The World Bank has ratified the nomination of Ajay Banga as its next head, Bloomberg reports. It continues: “[Banga] is taking over at a pivotal time for the anti-poverty lender, which gives out about $100bn annually. The US is among nations pushing reforms of multilateral development banks to unlock more climate financing for the developing world.” The outlet adds: “Since his nomination, Banga has declared himself a ‘big believer’ in the scientific evidence that burning fossil fuels contributes to climate change, seeking to address criticism about the lender’s commitment to the issue under its outgoing chief.  His comments also contrast with a public relations flub by [outgoing Trump-nominated World Bank head David] Malpass last year, when he came under fire for appearing to dodge questions on whether he believed that climate change is driven by man-made greenhouse gas emissions.” BBC News reports: “Former Mastercard boss Ajay Banga has been elected to lead the World Bank as it strives to help low-income countries overcome debt and combat climate change…He will replace David Malpass, who had sparked outcry by appearing to question the role of humans in climate change.” It says Banga will start his five-year term on 2 June. The New York Times reports: “Ajay Banga, President Biden’s pick to be president of the World Bank and broaden its ambitions to combat climate change, was approved by its executive board on Wednesday.” It adds: “Biden praised the board’s decision in a statement on Wednesday, expressing optimism that Banga would help steer the bank to address challenges such as climate change in ways that will make it even more effective in its mission to reduce poverty.” The paper also quotes a statement from US treasury secretary Janet Yellen saying: “Ajay understands that the challenges we face – from combating climate change, pandemics, and fragility to eliminating extreme poverty and promoting shared prosperity – are deeply intertwined.” Reuters quotes Biden saying in a statement: “[Banga] will help steer the institution as it evolves and expands to address global challenges that directly affect its core mission of poverty reduction – including climate change.” The Times of India says the “Indian-American” Banga “will be taking charge at a pivotal time for the development lender as it looks to better address climate change”.

The El Niño weather pattern in the Pacific Ocean is likely to develop later this year and “could contribute to rising temperatures”, Reuters reports, citing the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). There is a 60% chance that El Niño will develop by May-July according to the agency, the newswire says, rising to 70-80% by July-September. It quotes a WMO official telling reporters: “El Niño will fuel the temperature globally…We feel the effect of El Nino temperatures globally with a slight delay.” Agence-France Presse says the shift to El Niño conditions “could fuel higher global temperatures and possibly new heat records”. It adds: “Since the El Niño effect on global temperatures usually plays out the year after it emerges, the impact would probably be most apparent in 2024, it said.” The New York Times also has the story. (Last week, Carbon Brief’s latest state of the climate report said: “This year is shaping up to be one of top four warmest years on record – and has a modest chance of being the warmest on record. Exceptionally warm conditions are being driven by the end of a persistent triple-dip La Niña  and a rapid transition into warmer El Niño conditions.”)

The incoming president of the UN COP28 climate summit, Sultan Al Jaber, is “at odds with leading environment ministers over how to curb global warming while pushing for the continued long-term use of fossil fuels by capturing their carbon emissions”, the Financial Times reports. It continues: “Speaking at the end of the two-day Petersberg Climate Dialogue in Berlin, Sultan Al Jaber, who is also the head of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, said fossil fuels would ‘continue to play a role in the foreseeable future’…But several ministers and delegates at the summit differed on the long-term outlook for continued oil and gas production and use. German foreign minister Annalena Baerbock, sharing the stage with Jaber for a closing press briefing, said: ‘We have to get out of fossil fuels, we have to dramatically reduce emissions.’” The New York Times says Al Jaber’s comments in Germany “hint[] at his approach” to COP28. Axios says the Petersberg meeting revealed “early jockeying for negotiating positions” ahead of COP28. It explains: “After facing staunch resistance to calls for a fossil fuel phase-out during the climate talks in Glasgow and Sharm El-Sheikh, Germany and the European Union are aiming to unite the world around goals to triple the use of renewable energy sources. The renewables proposal is essentially the flip side to the EU’s past position arguing for a fossil fuel phaseout…Ending fossil fuels usage has not disappeared from Germany’s agenda for COP28, but rather been pushed to the side.” Writing in Foreign Policy, Rachel Kyte, dean of Tufts University’s Fletcher School and Laurence Tubiana, head of the European Climate Foundation (which funds Carbon Brief), argue that “the Emirates’ hosting of COP28 could be a breakthrough”. They explain: “2023 may be the year when leaders galvanise into climate action. This may sound unduly optimistic. But there are several compelling reasons why this could be the case – and the fact that the United Arab Emirates (UAE) is hosting the next COP climate change summit is at the centre of them.” They add: “Countries have struggled in previous rounds of talks to acknowledge fossil fuels’ role in emissions and agree to phase them out. But the UAE can pull off a modern-day energy diplomacy ‘Nixon goes to China’ moment. Its oil producer credentials position it to unite the world around this fundamental statement of the obvious.” In other news from Petersberg, Climate Home News reports that Germany has pledged €2bn to the Green Climate Fund and Samaa reports that Germany has pledged “€120m to help Pakistan combat climate change”.

