Yesterday’s German election victory for the conservative Christian Democrats (CDU), whose leader Friedrich Merz is set to become the next chancellor, indicates a “reduced focus on climate policies in the future government”, says Clean Energy Wire. However, the outlet says it “remain[s] unclear whether Merz will be able to form a new coalition government with the [left-wing] Social Democrats alone, or whether the CDU/CSU will also need the support of the Greens in a new three-party alliance, which, ultimately, would determine the level of ambition in climate policy”. Carbon Pulse says the election outcome means there is likely to be a “more pragmatic, market-led approach to climate action”. Politico analysis of what the result means for various policy areas says on climate: “A Merz-led government will place less emphasis on climate change than Scholz’s coalition. Merz expressed concern on the campaign trail about the impact of climate policy on business, vowed to put economic growth above all other concerns and led a call to roll back several EU green regulations. But green advocates express confidence that in government Merz’s rhetorical hammer will turn feather duster.” Another Politico article, published before the election took place, is headlined: “The end of Germany’s climate crusade.” (See Carbon Brief’s “Germany election 2025: What the manifestos say on energy and climate change”.)

The UK’s “net-zero economy” is growing three times faster than the rest of the country, according to analysis by the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), the Guardian reports. It says net-zero sectors grew by 10% in 2024, according to the CBI, and generated £83bn in “gross value added, a measure of how much value companies add through the goods and services they produce”. The newspaper adds: “The analysis showed economic growth and climate action go together, said the report’s authors, and improve lives and livelihoods.” A second Guardian article, by air pollution scientist Dr Gary Fuller, says “net-zero policies would result in fewer deaths saving UK billions”. He explains: “By 2060 the economic gains from fewer deaths would amount to £26bn-£31bn. New evidence meant they were also able to estimate gains from less illness too; around £20bn adding to the economic benefits from net-zero.” The Guardian carries analysis previewing the Climate Change Committee advice, due to be published on Wednesday, on the level of the UK’s seventh carbon budget, covering the years 2038-2042. The Daily Mail, meanwhile, continues its editorial campaigning against action on climate change by publishing an article personally attacking three government climate advisers.

In other news from the UK, BusinessGreen reports on analysis showing that the UK has “spent £140bn on fossil gas since 2021”. It explains that the cost was £90bn higher than it would have been before the global energy crisis “underscoring the huge on-going costs associated with fossil fuel reliance”. The Press Association reports that the government has launched a consultation on “plans to reform clean power schemes to speed up transition”. It says the proposals to reform the “contracts for difference” scheme for renewables include “removing planning barriers” and longer contracts. BusinessGreen reports calls from the National Infrastructure Commission for “a step change in investment in Great Britain’s local electricity networks”. The Times reports the comments of Leslie Maasdorp, the head of British International Investment, saying that overseas climate finance “is in everyone’s long-term self-interest”. The Guardian reports that Scotland “is likely to miss its legally binding climate target by up to 20m tonnes”, citing “official data seen by the [newspaper]. The Daily Mail reports that “one in six energy bosses think the world can achieve net-zero by 2050 – down from nearly half of executives interviewed last year”. It frames it under the headline: “Is Ed Miliband’s net-zero dream dying?” [The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said that reaching net-zero is the only way to stop climate change.] Another Daily Mail article reports the comments of climate-sceptic Conservative peer Craig Mackinlay, who it says has criticised the government for maintaining the Conservative-imposed moratorium on fracking for shale gas. The Daily Telegraph reports: “Companies have been told to focus on net-zero and diversity goals if they want to win public contracts under the government’s new procurement rules.”

The EU, UK and “climate-vulnerable developing countries” have “raised concerns about delays to the next global assessment of climate change, by the UN’s climate science panel, after the US administration withdrew from the process”, Reuters reports. The newswire notes that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is due to meet in Hangzhou, China this week to plan its next climate science assessment report, known as AR7. It continues: “‘It will be vital that all working group contributions to the Seventh Assessment Report are prepared in time,’ the EU’s climate chief, Wopke Hoekstra, and ministers from 17 countries including Britain, Germany, France, Spain, the Marshall Islands and Guatemala said in a joint statement, seen by Reuters on Friday…Officials familiar with the talks said the countries behind the statement were concerned the report would now not be completed in time to inform the next Paris Agreement ‘stocktake’ in 2028, when nearly 200 countries will assess their progress towards curbing climate change and agree tougher measures to avoid escalating warming.” The news follows reports from Axios last week that the US would “pull [its] delegation” from the IPCC meeting this week: “The State Department delegation’s plans to travel to China for the meeting have been denied, sources said.” Bloomberg coverage of the news says: “The IPCC secretariat hasn’t received any official communication in relation to any change in the status of the US-based section of the organisation’s Working Group III technical support unit – the group that provides scientific and technical guidance, an IPCC spokesperson said in an email.” The outlet cites 2023 Carbon Brief analysis showing that around 18% of IPCC authors have been from the US, “more than twice the next biggest national contributor, the UK”. Climate Home News says the meeting is set to make a key decision on the timing of the AR7.

