G7 ministers are meeting in Turin for talks on the environment and climate change, reports AFP, with “experts urging the highly industrialised countries to use their political clout, wealth and technologies to end fossil fuel use”. The newswire adds: “The G7 meeting in the northern Italian city is the first big political session since the world pledged at the UN’s COP28 climate summit in December to transition away from coal, oil and gas…Hundreds of protesters demonstrated in Turin on Sunday, some burning photos of the G7 leaders as they accused them of failing future generations over the climate crisis. Rome, which holds the G7 rotating presidency, says it wants Turin to be ‘a strategic link’ between last year’s [COP28] in Dubai and COP29, which will take place in November in Azerbaijan…France is expected to push for the G7 to phase out coal by 2030, but Japan is reluctant to set a date. Germany – Europe’s biggest emitter of greenhouse gases – is unwilling to wean off gas, as is Italy. Italy’s far-right prime minister Giorgia Meloni has vowed repeatedly to transform Italy into a gas hub for Europe, seeking new suppliers in the Mediterranean and Africa and expanding gas infrastructure. Luca Bergamaschi, founder of Italian climate thinktank ECCO, questioned Italy’s claim that gas was essential for its energy security, and said its interest in nascent technologies such as nuclear fusion is misguided. G7 decisions ‘have a big impact on the markets and on the ideas and expectations of investors’, and Italy’s stewardship in Turin ‘will be watched closely’, he said.”

Meanwhile, the Financial Times reports that the G7 countries are set to agree on a global target to “increase electricity storage capacity sixfold from 2022 to 2030, as countries grapple with how to keep the lights on while shifting to intermittent wind and solar power”. The newspaper adds: “Climate ministers have ‘agreed in principle’ a global goal for electricity storage capacity of 1,500 gigawatts [GW] in 2030, up from 230GW in 2022, according to a draft document seen by the Financial Times. That includes the use of batteries, hydrogen, water or other solutions to store electricity. There are fraught discussions on several other areas, with coal among the most contentious, along with energy efficiency and methane targets. Japan in particular has pushed back against an ambitious shift away from coal. The current text, which has not been agreed, says countries should phase out the use of coal power from which emissions are not captured shortly after 2035. Under new rules unveiled by the US on Thursday, coal plants planning to stay open beyond 2039 will have to cut or capture 90% of their carbon dioxide emissions by 2032.” Reuters also reports that “Italy is pushing for an agreement among the G7 wealthy nations to set a target date for the phase-out of coal in power generation, diplomatic sources said”.

Separately, the Financial Times reports that the president of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev, whose country will host COP29 later this year, has “defended the country’s fossil fuel sector, arguing its ‘oil and gas would be needed for years to come’ because of European demand”. And Reuters covers a new report by Norwegian NGO Framtiden i vaare hender (the Future in our Hands) which concludes that “Norway’s $1.6tn sovereign wealth fund, the world’s largest, falls short on its climate ambitions by failing to back multiple shareholder proposals pushing oil companies to cut their greenhouse gas emissions”.

There is continuing media coverage of the extreme flooding affecting eastern Africa. Africanews says “at least 70 people have died in Kenya since mid-March as heavy rain and flooding have continued across the country”. It adds: “Kenya [has] seen weeks of rain and severe flooding, including in the capital, Nairobi, and in the country’s western and central regions. And citizens have been warned to brace for ‘even heavier rainfall’…The above-average rains have caused widespread destruction affecting over 100 thousand people, destroying crops, and damaging infrastructure, schools, homes and small businesses.” Kenya’s Nation says that dams along the Tana river, the country’s longest, were now at “full capacity” and “there is a prediction of a massive overflow downstream within the next 24 hours”. An editorial in the Nation says “this is the time to raise awareness and educate the people on the emergency measures needed to avert disasters”. BBC News is running a live-blog which this morning reports that “an unspecified number of passengers are missing after the boat they were travelling in capsized in Kenya’s north-eastern area of Madogo”. It adds that “the Kenyan government has postponed the reopening of schools by a week due to the ongoing floods”. The Guardian says the rain in Kenya, Tanzania and Burundi has killed “at least 90 people and damage[d] farmland and infrastructure”. A separate Guardian article says that the flooding in Kenya has displaced “more than 130,000 people across 24,000 households”.

