Storms in South Florida dropped around a foot of rain in just hours on Wednesday in a 1-in-1,000 year event, the Associated Press reports. The newswire says that Fort Lauderdale issued a state of emergency as flooding continued in parts of the city. The Washington Post reports that more than a third of the normal annual rainfall in Fort Lauderdale fell over 12 hours on Wednesday. BBC News reports that airports and schools were shut due to the flooding. The New Scientist links the extreme rainfall to climate change: “The rain was caused by a collection of slow-moving thunderstorms that gathered over Florida on 12 April. Such extreme rainstorms are becoming increasingly common as the climate changes.” It adds: “The likelihood of extreme rainfall is one of the trickiest weather events for climate scientists and meteorologists to forecast. One problem is that climate models seem to underestimate the potential increased severity of rainfall as the climate warms.” Seth Borenstein, science writer at the Associated Press, says the storm was a “supercell”, driven largely by the availability of warm ocean air from the Gulf Stream. Other outlets including Reuters, CBS News, Sky News, ABC News, CNN and the New York Times report on the flooding.

In other US news, the Hill reports that the US Environmental Protection Agency is investing $177m to create 17 technical assistance centres around the country to help environmental justice organisations successfully apply for federal funds. Separately, the US Energy Information Administration has said the country’s power grid “will almost double in capacity from 2022 to 2050 to meet rising demand, and most newly built capacity will be from renewable sources”, Reuters reports. And Reuters reports that “the Biden administration on Thursday approved exports of liquefied natural gas from the Alaska LNG project”.

The UK government has “axed its most senior climate diplomat post”, the Guardian reveals. The newspaper says: “The last special representative for climate change, Nick Bridge, stood down recently after six years in post and is not being replaced…The special representative in post from 2013-17, Prof Sir David King, said: ‘This is extremely disappointing. It’s a very backward step. I do hope that the government has second thoughts and gets a very strong person into this position.’” The paper quotes a spokesperson from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), who responded by saying: “Climate change remains an area of utmost importance to this government, and to the foreign secretary, and is a central focus of our diplomatic relations on a daily basis. Our resource and senior representation on climate and environment has grown significantly since the creation of the FCDO, and expanded further since the UK’s COP26 presidency.”

In other UK news, the Guardian reports on new data showing that bird populations in the UK are continuing to “crash”. The paper notes that the government passed the Environment Act into law in 2021, which requires a halt in species decline by 2030, but says that “campaigners predict the government will fail to meet its own nature targets unless radical changes are made”. The Daily Mail and i newspaper also cover the story.

Elsewhere, the Byline Times reports that “MPs are being urged to sever links to a parliamentary group coordinated by a campaigner who denies that humans are to blame for climate change and says there is no climate crisis”. And BBC News reports that “climate campaigners say they are considering legal action over ongoing coal mining at the UK’s largest opencast mine, months after planning permission ran out”.

Chinese officials announced that the coastal regions of China have experienced their “greatest-ever sea levels”, escalating at a faster pace than the worldwide average for two consecutive years, CNN reports. The rising sea level is presenting “a significant danger” to coastal cities, including the financial hub of Shanghai, the article adds. China’s coastal sea levels in 2022 were 94 millimetres (3.7 inches) higher than “normal” (the average over the 1993-2011 period), making it the highest since records began in 1980, the outlet writes. Wang Hua, an official from the ministry of Natural Resources, said that the rise was “due to global warming”, the outlet adds. Singapore-based CNA also covers the news. 

Meanwhile, the Chinese government yesterday announced that China-Russia bilateral trade showed a “robust” growth trend in the first quarter of 2023, in which “energy cooperation” continued “deepening”, according to China’s state-media Global Times. In a separate Global Times report, Zhang Jianhua, head of China’s National Energy Administration (NEA), says energy trade between China and Russia is “the cornerstone” of bilateral cooperation. Forbes carries a comment by Ariel Cohen, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, who writes: “With the energy-reliant Russian economy running out of options, it increasingly turned toward China.”

