There is widespread media coverage of new research finding that the remaining “carbon budget” for limiting global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial temperatures has shrunk further. The latest assessment report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimated that only 500bn tonnes of carbon could be released from 2020 to give the planet a 50% chance of staying below 1.5C, according to BBC News. The new study uses more recent data and re-examines the role of other factors such as aerosols on global temperatures, the outlet explains. It continues: “The new research paper finds that these aerosols have in fact a far higher cooling impact than previously thought. But as the world strives to clean up dirty air in cities and to use less of the most heavily polluting fossil fuels, the number of aerosols in the atmosphere declines – meaning temperatures go up faster than previously thought. The researchers say this new understanding of the role of aerosols removes 100bn tonnes from the remaining 1.5C budget. Combined with the extra carbon and some other small adjustments, this brings the total remaining budget down to 250bn tonnes.” The Guardian calls the remaining carbon budget “tiny”, adding that it will be exhausted in six years given current levels of emissions. The UN goal of halving emissions by 2030 and reaching net-zero by 2050 would give only a 40% chance of staying below 1.5C, the newspaper adds. The New Scientist notes that to limit global warming to 1.5C, the planet would need to reach net-zero emissions by 2034. The New York Times adds that global average temperatures have already risen by around 1.2C. In the Conversation, two of the study’s authors write: “It looks less likely that we will limit warming to 1.5C, but this does not mean that we should give up hope. Our update also revised the budget for 2C downwards relative to the IPCC’s 2021 estimate, but by a smaller amount – from 1,350 to 1,220 gigatonnes, or from 34 to 30 years of current emissions. If current national climate policies are fully implemented (admittedly, an optimistic scenario), this may be enough to hold warming below 2C.” The Times, Associated Press, Time, Daily Mail, Energy Mix and NPR also cover the study. The study authors revealed the reduced carbon budget in a Carbon Brief guest post last year (the new study includes small updates to their methods).

The World Bank has warned that crude oil prices could rise above $150 per barrel if the conflict in the Middle East escalates, the Financial Times reports. In its quarterly commodities markets outlook, the bank warned that prolonged conflict “could drive big rises in energy and food prices in a ‘dual shock’ for commodity markets still reeling from Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine”, the newspaper says. According to Reuters, the report outlines three risk scenarios based on regional conflicts since the 1970s. A “small disruption” similar to the 2011 Libyan civil war would cut daily oil output by 0.5m-2m barrels and drive oil prices up to $93-102 per barrel in the final quarter of 2023, it says. A “medium disruption” would push prices up to $109-121 per barrel, it adds. And a “large disruption” on the scale of the 1973 Arab oil embargo would cut global oil supply by 6m-8m barrels per day, driving up oil prices to $140-157 per barrel, the newswire reports. The Guardian notes that oil prices have risen by about 6% since the conflict began, but says agricultural commodities, industrial metals and other commodities have “barely budged”. The New York Times adds: “The World Bank projects that global oil prices, which are currently hovering around $85 per barrel, will average $90 per barrel this quarter. The organisation had been projecting them to decline next year, but disruptions to oil supplies could drastically change those forecasts.” CityAM reports that the current record for crude oil is $147 per barrel recorded in 2008. The Daily Telegraph, the Times, the Hill and the Daily Mail also cover the story.

Elsewhere, the Financial Times reports that Mario Mehren, chief executive of German oil company Wintershall Dea, has “warned of European ‘complacency” over energy security in the wake of the escalating war in Gaza. S&P Global also carries Mehren’s warning. Separately, S&P Global reports that Argentina has threatened to halt exports of crude oil following domestic shortages.