Meanwhile, in other extreme weather news, Reuters reports that “schools in Bangladesh reopened on Sunday despite a heatwave continuing to sweep the South Asian nation, with temperatures expected to climb above 40C (104F) in the days ahead”. 

A new tax on fossil fuel companies based in the world’s richest countries could raise hundreds of billions of dollars “to help the most vulnerable nations cope with the escalating climate crisis”, according to a report covered by the Guardian. It says the report, which is backed by dozens of climate organisations worldwide including Greenpeace, Stamp Out Poverty, Power Shift Africa and Christian Aid, calculates that an additional tax on fossil fuel majors based in the wealthiest Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries could raise $720bn (£580bn) by the end of the decade. The Guardian adds: “The authors say a new extraction levy could boost the loss and damage fund to help vulnerable countries cope with the worst effects of climate breakdown that was agreed at the COP28 summit in Dubai – a hard-won victory by developing countries that they hope will signal a commitment by developed, polluting nations to provide financial support for some of the destruction already under way.” BusinessGreen also covers the report.

Economic newswire Jiemian reports that China has published a draft energy law, which is now open for public comment until 25 May. It adds that the law “clearly supports prioritising development of renewable energy, rational development of clean and efficient use of fossil energy and…promotion of non-fossil fuel energy instead of fossil fuel energy and low-carbon energy instead of high-carbon energy”. Energy news outlet IN-EN.com says that the draft law calls on the Chinese state to “establish a mechanism to promote green energy consumption and encourage energy users to prioritise using renewable energy and other clean and low-carbon energy sources”. Industry outlet BJX News also covers the law, noting that it says “power supply enterprises…[shall] assume the responsibility for the consumption of renewable energy”. 

IN-EN.com publishes a summary of the speech Chinese president Xi Jinping delivered in the city of Chongqing, which included a call to “be realistic, by not slowing the pace of green and low-carbon development, and not be too idealistic, above all guaranteeing energy supply”. State news agency Xinhua covers comments by National Energy Administration (NEA) director Zhang Jianhua at the Zhongguancun Forum 2024 that China should “lead on clean energy industry innovation through scientific and technological innovation”. BJX News reports that the NEA has finished drafting renewable energy certificate issuance and trading rules to “promote the consumption of renewable energy electricity”. IN-EN.com also covers the story, adding that the rules require the trading parties to establish a “unique, real-name green certificate account”.

Bloomberg reports that Xi warned US secretary of state Antony Blinken in Beijing last week that “the US shouldn’t target or oppose China”. Reuters says China has passed a tariff law, which strengthens the country’s “trade defence capabilities” by outlining “a range of legal provisions related to tariffs on Chinese imports and exports”. In an interview with Reuters, US treasury secretary Janet Yellen has reiterated that her government “is not taking any options off the table” to tackle the overcapacity issue, adding that “Chinese officials acknowledge a problem with industrial overcapacity”. The New York Times reports that a US factory has restarted production of polysilicon, which could help the country re-establish a complete domestic solar supply chain. The Communist party-affiliated newspaper People’s Daily carries a “factcheck” of overcapacity arguments, saying that China uses its “comparative advantage” to contribute to “global green development” and provide low-carbon products that are “in dire scarcity”. China Daily also publishes an article quoting Liu Xueyan, of the Chinese Academy of Macroeconomic Research, saying China’s manufacturing advantage is “powered by market behaviours” rather than “government subsidies”.

Finally, many outlets cover the news that Tesla’s Elon Musk has made a surprise visit to China. The Times says: “As western governments accuse the country of flooding the global market with cheap electric vehicles, the Tesla chief executive met Li Qiang and other officials, who told Musk, 52, that the carmaker’s manufacturing in China was an example of strong Chinese-American trade co-operation, according to local media. Musk said that ‘it’s good to see electric vehicles make progress in China. All cars will be electric in the future.’”

German chancellor Olaf Scholz has said that his country plans to change its bilateral debt relief framework to enable middle-income countries to benefit from climate investment, reports Reuters. The newswire quotes Scholz saying on Friday on the sidelines of the Petersberg Climate Dialogue in Berlin: “In future, vulnerable middle-income countries that are willing to reform could also be eligible for a climate debt conversion programme.”