Meanwhile, Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva is visiting China. CNN reports that the two countries are likely to reach an agreement on carbon trading. China is a major purchaser in the carbon market and Brazil “controls about 15% of the world’s potential to sequester carbon from the atmosphere”, the article adds. American news website Axios writes that a recent poll shows that the majority of Americans say that the US and China are unable to work together on matters including climate change and infectious diseases. 

Elsewhere, Reuters says that electric commercial vehicle (ECV) manufacturers such as the Maxus brand from China have had the opportunity to establish themselves in the European market due to the delayed entry of traditional automakers into this business. Reuters says that power emission may get worse in 2023 thanks to the “increased coal burning fuelling the industrial recovery” in China, despite the fact that “renewables are gaining market share at a record pace in every power sector that matters”. And, finally, CGTN says that since March this year, China has experienced four “dusty weather processes”, citing the chief forecaster of the Central Weather Station. The state broadcaster adds that “warming temperatures and scarce precipitation” were the leading causes for such weather. 

The UK government’s green energy scheme encouraging homeowners to install heat pumps has been called an “embarrassment” following low uptake in its first year, the Times reports. The paper continues: “The government’s boiler upgrade scheme had a budget of £150m to subsidise 30,000 ground or air source heat pump and biomass boiler installations between its launch in May last year and the end of March this year. Yet figures published by the energy regulator Ofgem show that fewer than 10,000 installations were completed under the scheme in this period…Some people who have installed the pumps have complained that they are unable to make their homes sufficiently warm, although others say they work well and their heating bills are lower. Campaigners say heat pumps save the average homeowner between £6,000 and £7,000 on energy costs over 20 years compared with a gas boiler.” The Daily Telegraph calls the scheme a “flop”. It quotes the chief executive of the Energy and Utilities Alliance trade body, which represents boiler manufacturers: “It takes a certain type of genius to fail to give away £150m of taxpayers’ money and this wretched scheme looks like it has done just that. When will the Government actually listen to the people, the majority of whom simply cannot afford a heat pump, subsidised or not?” 

Separately, Gordon Hughes – a retired professor of economics and a former senior adviser on energy and environmental policy at the World Bank – says in a Daily Telegraph comment piece that heat pumps “epitomise the economic folly of net zero”. He says: “A practical date for net-zero, 2080, would be consistent with the natural cycle of asset ageing and replacement, protecting the economic interests of our children and grandchildren. It would also seem to stand a better chance of delivering a sustainable low carbon future. The 2050 target is on a collision course with reality.” And a Bloomberg feature says that “heat pumps need better branding”.

“Flash droughts” have become more frequent due to climate change, according to a new study covered by the Independent. Droughts which develop rapidly are becoming “the new normal”, the newspaper says. It adds: “Flash droughts can develop into severe droughts within a few weeks and are caused by low precipitation and high evapotranspiration, which quickly depletes the soil of water.” The Associated Press says that flash droughts occur mostly in summer, but also in spring and autumn. It says the droughts are “insidious” because “the air gets so hot and so dry that it sucks water right out of plants and soil”. The New York Times reports that “the humid tropics tend to experience more flash droughts than slow ones”. The New Scientist adds that Europe will become a “hotspot” for flash droughts as the planet continues to warm. The Hill also covers the research.

British oil company BP has started producing oil from a new platform in the Gulf of Mexico, the Times reports. The $9bn platform is expected to produce up to 140,000 barrels of oil per day, the paper says. It adds that the Gulf of Mexico remains one of BP’s most important regions. The Financial Times says: “The new Argos platform is the first the company has deployed in the region since the Deepwater Horizon explosion in April 2010, which killed 11 people and unleashed the worst offshore environmental disaster in US history.”

In other news relating to oil companies, the Times reports that “campaigners have called for a new North Sea oil and gas field to be blocked after a key contractor for the scheme was revealed as responsible for the UK’s largest accidental oil spill in the last five years”. Elsewhere, the Financial Times reports that the “ExxonMobil paid its chief executive $36m last year, a 52% increase from 2021 and more than double his 2020 pay after Russia’s war with Ukraine led to record profits for oil companies and a windfall for their top executives”. DeSmog writes about a 1989 memo from energy company Shell, which features in a new court brief “alleging that Shell, ExxonMobil, Chevron, and BP knowingly concealed the climate hazards of their fossil fuel products for decades”. And Reuters reports that “oil prices rose on Friday on signs of lower Russian output and tighter supplies, with the market looking ahead to the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) monthly report later in the day to clarify the global demand outlook”. 