Politico reports that last year’s agreement at the COP27 climate summit to create a loss and damage fund is “at risk of coming apart”. According to the outlet, discussions about the creation of a loss and damage fund “have become mired in acrimony to the point where one lead negotiator is threatening to reopen the most explosive issue: whether big polluters such as the US and the European Union should be held liable for their many decades of greenhouse gas pollution”. It says an inability to reach a deal on the fund “would raise questions about nations’ ability to resolve even tougher questions when the COP28 gathering begins 30 November”. The outlet quotes the lead negotiator for Barbados, who said that if countries fail to find a compromise in the coming days, “it will break COP”. It continues: “The US has said all contributions should be voluntary and is pushing for a variety of sources beyond government contributions, such as philanthropies and so-called ‘innovative sources,’ such as voluntary carbon markets…Developing countries worry that without a commitment or acknowledgement of responsibility written into the system, the fund would depend on the charity of rich countries.” Separately, Reuters covers a warning from the EU’s climate chief that “the need for agreement to tackle global warming is ‘higher than ever’, but it has never been harder as the geopolitical backdrop complicates international cooperation”.

Elsewhere, Cipher reports that “the US is working behind the scenes to ensure nuclear power is not excluded from an expected global pledge to boost renewables at the upcoming climate summit in Dubai”. It explains: “While no change is foreseen in the headline goal, the US is pushing for additional language (known as framing language in diplomatic speak) to accompany the main pledge that would ensure other low-emission technologies, such as nuclear power, are not overlooked.” This comes as Reuters reports that “the United Arab Emirates President of COP28 on Monday urged countries to seek ‘common ground’ to resolve disagreements over the future of fossil fuels ahead of a UN climate summit he will host from the end of the month”. However, according to the newswire, “countries are divided between those demanding a deal to phase out the burning of coal, oil and natural gas that produce the greenhouse gases that are the main cause of climate change and nations insisting on preserving a role for fossil fuels”. Finally, a comment for Climate Home News by Andreas Sieber, associate director of global policy and campaigns at 350.org, says: “A renewable energy target will be debated at COP28 but financial reforms are needed for the Global South outside China to meet that target.”

China’s national energy administration (NEA) plans to “correct improper market intervention” by local governments, including “forced investments to develop wind power, solar energy and pumped storage hydropower projects” this year, reports financial newswire Yicai. Energy newspaper BJX News reports that many local governments have accelerated “clearance” of existing solar and wind power projects and that, in some provinces, “nearly 67% of solar projects have been cut”. At the same time, state-run industry newspaper China Electric Power News reports that president Xi Jinping called for officials to “revitalise” northeast China, such as by accelerating the development of low-carbon energy and constructing large energy “bases” that combined the use of wind, solar, thermal and nuclear power. Another article by the newspaper reports that China installed 172 gigawatts of renewable energy capacity in the first nine months of 2023, a 93% increase on the amount added a year earlier, while power generation in September rose 10.4% year-on-year and investments in energy sector projects from January to June 2023 rose 20.7% year-on-year. State news agency Xinhua reports that China holds a market share of approximately 70% of key energy components, such as solar components and wind turbines, with Chinese companies still interested in expanding globally.

Meanwhile, Xinhua interviews COP28 president Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, who says that “the entire international financial system must be modernised to make climate finance more available, accessible and affordable to the global south”. China Daily carries a comment piece by Rajendra Shende, a former UN Environment Programme official, who urges that China, India and the UAE should “set their differences aside to tackle climate change andand the elephant in the room – finances to honour the Paris deal”. The Communist Party-affiliated People’s Daily reports that California governor Gavin Newsom and China’s environment minister Huang Runqiu both remarked on the importance of US-China climate cooperation at an event in Beijing. The Wall Street Journal says that China and the US have agreed “in principle” for a meeting between presidents Joe Biden and Xi next month in San Francisco. 

Elsewhere, Bloomberg reports that China’s ambassador to the EU Fu Cong has called the bloc’s electric vehicle probe “unjustified and regrettable” and “warned against any future trade measures that would penalise its clean-tech industry”. Finally, IN-EN.cn quotes the head of Great Wall Motor, a privately owned Chinese auto-manufacturer, saying the probe is “definitely a strategy to boost competitiveness” of EU carmakers.

