President Joe Biden announced yesterday that he has reached a deal with a bipartisan group of senators for his $1.2tn infrastructure bill, reports the New York Times – but, it adds, the “$579bn in new spending to repair the nation’s roads, rails and bridges” does “relatively little to fight climate change”. The paper explains: “The deal does provide funding for public transit, passenger and freight rail, electric buses and charging stations for electric vehicles, all designed to try to reduce pollution from passenger vehicles and trucks. And it includes $47bn to help communities become more resilient to disasters and severe weather caused by a warming planet. Still, it contains few of the ambitious ideas that Mr Biden initially proposed to cut the fossil fuel pollution that is driving climate change.” Among the measures to miss out is the national “clean electricity standard” requiring power companies to gradually ratchet up the amount of electricity they generate from wind, solar and other sources until they’re no longer emitting CO2, the paper says: “That is not included in the bipartisan bill, nor are the hundreds of billions of dollars in spending on tax incentives for wind, solar and other clean energy.” The paper says that “democratic leaders and environmentalists are hoping those proposals can be included in a separate infrastructure bill that would pass through a fast-track process known as budget reconciliation. That process would not require Republican support and could be enacted with a simple majority vote”, but “that’s a difficult proposition”. Standing with the 10 senators in the West Wing driveway after their 30-minute Oval Office meeting, Biden said: “We have a deal…They’ve given me their word…Where I come from, that’s good enough for me,“ reports the Los Angeles Times. The paper notes: “On Capitol Hill, senators who were not involved in the negotiations were reluctant to commit to supporting the plan without seeing full details. But in a positive sign, neither progressives nor conservatives completely ruled out supporting it.” Forbes takes a look at the measures in the proposal, noting that “clean transportation is heavily backed in the modified spending bill, with $49bn to aid public transit projects, $66bn earmarked for freight and passenger rail upgrades and $7.5bn for electric transit and school buses”. The Hill, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and New York Times all look into the details of what measures made it into the agreed deal, while CNN notes that the deal is “is far short of the $2.25tn plan Biden unveiled in March”. Reuters reports that the deal includes “partial funding by a proposed $6bn sale from the US emergency oil reserve”.

BBC News says that “the deal is far from done” as it depends on the second bill, which will be even larger. The $6tn spending package, which is being drafted by Senator Bernie Sanders, “would roll in [Biden’s] party’s priorities on climate change, education, paid leave and childcare benefits”, the outlet says. It adds: “It would be passed by a budget reconciliation process that would not require any Republican votes in the Senate. The most powerful Democrat in the US House of Representatives, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, made clear they would not pass one bill without the other.” Biden also confirmed he won’t sign the bipartisan infrastructure deal if Congress doesn’t also pass a reconciliation bill, the Hill reports, committing to a dual-track system to get both bills passed. Biden told reporters: “I expect that in the coming months this summer, before the fiscal year is over, that we will have voted on this bill, the infrastructure bill, as well as voted on the budget resolution. But if only one comes to me, this is the only one that comes to me, I’m not signing it. It’s in tandem.” This drew a “harsh response” from Republican Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, says Reuters. “Less than two hours after publicly commending our colleagues and actually endorsing the bipartisan agreement, the president took the extraordinary step of threatening to veto it,” McConnell said on the Senate floor. “It almost makes your head spin.” The Washington Post says that the dual approach will “require a bit of a tightrope walk, especially if Republicans see the second bill as undermining or devaluing the bipartisan bill they spent weeks negotiating”. It adds the Republicans senators “could see it as an affront, if Biden simply inserts the items they resisted into a separate bill”. Boston Globe reporter James Pindell warns that “at the moment it remains more likely that this bipartisan deal will fail than succeed. And even if it does pass, it will be a while before Biden signs it”.

In other US news, the Hill reports that Biden administration is backing the Trump administration’s approval of a controversial oil pipeline project in Minnesota in a new legal filing. The New York Times says: “The closely watched filing in federal court was the latest in a series of actions taken by the administration to back Trump-era approvals of oil and gas infrastructure, despite President Biden’s pledge to aggressively cut emissions from fossil fuels, a major driver of climate change. The pipeline, which is known as Line 3 and is being built by Canadian pipeline company Enbridge Energy, has been the focus of mass protests in recent weeks.” The Hill also reports that the Senate yesterday passed bipartisan legislation aimed at granting farms access to carbon offset markets. And, finally, Reuters reports that five Democratic Senators yesterday introduced a bill that would allow some existing nuclear power plants to receive a tax credit equal to an incentive already given to operators of wind power turbines.

