hottest day call for more action on climate change.” Another Independent article asks why the UK is “so unprepared for extreme heat”. The i newspaper reports under the headline: “Inside the battle against UK wildfires, as firefighters fought blazes without enough water to stay hydrated.” A comment in the Guardian asks why Britain’s homes are so hot. The Independent reports polling showing that three-quarters of the public are “worried about the worsening climate crisis and want more government action to tackle it”. The Guardian reports: “Traditional British garden under threat from extreme heat, says RHS.” The Daily Mail devotes four pages to the “aftermath” of the “hottest day”, but doesn’t mention climate change once, except to mock climate protestors (see below).
The UK government has granted development consent for the Sizewell C new nuclear plant in Suffolk, Sky News reports. It adds that the government announced in March it intends to take a 20% stake in the project, with the development, the state-owned French utility EDF, taking another 20%. The broadcaster says: “Discussions are continuing with the government regarding funding, with a final investment decision expected in 2023.” The Financial Times says the 3.2 gigawatt (GW) scheme “would be paid for with a surcharge on customer energy bills as well as £1.7bn of taxpayers’ money…[and] would take up to 12 years to build”. It notes that the planned “regulated asset base” funding model for Sizewell C “is controversial as it will add a surcharge to consumer energy bills during construction, long before any electricity is generated, leaving consumers exposed to the risk of cost overruns”.
The Times says the scheme “has moved closer to being built after the government overruled planning officials to grant consent for the £20bn-plus project”. It explains: “The independent planning inspectorate had recommended that the plant in Suffolk be rejected unless its developers addressed concerns about water supplies and the effect that construction would have on local habitats.” Regarding the remaining stake in the project, the paper says: “Barclays and Rothschild are working to secure the other 60% of funding, with industry sources suggesting a total equity requirement of about £8bn.” It adds that the total cost “remains unknown since EDF has not updated a £20bn estimate provided several years ago”, with the project’s sister scheme, Hinkley Point C in Somerset, having been “beset by delays and cost overruns…[with] an expected cost of up to £26bn, in 2015 prices”. BBC News notes that the government has committed to completely decarbonising the UK’s electricity by 2035 and has targeted “up to” 24GW of nuclear capacity by 2050. The Daily Telegraph says the local water firm “has warned that it cannot meet the combined needs of households, other customers and Sizewell C with existing water supplies”. It explains that a temporary desalination plant during construction could become permanent if alternative water supplies are not found. The Guardian says the project has “faced fierce opposition from local campaigners”. Press Association notes the news of planning approval was “welcomed” by unions and the nuclear industry. Reuters, Bloomberg, BusinessGreen and the Independent also have the story.
China’s “call to boost coal supplies” following the power shortage in 2021 and “subsequent surge” in approval for coal-fired plants has “climate experts worried about the nation’s carbon-neutral goals”, the South China Morning Post writes. Provincial governments across China approved plans to add a total of “8.6GW (gigawatts)” of coal-fired power plants in the first quarter of 2022 alone, nearly “50%” of the capacity approved in the whole of 2021, the outlet notes, citing a new report from Greenpeace East Asia on Wednesday. Wu Jinghan, a climate and energy campaigner in Greenpeace East Asia’s Beijing office, is quoted saying “ an overcapacity of this one energy source is a major hurdle for energy security, as well as China’s energy transition”. (An article for China Dialogue is titled: “China’s move to increase coal supplies won’t affect decarbonisation.”)
Meanwhile, China’s “massive” agricultural sector is facing “growing risks as a result of extreme weather and shifting planting conditions brought about by climate change”, reports Reuters, citing an “official with the agriculture ministry” on Wednesday. Separately, in an article focusing on China and the EU’s bilateral cooperation by the state-run newspaper Global Times, Jörg Wuttke, president of EU Chamber of Commerce in China, is quoted saying that: “Climate change obviously stands out as a clear area for further cooperation.” A separate Reuters report says that Spain has signed a partnership agreement with Chinese green energy company Envision Group to embark on four projects, including a battery plant for electric cars, with 3.8bn euros ($3.9bn) in total investment.