Oil major BP has reported a “steep drop” in its third-quarter profits, the Financial Times reports. According to the newspaper, the company’s earnings fell to $3.3bn over July-September, down from $8.2bn last year. It adds: “The results, which missed market expectations of $4bn, are the first since chief executive Bernard Looney resigned in September over his failure to disclose past relationships with colleagues.” The Guardian links BP’s drop in profits to a “slump in its gas trading business”. BBC News adds that profits are up from $2.6bn in the previous quarter due to “higher oil refining margins and increased oil and gas production”. Reuters also covers the news.

In 2022, banks “pumped” more than $150bn into companies with “carbon bomb” projects – 425 extraction projects that can each release more than one gigaton of CO2 into the atmosphere – according to the Guardian. The paper adds that over 2016-22, banks mainly in the  US, China and Europe gave $1.8tn in financing to the companies running “carbon bomb” projects. It continues: “Between 2016 and 2022, the research shows, banks in the US alone were responsible for more than half a trillion dollars of finance to companies planning or operating carbon bombs. The single biggest financier was JPMorgan Chase, providing more than $141bn, followed by Citi, with $119bn, and Bank of America, with $92bn. Wells Fargo was the seventh-biggest financier, with $62bn. Also in the top 10 were three Chinese banks – ICBC, Bank of China and Industrial Bank (China) – and three European ones – BNP Paribas, HSBC and Barclays.”

Scottish first minister Humza Yousaf has criticised the North Sea Transition Authority’s decision to award more North Sea oil and gas licences, the Times reports. According to the paper, an initial 27 licences have been offered and the results of dozens more applications are likely to be made public in the next few months. The paper quotes Yousaf saying: “I think it’s the wrong move, particularly given the extreme threat of the climate crisis that we’re facing, and we’re seeing the impacts of in this country, let alone right across the world. I’m a big supporter, of course, of our gas industry and the workers who work in it. But I’m equally a supporter of transitioning towards renewables. And I believe that the northeast [of Scotland] in particular, could transition from the oil and gas capital of Europe to being the renewables capital, and net-zero capital of Europe.” BusinessGreen reports criticism of the new licences from the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit as “at best a distraction”. Separately, the Scotsman reports that new North Sea drilling sites could start producing oil and gas within the next five years, according to the UK government.

In other UK news, the Times reports that more than 60 Just Stop Oil protesters have been arrested for shutting down roads and bringing traffic to a standstill outside the Houses of Parliament.  The Guardian calls the arrests “the first use of draconian new anti-protest powers”. Separately, the Guardian reports that since London’s ultra-low emission zone (Ulez) was expanded, 77,000 fewer non-compliant cars and vans have been detected in the zone per day – a drop of 45%. The Financial Times adds: “London mayor Sadiq Khan said his controversial decision to expand the city’s clean air zone ‘is working’ after figures showed that the number of polluting vehicles driving in outer London has fallen.”

Meanwhile, the Times reports that Britain has joined more than 20 countries backing a moratorium on deep sea mining. This is “a significant shift”, as the UK had previously granted licences for deep sea mining, the paper says. It continues: “Governments are meeting in Jamaica at the International Seabed Authority, the UN body responsible for mining the seabed, for talks lasting a week and a half. The members of the UN agency are yet to block deep sea mining, and the UK’s shift is no guarantee that a moratorium will be agreed.” The Press Association reports that the International Seabed Authority “has granted exploration licences but not yet given its permission for anyone to begin extracting”. BusinessGreen and City AM also cover the news. Elsewhere, Unearthed covers new analysis from the Environmental Agency which rated more than 4,000 of England’s flood defences as poor or very poor. And Reuters reports that the Treasury could lose out on £3bn of revenue per year from the sale of carbon permits “after prices on its post-Brexit emissions trading system fell this year faster than in the EU”.