A Reuters “exclusive” reports that US climate envoy John Kerry said yesterday that he had been invited to China for climate talks “even as diplomatic relations between the world’s two biggest greenhouse gas emitters remain tense”. The newswire says: “The US and China must work together to address climate change, Kerry said in an interview with Reuters on the sidelines of a conference on global warming in Berlin.” It continues: “US president Joe Biden has authorised the meeting, but the timing remains to be determined and certain issues must still be clarified, Kerry said. China, for example, first must issue its plan to reduce methane emissions and advance in the transition away from coal, Kerry added.” The newswire notes: “China last year briefly suspended talks with the US on climate, security and other areas in response to a visit to Taiwan by US House of Representatives then-speaker Nancy Pelosi. Although China subsequently resumed those talks, relations between the two countries deteriorated again after what the US described as a Chinese spy balloon traversed American airspace.” It also reports: “Kerry said he supports Germany’s proposal at the Petersberg Climate Dialogue to set a goal at COP28 to triple renewable energy by 2030, noting Europe’s largest economy was a trend-setter in this regard.”

Elsewhere, CNN reports that the US ambassador to China Nicholas Burns said on Tuesday that the US is “ready to talk” to China, and that “climate talks have resumed”. He also expressed hope that Beijing would “meet us halfway on this”, the broadcaster says. 

Finally, Xinhua focuses on US president Joe Biden’s statement on Wednesday that the Chips and Science Act was “not designed to hurt China”. The state news agency writes that those remarks might “seem friendly, but they can hardly be interpreted as a goodwill gesture” by the US towards China. It says that there are several urgent issues where the US requires China’s collaboration, including combating climate change. 

India will need to spend $1tn between now and 2030 on adapting to climate change, Reuters reports, citing a report from the country’s central bank. It continues: “Estimates suggest that green financing requirements in India could be at least 2.5% of GDP annually to address the infrastructure gap caused by climate events…The report said a sector-specific approach to climate risk mitigation is called for, in view of the difficult policy trade-offs between containing near-term adverse [economic] output impact due to NDC (nationally determined contribution) commitments against larger output losses in the medium-run due to no policy action.” The Hindu reports: “India’s goal of achieving the net-zero target by 2070 would require an accelerated reduction in the energy intensity of GDP by about 5% annually and a significant improvement in its energy-mix in favour of renewables to about 80% by 2070-71, the [Reserve Bank of India’s Department of Economic and Policy Research] said in its report themed ‘Towards a Greener Cleaner India’.” Separately, the Times of India reports that 82% of Indians are “alarmed or concerned about global warming”.

New York has become the first US state to ban gas and other fossil fuels in most new buildings, the Washington Post reports. It says the state approved a $229bn state budget yesterday “that will prohibit natural gas hookups and other fossil fuels in most new homes and other construction, a major victory for climate activists”. The paper adds: “The move, which will likely face a court challenge from the fossil fuel industry, will serve as a test of states’ power to ban fossil fuels outright, rather than simply encouraging developers to build low-carbon buildings. The law effectively requires all-electric heating and cooking in new buildings shorter than seven stories by 2026, and in 2029 for taller buildings.” It notes: “But the gas industry and its Republican supporters have raised doubts about whether New York’s gas ban can survive legal challenges. Some climate advocates worry that a decision by the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit that struck down the California city of Berkeley’s first-in-the-nation gas ban could have a chilling effect on other cities and counties. Although the court’s decision is not legally binding in most of the United States, hesitation to adopt local gas bans could ripple outward, said Matt Vespa, a senior attorney with the nonprofit organisation Earthjustice.” The Hill also has the story. Meanwhile, the Guardian “America’s dirty divide” reports: “New York state has passed legislation that will scale up the state’s renewable energy production and signals a major step toward moving utilities out of private hands to become publicly owned. The bill, included in the state’s new budget, will require the state’s public power provider to generate all of its electricity from clean energy by 2030.”