In other news from the US, the Guardian says there has been “outcry as Trump withdraws support for research that mentions ‘climate’”. Mother Jones reports on Robert Kennedy Jr “end[ing] HHS funding for climate change and health programs at the National Institutes of Health”. The Hill reported on Friday: “Mass firings are set to hit the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) ‘imminently’, a source with knowledge told the Hill.” A comment for the New York Times by Jeremy Konyndyk, president of Refugees International, explains the “damage done by the USAID freeze”.

The Guardian covers a new joint investigation with Carbon Brief of the biodiversity plans published by governments around the world, reporting: “More than half the world’s countries have no plans to protect 30% of land and sea for nature, despite committing to a global agreement to do so less than three years ago, new analysis shows.” The findings come as countries gather in Rome this week for the resumed COP16 international biodiversity summit. Separately, Climate Home News reports that Colombia, which holds the COP16 presidency, has posted a 35% increase in deforestation, but it notes that the figure remains the second-lowest in two decades.

Meanwhile, several outlets preview the second round of COP16 talks, with Reuters reporting: “Countries gather in Rome this week for a second crack at figuring out how to generate $200bn a year to help preserve the world’s biodiversity.” Bloomberg has similar coverage. Another Bloomberg article calls the resumed talks a “three-day sprint” after “last year’s COP16 reached an impasse”. Agence-France Presse also previews the meeting.

UK prime minister Keir Starmer has announced a “further £200m investment in the Grangemouth [oil refinery] site” in Scotland, BBC News reports. It explains: “The oil refinery, owned by Petroineos, is set to close by the summer with the loss of more than 400 jobs…Addressing the party’s Scottish conference, Starmer said oil and gas would be part of Scotland’s future for decades to come to protect the country’s energy security. But he said the UK had to be at the forefront of clean energy and that the Grangemouth site presented a ‘huge opportunity for renewal’. He said the site could have a future in bioengineering, biofuels or hydrogen energy.” The Times also has the story.

Separately, the Financial Times reports concerns from the steel industry over the transition away from “free allocation” of emissions allowances under the UK emissions trading system. The article is headlined: “UK steelmakers face £150m annual bill from carbon charges, industry warns.” However, it reports: “The industry was not against phasing out of the free allocations but was ‘cautious’ about it happening too abruptly,” according to a representative from UK Steel. Another Financial Times article says the Hinkley Point C new nuclear plant in Somerset is “yet to attract new investors, says EDF boss”.

Elsewhere, Auto Express reports that German car giant BMW has “paused” a £600m investment in its Mini plant in Oxford, which had been set to convert to electric-only production. The article, which includes a BMW statement shared with the outlet, says the delay is due to “slower than expected take-up of EVs”. [BMW figures show that sales of electric Minis grew by 24% last year, even as it sold 17% fewer of the cars in 2024 overall. Electric vehicle sales grew by a quarter worldwide last year and by a fifth in the UK. Even in Germany, where EV sales fell, BMW EV sales grew last year.] The Times coverage of the news reports: “German carmaker says stalling demand for electric vehicles is behind the move, but others suggest it has been hit by EU tariffs on vehicles it makes in China.” It adds: “[G]overnment sources said BMW’s decision to halt its investment in the UK was not to do with the EV mandate. Rather they claimed that it is due to the carmaker being hit hard by EU import tariffs on the vehicles it makes in China.” BBC News and others also carry the story. In related news, Reuters reports: “Electric transport groups urge EU not to ease CO2 emission rules.”

China has issued guidelines on strengthening the country’s “scientific and technological innovation in the ecology and environment sector” for building a “green, beautiful China”, state news agency Xinhua reports. It adds: “China will deepen the reform of the sector’s scientific and technological system and further improve the country’s ecological and environmental governance capabilities.” Industry news outlet BJX News and China Energy Net also cover the story. 

Meanwhile, Xinhua reports that private companies have contributed more than 50% of China’s “‘new trio’ exports, namely, electric vehicles (EVs), solar batteries and lithium-ion batteries”, also known as the “new three”. Bloomberg publishes an article under the headline: “China’s EV price war leaves behind a trail of zombie cars.” Online news outlet Jiemian reports that Chinese EV manufacturer BYD will start to sell carbon credits in Europe as the demand for carbon-credit trading among European auto manufacturers is expected to grow. The outlet adds that the “tightening of carbon emission policies” in the EU “undoubtedly” presents a new opportunity for Chinese EV companies. China’s Ministry of Commerce says it hopes to strengthen “green industry cooperation” with Europe in many fields, including the EV industry, China Daily reports.

Elsewhere, EnviroNews Nigeria, an environmental news outlet, reports that Evans Njewa, chair of the Least Developed Countries (LDC) says the IPCC’s reports are “fundamental inputs to climate action around the world” ahead of its meeting next week in Hangzhou, China. US president Donald Trump has signed a memorandum to limit investments from China in “strategic sectors”, including “technology”, “critical infrastructure”, “energy” and “raw materials”, Bloomberg reports. The move is the “latest salvo” from the Trump administration against China, the outlet adds. The Cook Islands says that it has signed “cooperation pacts” with China, including an agreement “covering exploration for seabed minerals”, another Bloomberg report says.

