Energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions reached a record-high last year, the Financial Times says, reporting new figures from the International Energy Agency (IEA). The newspaper says the increase in 2022 of “just under 1%” was “slow[er] than expected thanks to rapid growth in renewable energy as a result of the energy crisis caused by Russia’s war on Ukraine”. It quotes IEA chief Fatih Birol saying: “Without clean energy, the growth in [carbon] emissions would have been nearly three times as high.” Reuters says that “more clean technology such as solar power and electric vehicles helped limit the impact of increased coal and oil use”, according to the IEA. The National quotes Birol saying: “The impacts of the energy crisis didn’t result in the major increase in global emissions that was initially feared – and this is thanks to the outstanding growth of renewables, EVs, heat pumps and energy efficient technologies. However, we still see emissions growing from fossil fuels, hindering efforts to meet the world’s climate targets.” The Times reports: “Carbon emissions related to global energy grew by almost 1% last year to a record high, partly because countries had to burn more coal to cope with surging gas prices linked to the war in Ukraine.” The Wall Street Journal says emissions “climbed less than feared in 2022 despite coal resurgence”. Bloomberg reports the IEA finding that: “China, the world’s biggest emitter, also saw a slight drop of 0.2% last year as weaker economic growth, a slowdown in construction and measures to contain the spread of Covid-19 inhibited energy use.” (This finding from the IEA confirms analysis published by Carbon Brief two weeks ago, which found that China’s emissions are likely to have declined in 2022, contrary to Chinese government figures.)

New research proves “a clear correlation between deforestation and regional precipitation” for the first time, the Guardian reports. The paper says: “People living in deforested areas have long provided anecdotal evidence that their microclimates became drier with lower tree cover. Scientists already knew that killing trees reduces evapotranspiration and thus theorised this would result in lower local rainfall.” It continues: “The paper, published in the journal Nature, adds to fears that the degradation of the Amazon is approaching a tipping point after which the rainforest will no longer be able to generate its own rainfall and the vegetation will dry up.” The Times and New Scientist also have the story. Separately, Bloomberg reports: “Ecosystems that soak up carbon dioxide have long provided a helping hand against global warming, but we may not be able to count on it forever, researchers say.”

The European Parliament and EU member states have reached a deal on “the world’s first set of comprehensive rules for issuing green bonds to meet the bloc’s net-zero goals”, Reuters reports, adding: “The rules will enable investors to identify high quality green bonds and companies, thereby reducing greenwashing or exaggerated environmentally-friendly claims, parliament said.” However, the newswire notes that compliance with the green bond rules will be voluntary. Separately, BusinessGreen reports that certification firm Bureau Veritas has “published a new guide for businesses on how to avoid greenwashing, as businesses face growing pressure from regulators and customers to ensure their environmental claims are accurate”. Meanwhile, the Guardian reports that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is “to crack down on ‘greenwashing’ after survey reveals spike in misleading claims”.

US president Joe Biden is to issue the first veto of his presidency, the Financial Times reports, after both houses of Congress voted to “roll back a US labour department rule that allows retirement plan fiduciaries to include ESG considerations in their investments”. The paper says: “While Biden’s veto will effectively kill efforts to roll back the labour department rule, Congress’s approval of the measure nevertheless underscores Republicans’ newfound abilities to exert influence and amplify their message in Washington. National Republicans have made opposition to ESG a key pillar of their pitch to voters. Ron DeSantis, the Florida governor and likely presidential candidate, has banned fund managers for the state’s retirement system from including ESG factors in their decision-making.” Reuters says: “A Republican bill to prevent pension fund managers from basing investment decisions on factors like climate change cleared Congress on Wednesday, setting up a confrontation with President Joe Biden, who is expected to veto the measure.” Fox News runs with the headline: “Senate kills Biden ESG investment rule in stunning rebuke.” USA Today, Bloomberg and the Hill all have the story. Reuters has an explainer titled: “Can Republicans topple Biden’s ESG investing rule in court?” It says the Biden administration rule “lifts barriers to ESG investing imposed by the Trump administration”. It continues: “The Labor Department said the Trump-era rule, which was criticised by business groups and the financial industry, failed to account for the positive impact that ESG investing can have on long-term returns.” It says that the Biden rule “has divided the business community”, explaining: “Sectors that stand to lose investments, including the oil and gas industry, oppose it while many other businesses have voiced support for efforts to make ESG investing easier.” The newswire says legal challenges to the rule “could face an uphill battle in showing it violates the employee benefits law, lawyers said”. Separately, the Financial Times reports: “Wall Street’s largest asset managers, private equity firms and brokers have warned that a backlash against sustainable investing is now a material risk, in filings that show how acrimony over ESG principles has become a perceived threat to profits.” Elsewhere, Investment Week reports: “BlackRock, Vanguard, Fidelity, State Street Global Advisors and other global asset managers controlling over £77tn in assets have this week been accused of ‘treading water’ on environmental and social issues.”