Senior figures in Police Scotland have revealed plans to deploy around 10,000 officers each day during the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow in November, the Guardian reports. Describing the “biggest and longest mobilisation of police that the UK has ever seen”, assistant chief constable Bernard Higgins, who is “gold commander” for the COP26 operation, said that thousands of officers would be travelling north to support Scottish colleagues at the conference, which at least 20,000 delegates and more than 100 heads of state are expected to attend, the paper explains. At one of a series of briefings, deputy chief constable Will Kerr told reporters that the police’s intention is to police the event “sensibly and proportionately so that people have an opportunity to come and have their voice heard”, the paper notes. Higgins noted the possible attendance of both US President Joe Biden and Pope Francis added to the “complex and complicated operation”, reports the Press Association (via the Belfast Telegraph). He said: “If you take the two most iconic world leaders, the president and the pontiff, and put them in one place then the likelihood is that that will absolutely encourage a significant number of other world leaders to attend.” As well as having venues assessed by counter terrorist security advisers, officers are also installing CCTV and hostile vehicle barriers to help keep the summit secure, the i newspaper reports. In a separate article, the Press Association says that an assurance review by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland (HMICS) has warned that is “inevitable” that the resources needed for COP26 will cause disruption to day-to-day policing. The Times and BBC News also have the story.

In other COP26 news, UN secretary general Antonio Guterres said yesterday that the summit’s success will depend on a breakthrough in financial contributions from rich countries, reports Reuters. In a speech to the European Parliament, Guterres said a pledge to provide $100bn per year to help poorer countries was “not symbolic”, but a “vital commitment”, adding: “We can only ask for more ambition if we provide additional support”. Meanwhile, climate negotiators attending the annual Chatham House climate conference said the focus for COP26 must be “on getting more ambitious greenhouse gas emissions cuts and boosting finance for vulnerable nations”, says Reuters. Nick Bridge, the UK government’s special representative for climate change, said the country is pushing hard for all nations to come forward by next month with more ambitious commitments, the newswire reports, He said: “We will not be able to solve the whole thing in Glasgow, but we need to take concrete and convincing action collectively.”

The European Parliament yesterday approved a law to make the European Union’s greenhouse gas emissions targets legally binding, reports Reuters. The newswire explains: “Negotiators from Parliament and the EU’s 27 member countries reached a deal in April on the climate law, which puts tougher emissions-cutting targets at the heart of EU policymaking. The bill sets targets to reduce net EU emissions by 55% by 2030, from 1990 levels, and eliminate net emissions by 2050.” Parliament formally approved the law with 442 votes in favour, 203 against and 51 abstentions, Reuters says, noting that “some Green lawmakers abstained, after seeking a more ambitious 60% emission cut by 2030. Lawmakers from groups including the right-wing Identity and Democracy rejected it”. Frans Timmermans, head of EU climate policy, described the law as “the law of laws” because “it will discipline us in the years to come”. The climate law will guide EU regulations in the coming decades, Reuters explains, adding: “First up is a sweeping package of policies, which the European Commission will propose on 14 July, designed to cut emissions faster to meet the climate targets. It will include more ambitious renewable energy targets, EU carbon market reforms and tighter CO2 standards for new cars.”

Meanwhile, Reuters also reports that EU negotiators were yesterday seeking “a deal to make the bloc’s huge farming subsidies greener, after disagreements on rules to curb agriculture’s climate impact upended talks last month”. And the Financial Times Lex column looks at the potential impact of the “charge for imported goods based on carbon content” that the EU is expected to announce this summer.

In an “exclusive”, the Guardian reports that “individuals and companies linked to the oil and gas industries have donated more than £400,000 to the Conservative party in the past year, while the government mulled controversial new licences to explore the North Sea for fossil fuel production sites”. Research between the paper and the climate investigative journalism website DeSmog reveals that “at least £419,000 was given to the Conservatives by donors with a strong interest in oil and gas, including in the North Sea”. The paper continues: “The donations came as the government deliberated the future development of the UK’s lucrative oil and gas fields in the North Sea. A review was formally opened last September and then on 24 March came the announcement of a new round of licensing for oil and gas wells, with up to £16bn in joint investment between the government and private sector, despite the likely negative impact of such development on the UK’s climate targets.” The Guardian notes that “the companies making donations, or whose senior personnel were listed as donors, made no direct representations to the government over the award of oil and gas licences”, and that “ministers have held no meetings with the companies in the past year”. In response, a spokesperson for the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) said: “The UK is working hard to drive down demand for fossil fuels and eliminate our contribution to climate change, but we also know there will continue to be ongoing demand for oil and gas, as recognised by the independent Climate Change Committee,“ the paper says.