Separately, the Norwegian energy company Equinor is “pushing forward” with a pipeline from Germany to Norway for the transportation of CO2 to be stored below the seabed, reports Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ). The newspaper notes that up to 30m tonnes of liquefied CO2 are expected to be transported from the continent annually and disposed of using the carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. Equinor vice president Irene Rummelhoff says in an interview with FAZ: “Wilhelmshaven is the most likely solution in Germany, but there are several applicants in Europe.” It was a “bombshell” when the German government made a U-turn in the CCS debate, notes FAZ, conceding that “in the fight against climate change, there was no other way if the self-imposed climate targets were to be achieved”. However, the economy ministry intends to restrict CCS practices to certain producers, such as the cement industry, for which there is “currently no technology for complete CO2 avoidance”, adds the outlet.

Meanwhile, Der Spiegel reports that the “controversial reform” of Germany’s Climate Protection Act, which introduces “fundamental changes”, has now passed the Bundestag, the lower house of the German parliament. If individual sectors such as transportation or buildings fail to meet legal requirements for CO2 emissions reduction, the responsible ministries must now submit immediate action plans in the following year, explains the newspaper. With the reform, compliance with climate targets will no longer be divided by sectors, notes the outlet. However, Die Zeit reports that German economy minister Robert Habeck believes “Germany is on course with the energy transition” with “renewables generating around 75.9 terawatt-hours of electricity from January to March, about 9% more than in the same period last year”. The outlet continues that onshore wind turbines are “the most important”, but solar energy, hydropower and offshore wind turbines are also “on the rise”.

Finally, Deutsche Welle reports that Scholz called for greater private-sector investment to pay for combating climate change during the Petersberg conference. 

US media continues to examine the impact of a possible return of Donald Trump to the White House, should he win this year’s US presidential election. The Guardian says that “climate experts fear Donald Trump will follow a blueprint created by his allies to gut the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), disbanding its work on climate science and tailoring its operations to business interests”. It adds: “The plan to break up NOAA is laid out in the Project 2025 document written by more than 350 rightwingers and helmed by the Heritage Foundation. Called the Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, it is meant to guide the first 180 days of presidency for an incoming Republican president.” The New York Times has a feature headlined: “Five major climate policies Trump would probably reverse if elected.” The article says: “Trump’s likely policies would add four billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere, according to a study by Carbon Brief, a climate analysis site.”

Separately, the New York Times has a feature on how “abrupt u-turns are defining US environmental regulations”, adding that the “polarisation of politics means that rules are imposed, gutted and restored with each election. Experts say that’s bad for the economy.” And Reuters has a feature examining claims by some farmers in the US that solar farms are putting the “most productive farmland at risk”. It says: “Five renewable developers and solar energy firms interviewed by Reuters counter that the industry’s use of farmland is too small to impact domestic food production overall and should be balanced with the need to decarbonise the US energy market in the face of climate change.”

Finally, the Sunday Times has a news feature headlined: “California goes to war with Big Oil over climate change.” It says: “BP, Shell, Exxon, Conoco and Chevron are being sued in the US with the aim of forcing them to fund a climate ‘abatement fund’ similar to a settlement reached over cigarettes.”

In his final day as the Climate Change Committee’s chief executive, Chris Stark has told the Press Association that “the move to net zero will not require a ‘huge shift’ in everyday lives, with people still able to fly off on holiday and have a steak”. The article continues: “Speaking as he leaves the role after six years, [Stark] suggested he and others in the green sector had pushed too hard the idea that the shift required a radical transformation. Instead people’s lives would not be that different in 2050, the target date for ending the UK’s contribution to climate change by cutting emissions to zero overall. And after months in which the two major political parties have retreated on climate action, rolling back targets and cutting spending promises, he said politicians needed to show bold leadership. Net-zero was ‘an investment strategy for the country’, he said, and ‘fomo’ – fear of missing out – should be brought back into the climate debate, as other countries such as the US and China were making significant moves on the transition. He said the disconnect between the growing impact of the climate crisis which people were witnessing, from 40C heat to the extremely wet winter this year, and the retreat from ‘owning’ net-zero by mainstream politicians, was ‘jarring’.” Speaking to Politico, Stark says that it will “take a ‘Herculean effort’ for Labour to reach its key net-zero target of clean power by 2030 if it wins power”. He adds that the “opposition party’s clean-power goal is achievable – but it will need to ‘throw everything at it’ if elected”.

