There is extensive coverage of the news that a group of 2,000 older Swiss women have won the first ever climate case victory in the European Court of Human Rights. BBC News explains: “The women, mostly in their 70s, said that their age and gender made them particularly vulnerable to the effects of heatwaves linked to climate change. The court said Switzerland’s efforts to meet its emission reduction targets had been woefully inadequate. It is the first time the powerful court has ruled on global warming.” The ruling is binding and could influence the law in 46 countries in Europe, including the UK, BBC News says. At the same time as making the landmark ruling, the judges in Strasbourg also dismissed a climate case brought by six Portuguese young people against 32 European governments, finding the group had not exhausted legal action through the national courts, the Financial Times says. Gerry Liston, the lawyer for the Portuguese youths, said that despite the judges dismissing the case, the court’s ruling on the Swiss women’s action was “a massive win for all generations”, the FT says. It adds that the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights are all deliberating similar cases related to governments’ liability to protect citizens from climate change, with rulings expected later this year. The Guardian carries a video of climate campaigner Greta Thunberg reacting to the ruling. DeSmog has an explainer on what the ruling means in practical terms. There is further coverage in the Times, Reuters, Independent and Associated Press.

In the UK, right-wing newspapers report on the negative reaction to the ruling from right-wing politicians. The Daily Telegraph says the ruling sparked a “Tory backlash” led by energy secretary Claire Coutinho. The Daily Telegraph says: “Claire Coutinho said she was ‘concerned’ that Strasbourg judges were taking over decisions best made by elected politicians. Senior Tories urged Rishi Sunak to take Britain out of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in the wake of the ruling. They accused the court of acting in a ‘profoundly undemocratic’ way and being ‘bent out of shape’ by ‘progressive’ activists and politicians.” The Daily Express carries the backlash on its frontpage with the headline: “‘Bonkers’ ruling proves why we should quit Euro court.” The newspaper also carries an editorial, a lead comment piece by history writer Tim Newark and a comment piece by Tory MP Tom Hunt criticising the ruling, Carbon Brief notes. The Sun also reports on the backlash. The Daily Mail covers the story with the headline: “Despair as Euro court rules nations have a duty to tackle climate change.”

In a landmark judgement, India’s Supreme Court rules that climate change “impacts the constitutional guarantee of [the] right to life”, emphasising that the country “must prioritise” renewable energy “as citizens have a right to be free from the adverse effects of the climate emergency”, the Hindustan Times reports. It quotes the three-judge bench saying: “The inability of underserved communities to adapt to climate change or cope with its effects violates the right to life, as well as the right to equality.” According to Down to Earth, the court recalled its earlier orders asking renewable power companies to install underground cables to protect the Great Indian Bustard and the lesser florican, observing that “it is not a binary choice between conservation and economic growth or development but rather a dynamic interplay between protecting a critically endangered species and addressing the pressing global challenge of climate change”. Indian climate experts tell the Press Trust of India that the ruling “recognising the right against climate change” sets an important precedent, but warned that India’s energy transition “must not replicate the environmental injustices entrenched in the fossil fuel legacy”. 

In an editorial, the Hindu says “[i]t is unfortunate that the goal of reducing the country’s carbon footprint and the need to protect a critically endangered species are at odds with each other”. Another Hindu editorial calls heatwave advisories “to prepare for polls amid blistering heat…too generic” and says that with “temperature records collapsing every year and the links between heatwaves, climate and health becoming even more explicit, it is time that the electoral process mulls over creative ways to account for the crisis”. Separately, the country’s central bank – the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) – has “cautioned” that climate change can increase inflation and stunt growth, according to a story in the Times of India. 

Several publications report that the EU has launched a subsidy investigation into Chinese wind turbine companies amid escalating clean-energy trade tensions. The FT says that the probe “would examine whether Chinese companies participating in wind parks across Europe may have benefited from state support from Beijing”. It adds: “The investigation will use the European Commission’s new powers designed to clamp down on market-distorting subsidies from foreign governments as Brussels seeks to defend itself from unfair competition from abroad, including Beijing.” The European Commission will look into conditions for the development of wind parks in Spain, Greece, France, Romania and Bulgaria, Reuters says. A group representing Chinese business interests in Brussels responded by expressing its “profound dissatisfaction” over what it called protectionism and a lack of transparency from the EU as it rolls out its new rules to counter state aid from foreign actors, Reuters says. Politico, Bloomberg and the Daily Telegraph also have the story.

New energy vehicles (NEVs, including electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids) will account for about 50% of new car sales in mainland China by 2030, as “state incentives” and “expanding charging stations” attract more customers, according to research by Moody’s Investors Service, reports the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post (SCMP). In 2023, the adoption rate of NEVs in China reached 31.6%, up from 1.3% in 2015, and surpassing Beijing’s target of 20% by 2025, the news outlet adds. News outlet Guancha covers an announcement by the Chinese Passenger Car Association (CPCA) that China exported 406,000 cars in March, the “highest monthly export volume in [China’s] history”, with NEV exports reaching 120,000, a year-on-year increase of 71%. The Financial Times says that imported vehicles, including from China, are accumulating at European ports, due to challenges brought by a sales slowdown and logistical issues, such as a shortage of truck drivers. The newspaper added that Chinese automakers “were not selling their vehicles in Europe as fast as they expected” and quoted the secretary-general of the CPCA saying “inland shipping in European markets is difficult [for Chinese EV brands]”.