Onshore emissions from proposed shale gas extraction in Australia’s Beetaloo Basin could have been underestimated by up to 84%, according to new analysis covered in the Guardian. The research, by Climate Analytics, finds that “the projected emissions associated with proposed gas developments in the Beetaloo basin had been significantly underestimated in government modelling, while the availability of carbon offsets had been overestimated”, the newspaper reports. It continues: “In May, the Northern Territory government announced it was satisfied it had met the recommendations of a scientific inquiry into fracking, including a key recommendation – recommendation 9.8 – meant to deal with the climate risk associated with new gas projects. Underpinning its decision was a report by the national science agency CSIRO’s Gas Industry Social and Environmental Research Alliance (GISERA), which receives funding from the gas industry. That report found emissions from fracking in the basin could be either fully reduced or offset within Australia.” Prof Bill Hare, adjunct professor at Murdoch University and author of the report, describes his findings in the Conversation. He says: “Our analysis shows annual domestic emissions from fracking in the Beetaloo and processing at Darwin’s Middle Arm industrial precinct would produce up to 49m tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, 11% of Australia’s total emissions in 2021…CSIRO’s report uses overly optimistic estimates of how many offsets are likely to be available. If they could be realised, the offsets required for Beetaloo would take up very large areas of land in Australia – up to 2.9m hectares, 12 times the size of the Australian Capital Territory.”

In other Australian news, the Guardian reports on new polling which finds that “fewer than one in three voters believe Australia is on track to meet the Albanese government’s target of net-zero emissions by 2050”. A comment for the the Guardian by Peter Lewis, executive director of communications and research company Essential, says “[Australia’s] reactionary right is prepping a new community consensus to infect, recasting the transition to renewables as a reckless attack on the environment”. He concludes: “In the disinformation age it is not enough to shake our heads about the lies the other side perpetrates and invoke a mythical golden age of rational debate…Building a community-led, reality-based politics of permission for the renewable transition will be every bit as important as the decades-long climate wars that got us to this point. In fact, it is the next phase of that battle.”

“Instead of complaining about clean-energy subsidies, world leaders should agree on better rules to govern them,” a Bloomberg editorial argues. It continues: “Last month, the European Commission moved in the wrong direction when it announced an investigation into state subsidies of Chinese electric cars, which have been rapidly gaining market share in Europe. If the probe finds the subsidies to be unfair, it could result in countervailing duties. This would likely prompt retaliation against European manufacturers, some of which are major exporters to China. The upshot would be fewer and more expensive cars, in Beijing and Berlin alike.” The editorial says that “policies to promote green investment need to let the world’s best and most efficient producers prevail”. It criticises the US for being “the world leader in imposing countervailing duties on imports”, noting that “China, the EU and the US are all perfectly capable of competing without walling off their markets”. The editorial concludes: “Governments should agree to allow well-designed subsidies that generate broader social benefits, provide timely disclosure of what they’re subsidising, set reasonable limits and impose effective penalties for transgressions.”

Separately, Bloomberg columnist David Fickling says the wind industry is “in danger of dying from neglect unless governments simplify rules for developers and slash red tape”. He says the pace of wind installation fell last year for the first time since 2018 and calls the recovery from Covid a “perfect storm for wind”. He continues: “Expenditure for renewables is almost all upfront, meaning the sector is unusually sensitive to borrowing costs…Years of supply chain disruptions mean materials are more expensive, too…Unlike solar, where grids are being transformed by the power of consumer rooftops alone, wind depends on large-scale engineering that doesn’t inevitably get cheaper the way that manufactured goods do.” However, Fickling says there are “still reasons to hope the industry will turn the corner”, noting that “the rising cost of gas, coal and carbon means that wind still looks competitive in economic terms”. He adds: “Wind power is often most available when solar generation is weak, at night and in winter. Combined with its predictable long-term costs and higher utilisation, that means that even pricier tenders are likely to cut customer bills by pushing expensive fossil generation out of the fuel mix.” 