In comment, China Daily publishes an article by Chen Weihua, the newspaper’s EU bureau chief, saying that the EU should “wake up and improve their relations with China” rather than “blindly” following the US, adding that the bloc has “more common ground” on fighting climate change with China. David Dodwell, CEO of the trade policy and international relations consultancy Strategic Access, writes in the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post that Hong Kong should make full use of China’s “burgeoning edge in alternative solar cell technologies to become a hub for renewables”.

In an article for PoliticsHome, former government official Adam Bell, a consultant at Stonehaven, explains the “increasingly fraught debate” over whether to shift electricity markets in the UK from a single national price to regional “zones”. He says that officials in the energy department team responsible for reviewing electricity markets are rumoured to be in favour of zonal pricing, whereas those in charge of the rollout of renewables want the “status quo” because change would “prompt an investment hiatus while banks figure out how price formation is going to work under the new regime”. He adds that officials in the business department are also opposed to a change to zonal pricing.

In related comment, the Daily Telegraph follows the slot it gave last week to the head of SSE writing in favour of maintaining national pricing, with a piece by Octopus Energy boss Greg Jackson making the counter-argument. Jackson writes under the headline: “Windfarm owners are clinging to a flawed system – and pushing up bills.” He says that fears over investment are “scaremongering”. The Daily Telegraph reports Jackson’s comments in a separate news article. Elsewhere, the Times reports: “Homes served by wind farms could pay less in energy bills plan.”

The UK’s right-leaning newspapers maintain their relentless campaign of publishing comment pieces attacking net-zero policies. Writing in the Sunday Times, Robert Colville, who is the director of the Centre for Policy Studies thinktank, previews the Climate Change Committee’s forthcoming seventh carbon budget: “On Wednesday, a committee you’ve probably never heard of will publish the most important document you’ll never read. It will do more than any budget or industrial strategy to set the terms of trade for the economy – drawing the lines inside which politicians are left to colour…The problem, of course, is that people don’t like being told how to live, work and get around, let alone what to eat. Which is why many of the suggestions in the sixth budget went down badly — such as ending the sale of gas boilers by 2033 or capping UK airport capacity…Under the current approach, we risk lashing ourselves to the carbon mast even as other countries, notably the US, swing decisively in the other direction. A world in which net-zero means fewer flights, higher bills, fewer jobs and compulsory veganism is not one voters want – nor one they’ll accept.”

Elsewhere, an editorial in the Sunday Telegraph argues that the expected increase in defence spending will mean a “rolling back of the expansion of the welfare state alongside sacrificing government ambitions such as net-zero in order to achieve growth”. It adds: “In this light, in addition to a desire for resilient and reliable energy systems, Ed Miliband’s attempts to shut down future North Sea and shale production look like an egregious act of self-sabotage.” Similarly, over a whole page in Saturday’s Daily Mail, the climate-sceptic commentator Andrew Neil says: “We can pay for a rapid rebuild of our military might – by using the hundreds of billions Miliband is planning to splurge on his fatuous pursuit of net-zero.” (In contrast, the Financial Times’s Lex column has an article on the need for investment in both defence and climate action headlined: “Europe’s tricky double transition should pay dividends.”) The Sunday Telegraph also sees Kamal Ahmed write: “An energy price disaster is creeping up on Keir Starmer. As businesses collapse, the Labour government is beginning to panic over rising bills.” In the Daily Telegraph, Adam Smith argues: “If Reeves is serious about growth, she should axe Miliband’s vanity projects.” Sam Lister in the Daily Express claims [via a false reading of a new Tony Blair Institute report] that “Ed Miliband’s promises of a Britain basking in the glow of green-powered economic prosperity have been exposed as a fantasy”.

Finally, the Times’s Dominic O’Connell argues that “BP went green and the share price went red”. And the Daily Telegraph writes: “BP faces ‘existential crisis’ after ruinous attempt to go green.” [BP never went “green”. It announced plans back in 2020 under a previous CEO to reduce its oil production by 2030.] For BusinessGreen, the Conservative Environment Network’s Sam Payne writes under the headline: “Reskilling UK oil and gas workers is vital for both our economy and the clean energy transition.”

A new paper finds that, over the period 2001-21, fires on peatlands in the UK released 800,000 tonnes of carbon, contributing around 90% of the country’s total annual fire-driven carbon emissions. The authors used a “fire emission model” to quantify carbon emissions from wildfires, using “high-resolution land-surface data and fire-weather indices”. By integrating future climate projections, the authors find that a global warming level of 2C above pre-industrial temperatures would drive up the UK’s fire-driven carbon emissions from peatlands by 60%, due to increased burn depths. They conclude that “protecting peatlands from fires in the UK would be a cost-effective way to slow climate change by avoiding future emission”.