In other US news, Reuters reports that the US senate voted yesterday to repeal president Joe Biden’s suspension of tariffs on solar panels from four southeast Asian countries, adding that Biden has “vowed to veto the legislation, which passed the House of Representatives last week”. Politico calls the senate vote a “bipartisan rebuke of solar tariff policy”, because the Republican measure had the support of nine Democrats. The Hill runs the same angle. Bloomberg says the vote “underscor[es] a deep clash over continued US reliance on foreign imports to drive the nation’s renewable-energy development”. It explains: “The legislation creates political risk for the president, because it’s bound up with concerns about US dependence on China for the critical minerals used in electric vehicles, solar panels and other equipment vital to the clean-energy transition. House Republicans are expected to hold a vote to override Biden’s planned veto, even though the chamber didn’t muster the two-thirds majority necessary to overcome his rejection when it passed the measure last week.” Separately, Politico reports: “The United Auto Workers is holding back on endorsing President Joe Biden for reelection for now, citing concerns over his electric vehicle policies. In a memo sent to UAW members Tuesday, President Shawn Fain said the union wants to see Biden push more forcefully for better wages and benefits for workers at EV facilities.” Meanwhile, the Hill reports under the headline: “Four ways Biden is boosting fossil fuels – and drawing heat for it.”

There is a “significant risk” that Russia could target energy infrastructure in Europe or North America, Politico reports, citing comments to reporters by David Cattler, Nato’s assistant secretary general for intelligence and security. The outlet reports: “The threat posed to undersea gas pipelines that supply Europe was starkly exposed by the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines in the Baltic last September. Cattler said that undersea cables that carry 95% of internet traffic were also potentially at risk.” The Times reports: “Nato suspects that Russia has planted explosives on critical European undersea infrastructure, based on intelligence from the companies that run oil and gas rigs, pipelines, electricity connectors and telecoms cables.” It adds: “While investigations into the Nord Stream bombing continue and several theories have been suggested, there is growing evidence that links the Russian navy to the attack.” Politico says: “Three Russian Navy ships were detected in waters close to the site of the Nord Stream explosions in the months leading up to the pipeline sabotage, according to media reports.” The Daily Mail also reports Nato comments about Russia potentially having mined undersea infrastructure. (It was one of several UK papers to report similar concerns last October.)

As the world struggles with the lasting energy crisis, China-led Asia has become “a centre” for the development of nuclear power, indicating “the decline of the West”, writes CNBC. It says that “with 21 units, which account for 40% of total global construction, China tops the list of countries with the most reactors under construction”. The article adds that “out of 15 countries that are building nuclear plants, only four countries including China, India, Russia and South Korea are constructing more than one site”. 

Meanwhile, Reuters carries an article by columnist Gavin Maguire, former Asia commodities and energy editor. He writes that the country’s coal-fired power emissions are expected to reach an all-time high in 2023. The manufacturing sector’s “unexpected contract[ion]” in April, after a strong start to the year, may “trigger fresh stimulus measures” that would increase the country’s coal usage even further, he adds. For Bloomberg, columnist David Fickling says predicted heatwaves across Asia could mean drought and the increased use of coal power to make up for shortfalls in hydro output. He writes: “Yunnan province, which contains the headwaters of the Yangtze River that feeds many of the vast dams China has constructed over the past few decades, has been gripped by severe drought in recent months, according to the official China Daily…The Yangtze may face drought this year even as other river basins experience floods, the Ministry of Water Resources said last month. Economic planners in Yunnan have told local aluminium smelters, one of the most power-hungry sectors of the economy, to cap output and purchase more coal and coal-fired power, the South China Morning Post reported.”

“Banks and insurers are more frequently adding coal exclusion policies to their investments while those with existing policies are toughening them up”, Reuters reports, citing new analysis from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA). It adds: “More than 200 financial institutions globally have policies restricting coal investment, double the number seen in April 2019…The increase in restrictions comes amid record profits at coal miners over the past year, partly driven by the policies that have curbed available capital for new projects, increasing regulation, as well as by the war in Ukraine.” The South China Morning Post says only three of the 200 institutions mentioned in the report are from China. It quotes the IEEFA report saying: “Overall, China, the second-largest economy in the world, has too few FIs with coal exit policies.”

The EU is committed to its climate goals and “won’t be deterred by mounting geopolitical challenges”, Bloomberg reports, citing comments from Kurt Vandenberghe, director general for climate at the European Commission. It quotes the official saying: “What is very clear is that our climate ambition increasingly goes hand-in-hand with energy security…We will stay the course, whatever happens in the world; in the very changing, volatile world.” Meanwhile, the Financial Times reports under the headline: “EU centre-right joins backlash against bloc’s green agenda.” It explains: “Europe’s largest political party has joined a growing backlash against Brussels’ plan to reverse damage to the environment, arguing it threatens food production and farmers’ livelihoods…The move could torpedo the commission’s plans to cut pesticide use in half and rewild a fifth of damaged habitats across the bloc by 2030.” Separately, Energy Monitor reports on “Europe’s ‘coal comeback’ that never materialised.”