In the UK, James Frayne, director of consultancy Public First, writes in Conservative Home that “net-zero scepticism will harm, not help, the Conservatives’ election chances”. Frayne says that according to recent polling, the public support delays to the petrol-only car ban. However, he adds: “It’s vital to understand why people said they supported the delay. It’s emphatically not because voters have become ‘green-sceptic’. Rather, it’s all about the practicalities: people simply think EVs are too expensive; and they think there isn’t enough charging infrastructure available. Overall, 26% of swing voters said the delay has made it more likely they will vote Conservative, while 21% say it has made them less likely to vote Conservative.” Frayne continues: “Our analysis indicates that signalling green scepticism is a big vote loser for those who support environmental policy, but does not make up for this by being a substantial vote winner among their counterparts…The lesson from the last few weeks – all the media coverage and all the opinion research – is that the Conservatives should run a mile from any net-zero scepticism.”

In other UK comment, a Daily Mail editorial calls Just Stop Oil’s recent protest “moronic” and says its aims are “not remotely achievable”. Separately, climate-sceptic columnist Richard Littlejohn writes in the Daily Mail that the protestors “may parade their compassion for the environment, but they don’t give a fig about the misery they inflict on their fellow humans”. Assistant editor of the Sun, Clemie Moodie, outlines new polling which, she says, shows that “18 to 24-year-olds, who worship at the tubthumping feet of [Greta] Thunberg, are worse than anyone else at acting on climate change”. Also reporting on the polling, a Daily Telegraph comment by columnist Michael Deacon says “Greta Thunberg and her Gen Z friends owe Baby Boomers an apology over climate change”. And climate sceptic energy consultant Kathryn Porter writes in another Daily Telegraph comment that “white hydrogen [that can be extracted from the environment rather than being manufactured] is probably not the white knight of green energy and net-zero”.

Newspapers have continued to publish obituaries of Saleemul Huq, a prominent Bangladeshi climate scientist and director of the International Centre for Climate Change and Development, who passed away this weekend at the age of 71. At the Third Pole, editor-at-large Joydeep Gupta writes: “Huq was one of the leading voices who succeeded in putting adaptation as well as loss and damage on the global agenda.” The Associated Press calls Huq a “pioneering climate scientist” who “pushed to get the world to understand, pay for and adapt to worsening warming impacts on poorer nations”. The Washington Post calls him a “climate change ‘revolutionary’”. Climate Home News and BusinessGreen have also published some of the tributes written by Huq’s friends and colleagues.

The remaining “carbon budget” to have a 50% chance of limiting warming to 1.5C, the net amount of CO2 humans can emit without exceeding the temperature aspiration, is around 250bn tonnes as of January 2023, new research estimates. This is “equal to around six years of current [global] CO2 emissions”, the authors say. The research also estimates that the remaining carbon budget to have a 50% chance of limiting warming to 2C is 1,200bn tonnes. The researchers use new data and present “improvements to the methodology” for calculating carbon budgets to come up with their findings. An accompanying News & Views paper says the new estimates revise those in the sixth assessment report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This “raises the need for the IPCC to consider internally how to keep data current”, the author says, which will “only be compounded” for the authors of the seventh assessment report, which will likely be completed “with an estimated remaining 1.5C budget of zero”.

Climate change is expected to decrease the availability of key nutrients from seafood, such as protein, omega-3, calcium and iron, for the poorest world regions, new research suggests. The study uses past fishing data and model projections to examine how nutrient availability from seafood could change at different warming levels. It finds that, under climate change, nutrient availability is projected to “decrease disproportionately in tropical low-income countries that are already highly dependent on seafood-derived nutrients”. Nutrient availability from seafood is projected to decline by 10% by 2100 under 1.5C of global warming and around 30% under 4C of warming, the research adds.