The German Green Party in Saxony is campaigning for acceptance of the “imminent” phase out of the last three nuclear power plants in Germany, warning Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and Free Democratic Party (FDP) against the blockade of the decision that should come into force on Saturday, reports Süddeutsche Zeitung. The Green party’s representative in Saxony, Wolfram Günther, commented to the German Press Agency: “Anyone who is still in favour of extending the term must honestly say what that would mean: nuclear power is by far the most expensive and riskiest form of energy production.” Table.Media adds that politicians from the CDU and FDP consider the exit to be “a big mistake”, pointing out that the power plants “could help to ensure the supply, lower the price of electricity and improve the German climate balance”. However, a study by the Enervis institute on behalf of the green electricity provider Green Planet Energy and Greenpeace – seen by Table.Media – calls this argument into question. It says that even if the reactors had not been shut down in mid-April, but at the end of the year as initially planned, there would never have been a power shortage during the winter in Germany. In addition, the outlet quotes Prof Bruno Burger from the Fraunhofer institute, arguing that “the shutdown of the last three nuclear power plants has no visible effect on the weekly future electricity prices in Germany”. The shutdown comes as “other European countries are looking to expand nuclear energy”, the New York Times notes.

Meanwhile, Die Zeit reports that the German energy industry is demanding “more speed” in constructing new hydrogen-capable gas power plants in Germany due to the nuclear phase out. This is necessary to “guarantee the security of supply at any time, even in the long term”, Kerstin Andreae, general manager of the Federal Association of Energy and Water Industries, is quoted as saying. On the other hand, the energy expert Manuel Frondel from the Leibniz Institute for Economic Research is calling for more coal-fired power plants to be put on reserve after the nuclear phase out, adds the story. Another Die Zeit article reports that Bavaria’s prime minister Markus Söder from Christian Social Union (CSU) spoke out in favour of nuclear power plants to run “by the end of the decade” after visiting the Isar 2 plant in Essenbach, Lower Bavaria, describing the shutdown now as a “mistake.”

In addition, in the guest post for Tagesspiegel, German environment minister Steffi Lemke describes five reasons why she thinks phasing out nuclear power is the right decision, talking about avoidance of “catastrophic accidents” such as Chornonyl or Fukushima, the problem of nuclear waste storage and rivers pollution due to nuclear plants’ high cooling water requirements. She added the argument about the profitability of nuclear as well, saying that the costs of uranium mining, disposal and insurance are already expensive today.

Finally, the Guardian reports that the German chief executive of Europe’s largest media publisher, Mathias Döpfner, tried to use his flagship tabloid, Bild, to influence the outcome of Germany’s last election and “fed the newspaper his personal views attacking climate change activism”, leaked messages suggest. In one of the messages published by the German weekly Die Zeit, from 2017, Döpfner says: “I am all for climate change”, seemingly arguing that human civilisation in periods of warm climate was always “more successful” than during cold-climate periods, adding that “we shouldn’t fight climate change but adjust to it”.

A court has ordered Russia to pay $5bn in compensation to Ukraine’s state energy firm, Naftogaz, for “seizing assets” during Moscow’s “illegal annexation of Crimea”, Politico reports. The Financial Times quotes a statement from Oleksiy Chernyshov, chief executive of Naftogaz: “Russia must now comply with this decision in accordance with its obligations under international law.” Reuters also covers the story. This comes as Reuters reports that “lawmakers in Ukraine’s parliament want the European Union and US to use sanctions to block Russia’s plans to expand liquefied natural gas (LNG) production, and end Europe’s purchases of the fuel from Russia”. 