In other UK news, the Daily Telegraph reports that a government-funded report by Energy Systems Catapult has “warned” that “Britain must invest £30bn in a network of massive air cleansing systems designed to strip CO2 from the atmosphere if it is to reach net-zero”. [The report’s key conclusions include: “The transition to a net-zero economy, both in the UK and internationally, is an unparalleled economic opportunity…Our new analysis shows the UK can achieve an affordable transition with costs within 1% of GDP by 2050.”] And the Guardian reports that “UK harvests of important crops could be down by nearly a fifth this year due to the unprecedented wet weather farmers have faced, increasing the likelihood that the prices of bread, beer and biscuits will rise”. Finally, the Sunday Times has a news feature headlined: “The eco groups ready for battle over Keir Starmer’s climate plans.”

The New York Times has published a comment piece by Benji Backer, the founder and executive chairman of the American Conservation Coalition. He writes: “Many of today’s Republican leaders stoke fear and anger by mocking the most divisive climate activists while claiming that every environmental solution is a radical one. If they’re not doing that, Republicans can often be found on the sidelines and disengaged from the issue completely. Instead of continuing the environmental legacy they were once known for, they have ceded the fight against climate change to Democrats, putting themselves on the wrong side of history.” He concludes: “As a member of Gen Z, I believe it’s time for my generation to mobilise around climate solutions that bring both sides to the table – and demand our leaders do the same. Liberals must stop denigrating and abandoning key communities they need to solve the problem, and conservatives must stop denying the problem and take ownership of climate solutions. If the Republican Party wants to expand its coalition, it will need to recruit young voters with a far more pragmatic message. This environmental movement will look slightly different from what the Democrats have built. We firmly believe fossil fuels must be part of our transition to cleaner energy sources for years to come. So our movement will aim to improve the environmental impact of all energy sources, not just wind and solar. We’ll also focus on ecosystem restoration and other conservation measures that lower emissions. And we’ll call on policymakers to prioritise permitting reform, reducing government overreach and making it easier to build clean energy projects in the US more quickly.”

In other comment, an editorial in the Washington Post argues that “humans might need to re-engineer the climate”. It says: “Assessing the risks of messing up the weather by blocking the sun against the risks of letting the world broil requires a better understanding of the technology and its effects. Along with that, figuring out how to decide if, when and how to deploy such technology will be extremely difficult, given its heterogeneous impacts. But this effort is indispensable – and, increasingly, urgent.” The Financial Times has published a special report on “health and climate change”, which includes a range of articles on the topic, including on how “deforestation opens paths for disease spread from animals to humans”. The Financial Times also has a “big read” on how “Europe solved its Russian gas problem”, adding that “the bloc has avoided an energy crisis, but the short-term solutions could harm competitiveness and the green transition down the line”.

Finally, an editorial in the Guardian examines the rising price of chocolate: “As grim as the picture looks, the attention demanded by the rocketing price of cocoa, and the introduction of EU deforestation and transparency regulations, offer an opportunity. While unusual in some ways, cocoa farming’s travails point to a systemic problem. There are parallels to grave concerns about the future of the coffee industry. Faced with global heating, increasing conflict and energy price instability, depending on the free market is a poor bet. Treating foodstuffs as financial instruments immiserates farmers, destroys forests and exacerbates instability of supply.”

Methane emissions from China’s abandoned coal mines have been underestimated, a new study warns. The authors construct a “coal mine database” to estimate China’s coal methane emissions over 2011–19, and calculate future emissions based on different mine closure policies. They estimate that by 2035, abandoned mines will be China’s largest sources of coal methane emissions – larger than emissions from active coal mines. The authors also develop a “coal mine closure strategy”, which they say could “reduce cumulative methane emissions by 67m tonnes (26%) to 2050, potentially reaching 100m tonnes (39%) with improved methane recovery and utilisation practices”.