Elsewhere, China Energy News reports that the National Energy Administration (NEA), the country’s top energy regulator, released the national electricity industry statistics from January to June. By the end of June, the national installed power generation capacity reached about 2,440GW, an increase of 8.1% year-on-year, the state-run industry newspaper notes. Among them, both wind and solar power installed capacity reached about 340GW respectively, an increase of 17.2% and 25.8% year-on-year, the outlet notes. Finally, Reuters reports that solar additions in China “more than double[d]”, with a 137% year-on-year rise to 31GW growth in the first half of 2022, citing an “industry group”.
The US and Canada are seeking trade dispute talks with Mexico “over the country’s nationalist energy policies” reports the Financial Times, which they argue have undermined international companies investing in clean energy. The paper explains: “Washington accused Mexico of failing to meet its obligations under the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) by favouring state-run utility Federal Electricity Commission (CFE) and oil company Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex). This came at the expense of US and other private firms that have poured billions of dollars over the past decade into the clean energy sector in Mexico, it said…Canada followed the US’s lead and requested its own consultations under the USMCA trade pact.” In response, Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said his government had done nothing wrong, and “even played a song to show that he was not scared of how it would play out”, reports Reuters. Speaking at a regular news conference, Lopez Obrador shrugged off the controversy, saying his policies did not violate the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement trade pact, and promised to answer the US grievances “point-by-point”. The president added: “We’re acting in line with public interest, defending the Mexican people against greedy companies used to stealing.” However, a Reuters analysis piece reports the comments of Carlos Vejar, a former Mexican trade negotiator, who warned that “it would be difficult for Mexico to defend all the measures that are being identified”.
Just Stop Oil protesters climbed motorway signs on the M25 yesterday morning in response to the extreme temperatures in the UK and what they describe as the government’s “inadequate preparations” for climate change, reports the Press Association. It continues: “Five demonstrators scaled gantries which support overhead motorway signs in three places on the M25, causing police to close sections of the road.” The protest group declared the M25 as “a site of civil resistance”, BBC News reports, adding that five people were arrested. The protest group issued a statement saying the record heatwave is “without doubt the most important moment in UK history”, reports the Independent. The statement added: “All-time temperature records are being obliterated, thousands of people are expected to die from heatstroke and the liars and plotters who are vying to lead us are too busy fighting among themselves to even care.” The group is demanding the government make a “meaningful statement” that they will commit to stop licensing and consents for the exploration, development and production of fossil fuels in the UK, which they say is “the necessary first step to ensuring a liveable future”, reports Metro. The Daily Telegraph notes that the group says it will be returning to the M25 until the end of the week. The Times, Evening Standard, MailOnline and ITV News all have the story.
A frontpage story in the Guardian covers a report from Greenpeace UK, which the paper says describes the “climate and ecological crises” as “a legacy of systemic racism”. It quotes the report saying: “The environmental emergency is the legacy of colonialism.” The paper says: “The report’s publication makes Greenpeace UK the latest big campaign group to link racial justice to the environment agenda.” The article goes on to describe the ongoing links between environmental impacts and race: “Newham, in east London, has the largest minority-ethnic population of any local authority area in the UK, and it is one of the most deprived. It is also the most polluted”.
The climate records of the final two contenders to replace Boris Johnson as UK prime minister are profiled by Climate Home News. It says former chancellor Rishi Sunak and foreign secretary Liz Truss have both committed to the UK’s existing, legally-binding net-zero by 2050 target, “both have weak records on climate action”. It says this “could change in power…[but both] will face pressure from climate sceptic elements within their own party”. The publication adds that at a recent hustings held by the Conservative Environment Network Truss “mainly focused on conserving nature” while Sunak said “he is looking at launching a new energy efficiency scheme focused on smart heating controls and cavity wall insulation, which he regards as better value for money”.
Meanwhile, the Guardian reports that a House of Lords committee has said the next prime minister needs to “get a grip on net-zero plans or deter investment”. A comment for the Financial Times by columnist Helen Thomas runs under the headline: “Cooling on net-zero isn’t good for business.”