The Washington Post carries a visual analysis by its “climate lab” columnist Harry Stevens, who writes that the pace of China’s industrialisation has been “astonishing…far surpassing the speed of the west’s industrial development”. It adds that, “at this rate, it’s not a matter of whether China will eventually emit more carbon dioxide than any other country in history, but when”. He explains via an infographic that, “despite the west’s enormous head start, China is projected to have emitted more total CO2 than all of Europe by 2039 and more than the US by 2050”. (Note that the article assumes emissions remain relatively constant over the coming decades, rather than declining in line with climate goals. For more analysis and explanation about historic cumulative emissions, see this 2021 article by Carbon Brief.) CNBC writes that China’s “factory activity for February bounced further into expansion territory”, according to data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). The official manufacturing purchasing managers’ index “rose to 52.6 in February – above the 50-point mark that separates growth from contraction”, which “marks the highest reading since April 2012, when it hit 53.5”.

Separately, China Dialogue says that the country’s “provincial-level jurisdictions (hereafter “provinces”) will focus on both coal and renewable power in the year ahead”, according to work reports released ahead of the national “two sessions”, which are the country’s “most significant annual political and legislative meetings”. It adds that “more than two-thirds of the 31 provinces in mainland China have pledged to promote ‘clean’ coal, to construct ‘advanced’ coal power capacity, or to ensure coal supply”, while “seventeen plan to speed up building wind and solar farms or industrial parks, with more attention given to offshore wind”. (See Carbon Brief’s in-depth article explaining why China’s provinces are so important for action on climate change.) Also reporting on the upcoming political gathering in Beijing, CGTN, a state-run news channel, writes that the country’s goals of “peaking carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality by 2060 have since fueled everything from renewable energy development to the booming market of new energy vehicles”. The channel interviews Zhang Guoqiang, chairman of SinoHytec, a leading Chinese hydrogen energy company, who is quoted saying he “expects even greater acceleration in the industry this spring”. Zhang, who is also a deputy to the 14th National People’s Congress, adds: “We are proud to say that China’s hydrogen industry, as well as the hydrogen fuel cell industry, is among the world’s first tier.”

Finally, the Wall Street Journal writes: “[China’s] unusual approach to the energy transition means the impact [of China permitting large numbers of new coal power plants] might not be as bad as it seems. That matters since China accounts for nearly one third of the world’s total carbon-dioxide emissions.” The article says that “China says it aims to build another 160GW (gigawatts) of solar and wind energy capacity in 2023”, adding that, “if all goes to plan, this renewable power would relegate coal plants to backup status, meaning they would run well below capacity and add less to emissions than the headline number may suggest”. And Reuters carries a column by Gavin Maguire headlined: “China widens renewable energy supply lead with wind power push.”

There is widespread coverage of Tesla’s “investor day” yesterday, where Reuters says the firm pledged to “cut assembly costs by half in future generations of cars…but chief executive Elon Musk did not unveil when it will debut a much-awaited affordable electric vehicle”. The newswire says shares in the company “fell more than 5% in after hours trade” following the event. It adds: “More than a dozen Tesla executives led by Musk discussed everything from a white-paper plan for the globe to embrace sustainable energy to the company’s innovation in managing its operations from manufacturing to service…But there were no details about when next generation cars would be launched and what models would be offered.” A separate Reuters piece is titled: “How Elon Musk has missed his targets on delivering affordable cars.” The Financial Times reports: “Tesla executives said a wide range of efficiency and cost improvements has put the company on track to launch a far cheaper electric vehicle, potentially allowing it to tap a big new market as it faces greater competition from rival carmakers.” The Times says Musk “hinted at a cheaper next generation of electric cars at an investor day yesterday as the electric carmaker’s engineers described plans to cut vehicle assembly costs by half”.  The Daily Telegraph, Forbes and Quartz also have the story.