The Australian state government in the Northern Territory “has not fully implemented key recommendations, including those aimed at reducing the risk new gas developments pose for the climate”, the Guardian reports, adding: “Environment groups say it shows ‘serious outstanding issues’ remain with plans to expand the gas industry in the Beetaloo Basin a day after the NT government cleared the way for a move from exploration to production.” Bloomberg reports: “Scientists warned about the potential climate impact of shale gas production in Australia’s Northern Territory as the region – which had previously banned fracking – confirmed it will allow developers to seek approvals for projects…Development of Beetaloo would generate as much as an additional 89 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions annually, a group of almost 100 opponents said Wednesday in a letter to the region’s government published in local newspapers.” Separately, the Guardian reports that Australia has been “warned of ‘over-mining’ risk in race to secure minerals needed for clean energy”.

For the Financial Times magazine, business columnist and former environment correspondent Pilita Clark profiles and interviews Pete Betts, the former UK and EU lead climate negotiator and “one of the world’s most influential climate diplomats”. She quotes Betts saying that the annual UN climate summits (COPs) are misunderstood: “It is incredibly frustrating to see how poorly understood these UN summits are…The decisions that really matter are taken months before a COP starts. That’s when most countries announce their so-called nationally determined contributions, or emissions-cutting pledges.” Betts adds: “There should be a much bigger spotlight on the failure of countries such as China, whose emissions are bigger than those of the entire developed world, to seriously strengthen their commitments…Instead, there is far more attention at COPs on things like what is said about fossil fuels in the wording of a final decision to which no single country can be held to account.” On the 1.5C limit, Betts tells Clark: “Countries’ collective failure to agree on sufficient emissions cuts between now and 2030 is hugely significant – and China matters most here. This is not to point fingers at Beijing. Developed countries outside Europe, especially the US, Canada, Australia and Japan, have failed to act for decades, when they could have done so at very manageable cost.” He adds: “Many will try to use such a moment to argue that we should give up on 1.5C. These are the same people who caused us to fall short of the target in the first place. If we do go above 1.5C, the message is not to give up. It’s to double down.” Betts also comments on the challenge of staying on top of activity at COP, the near-disaster at the end of Paris COP21, the value of personal relationships, the “crucial” role at COP21 of the late Marshall Islands foreign minister Tony de Brum and the way recent UK prime ministers have acted at COP.

Writing for the Times Red Box, former foreign secretary David Miliband reflects on comments last week from international development minister Andrew Mitchell, who he says “declared last week that tackling the poverty crisis and the climate crisis are two sides of the same coin”. Miliband writes: “He’s right. There is a strong correlation between communities facing extreme poverty and those at the sharp end of the risks of climate catastrophe. But words and deeds are out of sync and there needs to be a fundamental change of approach. Today, global climate and humanitarian policy are not joined up. The most vulnerable communities in the world have the least investment in climate resilience. And there is palpable anger in countries that have contributed least to the climate crisis but are most exposed.” He says there are four gaps that need to be addressed: “First, there is urgent need for better mapping of climate and humanitarian risk…The second gap concerns policy and programme innovation: what constitutes effective action to insulate people against the ravages of the climate emergency…The third gap is finance.” On finance, Miliband writes: “This makes the task of the new president of the World Bank, Ajay Banga, former chief executive of Mastercard, especially significant. He needs to reboot the World Bank’s mission for an age when humanitarian need, development challenge and the climate challenge are intertwined. He has to raise more capital and take more risk to get anywhere near the levels of finance needed for the scale of the challenge. He has to achieve a balance between mitigation of future climate change and adaptation to climate emergencies already baked into current levels of greenhouse gas emissions. And he needs new delivery mechanisms for fragile states. This latter point is the fourth challenge.”

New research finds that by the mid 21st century, 6.8m kilometres of global road and railway assets –  representing 29% of the global land transport infrastructure – will be exposed to more frequent extreme precipitation under a moderate warming scenario. The authors “comprehensively analyse the exposure of road and railway infrastructure assets to changes in precipitation return periods globally”. They propose a “safety factor” of 1.2 for climate change adaptation in the transportation infrastructure design process to “ensure transportation assets will maintain their designed risk level in the future”.