In a comment for the Daily Mail, Truss reiterates her pledge to “suspend[] the green levy on energy bills”. (Green levies currently make up 5% of bills and will fall below 3% when the price cap rises to an estimated £3,300 in October.) An accompanying Daily Mail editorial (not online) endorses Truss and asks of both candidates if they are “committed to…standing up to the green lobby”. A comment for the Daily Telegraph by Matt Ridley, a climate-sceptic former Conservative hereditary peer who oversaw the collapse of Northern Rock bank and owns land which has been mined for coal, endorses Liz Truss. He claims – contrary to the clear evidence that more than 90% of the increase in energy bills is due to high gas prices – that net-zero “has driven up energy bills and will do so further”. He goes on to claim that a “better way” to cut emissions is “innovation in fission, fusion, shale gas and carbon capture”. (It would be effectively impossible to cut UK emissions with shale gas as there is hardly any higher-emissions coal left to phase out.)
In a factcheck for the Guardian, Carbon Brief deputy editor Dr Simon Evans explains why fracking is “too uncertain and too slow” to tackle the current energy crisis caused by high gas prices – particularly when renewables were four times cheaper than gas in a recent government auction – whereas homes could immediately up to £250 off annual bills by adjusting their boiler settings.
The i newspaper reports: “Aviation tycoon paid for anti-net-zero MP Steve Baker to party at Conservative summer ball.”
Writing for the New York Times, staff editor Spencer Bokat-Lindell says the “clean energy revolution” promised by President Joe Biden when he took office “appeared to collapse last week” after the failure to pass a climate bill through Congress “after more than a year of negotiations, compromises, deal-making and belt-tightening”. He quotes experts including Prof Leah Stokes saying: “We are not going to meet our targets, period.” Bokat-Lindell adds: “Because the US has spewed more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than any other nation, it plays a uniquely prominent role in global climate politics.” He says the Biden administration will “have to rely on its less powerful arsenal of executive actions to make progress”. For the Atlantic, columnist Robinson Meyer considers “seven ways of looking at where climate action goes from here”, following the defeat of Biden’s climate bill. These include that it was “a truly irreversible climate defeat” and that the “misery of this defeat is going to make climate activists more militant”, as well as that the “alphabet soup of state and local climate laws will be more important than ever”.
In the Washington Post, columnist Henry Olsen writes under the headline: “No, Biden shouldn’t declare a national emergency on climate.” He argues: “Climate policy is a politically contentious matter. While few deny anymore that human behaviour is warming the climate, there’s a lot of dispute about everything else. We aren’t sure how quickly the climate is warming or how much it will heat up…Presidential invocations of emergency powers are consistent with democracy only in rare cases of genuine, short-term crises. Fighting climate change is not such an event.” Another Washington Post article looks at Biden’s “stark political choice”, according to “liberal pundits”, namely: “slam Senator Joe Manchin, or take the wood to Big Oil”.
An editorial in the Independent says: “Our rapidly changing climate is veering out of its normal ranges even more rapidly than the scientists were expecting.” In contrast, a comment for the Times by Joanna Williams, author of “How Woke Won”, runs under the headline: “Climate preaching is no way to win over converts.” It says: “The weather is increasingly being discussed using the language of morality…Climate preaching reinforces the superiority of those doling out the sermons. But it neither helps people practically in the short term nor serves to cut carbon emissions in the long run. And being lectured on what to think as well as hectored on how to behave is unlikely to win converts. If you want to take people with you, drop the moralising.”
The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) – the first market-based emissions reduction programme in the US energy sector – has “not redressed the fundamental problem of disparities in pollutant burdens between EJ [environmental justice] and non-EJ communities”, a new paper says. The analysis, which focuses on electricity generation in RGGI states from 1995 to 2015, finds significant differences in siting and operation of power plants located in communities of colour and low-income communities compared to other communities. Specifically, the authors find that “the percentage of people of colour that live within 0–6.2 miles from power plants is up to 23.5% higher” than for white residents. And “the percentage of people living in poverty that live within 0–5 miles from power plants is up to 15.3% higher” than those not living in poverty.
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.