Meanwhile, SCMP publishes an interview with Bertrand Lortholary, French ambassador to China, who says that “we need to make sure that our companies [can] compete on a level playing field…[and] get the same opportunities in the Chinese market that Chinese companies get in the European market”. He adds that France wants to “engage even more with China” on climate change, biodiversity and sustainable development, the outlet says. Reuters reports that Chinese commerce minister Wang Wentao told French finance minister Bruno Le Maire that the probe started in China on the cognac market is “not linked to the one started by the EU on Chinese [EVs]”. State news agency Xinhua quotes Mike Hawes, chief executive of the UK’s Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), saying that having more Chinese EV brands entering the UK “lowers prices” and “encourages innovation”. 

Energy news outlet BJX News reports that solar project sites are under renewed scrutiny, with provinces investigating “illegal construction of floating solar projects”. Industry outlet IN-EN.com says that, while there is evidence in March that “excess capacity [in the solar industry] began to clear”, enterprises are still increasing investment and local governments are “even more enthusiastic” about attracting investment into the sector. The Financial Times carries a commentary saying that the cost of China’s dominance in solar production “is now looking too high”, with the “weak stock performance of Chinese solar cell manufacturers reflect[ing] the mismatch” between capacity and demand. 

The Communist party-affiliated newspaper People’s Daily carries a commentary under the nom de plume “Heyin”, which argues that China develops new energy industries through “technological innovation, [strong] production and supply chain systems and comprehensive market competition” and that it “brings [other] countries opportunities for green development and win-win development”. Finally, the state-run newspaper China Youth Daily publishes an opinion piece calling on young people to “implement Xi Jinping’s idea of ecological civilisation…and gather youthful strength for the construction of a beautiful homeland where human beings and nature coexist in harmony”.

There is continued coverage of Shell’s threat to leave London for New York, with former chief executive Ben van Beurden saying the company could quit the London Stock Exchange for a New York listing because US investors are “more positive” about fossil fuels, the Guardian says. It comes after current executive Wael Sawan told journalists he believed Shell was being undervalued in London and he would consider moving to New York, the Guardian adds. The Times and Financial Times also cover van Beurden’s comments. The Times also carries a comment piece on why fossil fuel firm BP’s “green shoots need time to grow”.

Elsewhere, the Daily Telegraph reports that a UK energy company is to start drilling at the biggest oil field discovered in the North Sea in at least 20 years. EnQuest plans to bring two fields onstream which have the potential to produce 500m barrels of crude oil, the Daily Telegraph says. The fields are located near the Kraken oil and gas fields and collectively the projects will be called the “Kraken cluster”, it adds. Meanwhile, Politico reports that Nigel Farage’s new party, Reform, has plans to make scrapping climate policies a central part of its campaigning in the next UK general election. The Times reports on analysis from a satnav company finding congestion is up in London compared to five years ago, when the ultra low emissions zone (ULEZ) was first introduced.

Financial Times associate editor and business columnist Pilita Clark writes on the potential “profound” psychological and political consequences of the world peaking its global emissions, which might occur as early as this year. Economist Nat Keohane, a former Obama White House adviser who is now president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions thinktank, tells Clark: “I think that would be an extraordinarily powerful political and psychological moment.” Clark explains his argument: “First, it would be empowering because it would show that the fight against global warming was winnable, not a futile, pointless quest. Second, a decline would offer concrete evidence that demand for fossil fuels was more fragile than appreciated, and competition in the global clean energy race more robust.” Elsewhere, three researchers in the Conversation write on the “plausible” scenario of countries coming together to agree to restrict the supply of fossil fuels.

For the Guardian, Gina McCarthy, who was the first White House national climate adviser and the 13th administrator of the US Environmental Protection Agency, and is currently managing co-chair of the climate movement America Is All In, writes on the impact of methane from landfills. She says: “When we think of methane, we often picture leaking pipelines or belching cows. But trash, organic waste decomposing in landfills, is the third largest source of human-caused methane pollution in the US…Keeping organic waste out of landfills – through waste prevention, food recovery and composting programs – is the most effective way to avoid future landfill methane generation, while benefiting communities.”

A new study explores the links between attitudes to the Catholic church, Pope Francis and human-caused climate change in Latin America. Using survey data from more than 13,000 people across 18 countries, the study finds that “Roman Catholics are less likely to believe in man-made climate change as compared to evangelical Christians and respondents belonging to no or any other denomination”. However, the more positive a respondent’s view of Pope Francis – who published a Papal Encyclical on the environment in 2015 – the more likely they are “to acknowledge the effect of human activity on global warming”, the study says.