A new report from Scotland’s Climate Assembly has outlined a set of recommendations for how the country can tackle climate change, BBC News says. The document, which will now be handed over to party leaders at Holyrood, suggests an “Oyster card” for public transport in Scotland, green taxes and scrapping air miles among its 80 recommendations, the outlet says. It notes that the assembly “was created after people across Scotland were randomly selected to register an interest. More than 100 were eventually chosen, meeting to discuss the climate change challenge over seven weekends between November 2020 and March this year”. The Herald reports that the assembly calls for a commitment “to working to decarbonise all internal flights within Scotland by 2025” and “place rail travel at the core of an integrated transport system, by subsidising rail infrastructure to make it more affordable and resilient than air travel, particularly for mainland journeys in the UK”. The National reports the comments of Prof Dave Reay of Edinburgh University’s Climate Change Institute, who said: “This is a clarion call for climate action right across Scotland…These recommendations span every part of our lives, from heating our homes and the daily commute, through to what we buy and what we eat.” The Courier also has the story, while Ruth Harvey and Josh Littlejohn – co-conveners of the assembly – have a comment piece in the Scotsman. They write: “The assembly’s recommendations show ordinary people leading Scotland’s response the climate emergency through proposals that are innovative and ambitious. They are also realistic and achievable – provided they are matched by political will from our parliament and government. It gives Scotland a mandate from its people to provide genuine global leadership on climate.” (Carbon Brief has previously reported on the recommendations from the UK-wide climate assembly.)

In related news, BBC News reports on a planned direct air capture (DAC) plant for north-east Scotland. The proposed plant, a joint project between UK firm Storegga and Canadian company Carbon Engineering, “would remove up to one million tonnes of CO2 every year – the same amount taken up by around 40m trees”, the outlet says, adding that “the extracted gas could be stored permanently deep under the seabed off the Scottish coast”.

Reuters reports that China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC) – the largest oil and gas producer and supplier of China – expects China to use more natural gas and cut coal to deliver its climate targets. The news agency says that CNPC predicts the nation’s coal use to drop to 44% of energy consumption by 2030 and 8% by 2060. It adds that CNPC forecasts the portion of natural gas to increase to 12% of China’s primary energy mix in 2030. Meanwhile, an opinion piece from Yicai says that the launch of the national emissions trading scheme (ETS) will facilitate China’s economic transformation, in addition to helping it cut emissions. Yesterday, Carbon Brief published an in-depth Q&A explaining how the ETS can help China tackle climate change.

Separately, energy experts have said that the “solution” for China’s 2060 “carbon-neutrality” goal was not to abandon coal, but to upgrade the industry – including reducing emissions and developing “new value” – reports S&P Global Platts. The experts also said that China’s climate endeavour would require large-scale deployment of carbon capture, usage and storage to remove carbon dioxide from coal-fired power generation and hydrogen production, the website says.

Elsewhere, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has said that Beijing will take “all necessary measures” to “resolutely safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies”, reports state newswire China News Service. The statement came after reports – including by Reuters, Bloomberg, Politico, Financial Times, the New York Times and Wall Street Journal – that the Biden administration had issued an order to ban US imports of solar products from a Xinjiang-based company over forced labour allegations. Another Reuters article reports that the White House “stopped short of imposing a ban on all imports of silica from Xinjiang and said the action would not harm US clean energy goals”. And a separate Bloomberg piece says the move “represents one of President Joe Biden’s biggest steps yet to counter alleged mistreatment of China’s ethnic Uyghur Muslim minority”, but “it falls short of a broad regional ban some activists had urged on solar imports from Xinjiang”. Washington Post columnist Josh Rogin has a piece entitled, “We can’t fight climate change using forced labor in China”. In related news, South China Morning Post reports that Daqo New Energy – a Xinjiang-based solar plant that has been put on a separate “export blacklist” by the US – plans to raise 5bn yuan (US$772.5m) from listing a subsidiary in Shanghai.

UK power producer Drax said yesterday that it would seek planning permission to build a new 600-megawatt (MW) underground pumped hydro storage power station at its Cruachan facility in Scotland, reports Reuters. Drax already has a 440MW pumped hydro storage station at the site of Ben Cruachan, Argyll’s highest mountain, in the west of Scotland, the newswire explains. It adds: “By using reversible turbines to pump water from Loch Awe to the upper reservoir on the mountainside, the plant would be able to store power from wind farms when supply outstrips demand.” The Times says the project “is likely to cost hundreds of millions of pounds and will depend on the government developing new policies to offer financial support”. It notes that work on the project could begin as soon as 2024 and the plant could be operational by 2030.