Writing in the Financial Times, Fatih Birol – the executive director of the International Energy Agency (IEA) – says that inertia is “a powerful force in energy systems”, but the ongoing energy crisis “has demonstrated how shocks can shake systems out of inertia”. He continues: “Six months ago, the IEA showed that the repercussions of the war in Ukraine were reshaping the future of global energy, with a peak in fossil fuel demand clearly visible for the first time and set to happen before the end of the 2020s…The IEA’s latest data indicates that the peak in fossil fuel demand is moving even closer.” Birol says that over the past two years, solar panel deployment “has been fast enough to align fully with the rate envisaged in the IEA’s ambitious pathway to net-zero emissions by 2050”. Sales of heat pumps have been “growing rapidly over the past two years” and electric car sales are “soaring”, he adds. He continues: “New IEA analysis in our Global EV Outlook 2023, to be published this month, shows that current trends in the rapidly growing global fleet of electric cars will avoid the need for the equivalent of 5m barrels of oil a day by 2030.” He concludes: “The push by some companies and governments to build new large-scale fossil fuel projects is not only a bet against the world reaching its climate goals – it is also a risky proposition for investors who want reasonable returns on their capital.”

In other UK comment, Claire Jones – international economy news editor at the Financial Times  – says the EU “must be more ambitious in its response to climate change”. Jones says that the EU’s Net-Zero Industry Act – which was implemented in response to the US Inflation Reduction Act – has received criticism. However, she says the bloc is “not quite as far behind in the race as recent headlines might suggest”. To catch up, she says “triage, time horizons and trillions” are needed. 

Finally, a Scotsman editorial under the headline “Climate change: Dengue fever case is a warning about the ‘biggest global health threat of the 21st century’” talks about a woman who contracted a case of Dengue fever in France. It says the illness “is spread by mosquitoes previously only found in the tropics”, but adds that  “warmer conditions have enabled the Asian tiger mosquito to move into southern Europe, bringing the disease with them”.

Financial Times business columnist Helen Thomas writes that Glencore – the world’s biggest commodity trader – “wants to spin off” its coal business “despite previously arguing holding on to it was better”. (This comes as the Times reports that Glencore is attempting to buy out its Canadian mining rival Teck.) Thomas writes that most big miners have tried to “get rid” of coal, but says Glencore is the exception. She continues: “The miner has effectively argued that holding on to its big thermal coal business is not only the economically preferable course, but (don’t laugh) the morally superior one. Glencore’s chair said its ‘responsible stewardship model’, which means keeping coal in a large, diversified, listed group with high standards, was the correct one for all stakeholders…But suddenly Glencore does want to spin off coal, as part of its $23bn hostile takeover bid for Teck Resources, a family-controlled company long seen as attractive, but unbuyable.” Glencore denies any shift in its “responsible stewardship” strategy, says Thomas, though “the phrase is notably absent from its letters and presentations around Teck”. Others disagree, she adds, noting that “‘complete U-turn’, ‘definitely a strategic change’, ‘undermines their argument’ were some thoughts from investors, analysts and bankers this week”. 

Elsewhere, Bloomberg opinion columnist Javier Blas writes: “In pursuing its coal strategy, Glencore is making two calculated bets. First, it believes that while most institutional investors hate coal, many others would still love the fat dividends the coal miner would probably pay…Second, it sees that the mining companies that have stuck with coal despite pressure to divest are making a killing.” He concludes: “If Glencore is going to triumph, it requires coal prices to remain as high as they are today, around $200 a ton for the benchmark Australian material, compared to an average of $75 a ton between 2000 and 2020. The more investors hate coal – limiting production – the more likely that coal prices remain high. Ironically, ESG [Environmental, social and governance] is key to a downsizing coal industry remaining profitable and keeping diehard investors along for the ride. Crudely, that’s Glencore’s play.”

New research finds that rates of drought intensification “have sped up” over the past 64 years, with nearly three-quarters of the globe transitioning toward “flash droughts” becoming the norm. Researchers use global soil moisture data to determine the speed of drought onset since the 1950s, then use climate models to figure out whether these observed changes are due to human-driven climate change. They find that climate change has “significantly amplified” the factors speeding up drought onset and that the transition towards flash droughts “is projected to expand to most land areas” under future climate change. They conclude: “These findings underscore the urgency for adapting to faster-onset droughts in a warmer future.”