In other UK news, the Guardian reports that “chief executives from the UK’s largest insurers have joined forces with the Prince of Wales to launch a sector-wide taskforce aimed at tackling the climate crisis”. At the launch of the taskforce, the prince urged the world’s insurers to rise to the “challenge” of tackling climate change and “innovate new products”, reports the Press Association (via the Belfast Telegraph).

The Press Association also reports that “three UK-built satellites set to monitor and tackle climate change and track endangered wildlife are due to be launched on a SpaceX rocket” today.

The airline industry’s global trade group will later this year propose a net-zero carbon emissions target for 2050, reports Bloomberg. In an interview yesterday, Willie Walsh, the director general of the International Air Transport Association (IATA), said they will ask carriers to adopt the target at its annual meeting in Boston in October. The outlet continues: “While airlines including British Airways owner IAG SA, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines Holding have all made net-zero commitments, IATA hasn’t updated its own goal since 2009. At that time, airlines pledged to cut CO2 output 50% by mid-century, compared with 2005 levels. But emissions have surged since then, driven by a boom in air travel cut short only last year by the coronavirus pandemic.” Walsh said: “I’m very confident that the industry will align with the changed goals…But we do have to go through the formal process.”

In other net-zero news, Bloomberg also reports that the United Arab Emirates could become the first nation among the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) to set a net-zero goal. It says: “The country is considering a 2050 target to align with a global push to keep temperatures from rising more than 1.5C from pre-industrial levels, according to people familiar with the discussions. They asked not to be named because talks are private and ongoing. The aim is to make an announcement before the United Nations climate summit in Glasgow in November, the people said.”

A Times editorial reacts to yesterday’s “critical report” from the UK’s Climate Change Committee (CCC) that detailed “the gaping chasm that exists between rhetoric and reality” on the government’s net-zero and adaptation targets. “Of course, there is an obvious reason why the government is dithering,” the paper says: “It has realised that while setting targets is cheap, achieving them can be ruinously expensive.” However, “these hard choices cannot be ducked for much longer, and not just because the targets are legally binding”, the editorial says: One risk is that by delaying decisions, the government will miss the opportunities that arise from the transition to clean energy. The European Union has started dispensing an €800bn pandemic recovery fund, much of which is to be spent on clean energy projects. Having led the pack in setting ambitious targets, Britain may find itself left behind in new technologies such as hydrogen, just as it has been in wind power.“ The piece cautions that “the lack of a coherent strategy could have global consequences”, concluding: As the host of this year’s Cop26 summit, the world is looking to Britain for climate leadership. Bluster will not suffice.“ (See Carbon Brief‘s in-depth summary for more on the report’s findings.)

Elsewhere in UK comment, Times Red Box carries an article by Rachel Wolf – founding partner of policy and research company Public First – and Sam Alvis – head of green renewal at the thinktank Green Alliance. They discuss their new research that suggests “there is a disconnect between Westminster and the rest about green work. Crucially, hardly anyone knows what a green job actually is. The conversation is abstract, and that makes it difficult for people to engage.”

Writing in the Daily Telegraph, farmer-turned-barrister-turned-writer Philip Walling – who was briefly a parliamentary candidate for the Brexit Party at the last general election – criticises the potential creation of two new Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) in the Yorkshire Wolds and Cheshire and extension of other existing areas in the Surrey Hills and the Chilterns. He writes: “At the same time as the government is trying to commit itself to the strictures imposed by the global climate change movement represented by COP26, it is loosening planning regulations to allow huge estates of houses, many without gardens or outside space, to be crammed onto farmland around our towns and cities.”

Finally, John Thornhill – innovation editor at the Financial Times – looks at the “burst of creative competition” in the electric vehicle market “as entrepreneurial start-ups and tech companies flood into the market”.

New research shows that some datasets, including those used by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, may be underestimating the scale of deforestation-related emissions in Brazil. Researchers analyse several different datasets of land use in Brazil and calculate the emissions associated with the land-use changes in each dataset. They find that, when remote-sensing data are incorporated into these larger-scale datasets, they are able to better reproduce the patterns of land-use change across the country, and the upper bound of emissions increases by nearly 70%. The authors write that their new estimates will help “reduce uncertainty” in the emissions related to land-use change and provide better constraints for the global carbon budget.

The amount of carbon sequestered in Russian forests since the late 1980s may be nearly 50% higher than previously reported, according to a new study. Using remote sensing data and on-the-ground measurements of forest biomass, researchers evaluate the changes in forests across Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union. They estimate that, in 2014, the actual forest biomass in Russia was more than one-third higher than the country officially reported. These changes are of the same magnitude as the losses in tropical forests over the same time period, the authors say: “Russian forests play an even more important global role in carbon sequestration than previously thought”.