Renewable sources of power generated more electricity than gas in the UK between October and February, the Press Association reports, based on figures from the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit. This avoided the need for 110 tankers of liquified natural gas (LNG), the newswire says.

Two US firms have agreed to develop and build “the first grid-scale next-generation nuclear reactor for an industrial site in North America”, Reuters reports. It says the demonstration project would be built at a Dow site on the US Gulf Coast, with the location to be finalised this year. The newswire says: “Backers of next-generation nuclear reactors, including the Biden administration, say the technology is crucial to fight climate change. Critics say they are more expensive than renewable energy and energy storage technologies and take too long to develop.” Another Reuters article reports: “Plans for the first US small modular nuclear power reactor got a boost on Tuesday as some Western US cities vowed to continue with the NuScale Power Corp project despite a jump in projected costs. NuScale plans to build a demonstration small modular reactor (SMR) power plant at the Idaho National Laboratory. If successful, the six-reactor, 462 megawatt Carbon Free Power Project will run in 2030.” The newswire adds: “NuScale said in January the target price for power from the plant is $89 per megawatt hour, up 53% from the previous estimate of $58/MWh, a jump that raised concerns about whether customers would be willing to pay for the power it generates.”

In a comment for the Hindu, Prof Prabhash Ranjan, an expert in international investment and trade law at the Jindal Global Law School in India, reflects on Vanuatu’s push for an advisory International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling on climate change. Ranjan notes that advisory ICJ rulings are non-binding. He continues: “Yet, they carry normative weight and clarify international law on a relevant issue. The ICJ’s advisory opinion on climate change will also be handy in climate-related litigation at the national level.” Ranjan explains the legal questions being raised by the case: “First, what are the international law obligations of countries toward the protection of the climate system from anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases for the present and future generations?…Second, given these international legal obligations, what are the legal consequences for states that have caused significant harm to the climate system, the SID states and other people of the present and future generations?” He concludes: “These advisory opinions are not a panacea. They may even turn out to be double-edged swords depending on the kind of verdict delivered. Nonetheless, as part of a multi-pronged approach to saving our planet, one should welcome the role of international courts.”

Writing in the Times, columnist Iain Martin says the “enormous industrial subsidies” in the US Inflation Reduction Act “threaten to deindustrialise Europe over the course of this decade”. He continues: “Investment will be sucked into the US and Europe will struggle to respond. With deindustrialisation will come unemployment, social unrest and, perhaps, the rise of crazy populism, with all that entails.” Martin writes: “From a European perspective, these developments are a potential disaster. The new subsidies and tax breaks in the US are so attractive they will suck in money from global investors and companies keen to enjoy American subsidies. Why build or fund a solar or battery factory that counts as green in Warsaw or Wigan when Wisconsin is available with a wheelbarrow full of subsidies?” He adds: “The European Commission is alert to the danger and has been making trips to Washington seeking opt-outs. Although the EU will try to agree its own subsidies, they are likely to be piddling without the kind of investor leverage America enjoys. Rishi Sunak is aware of the difficulties, too, but for the Treasury it is just another item on a long list of problems in post-Brexit Britain.”

An editorial in the Hindu reflects on recent warnings that heatwaves are likely to hit most parts of India during March-May. It says: “Climate change, studies have reported, has exacerbated the impact of heatwaves in India. A Lancet study reported a 55% rise in deaths due to extreme heat and that excessive heat also led to a loss of 167.2 billion potential labour hours among Indians in 2021.” It adds: “The interplay between local weather and climate is complex and while it is tempting to blame rising heatwave intensity as ‘climate change,’ the science continues to be uncertain. This, however, should be a wake-up call to buttress public health systems and make them more responsive to the challenges from rising temperatures.” The Independent reports on the story under the headline: “India braces for another heatwave amid concerns over wheat exports.”

An editorial in Nature notes how the model of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has proved “difficult to replicate”. It points to the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) as one example, but adds: “[W]hen it comes to other great global challenges, which are embodied by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals – inequality, say, or water or food security – there’s no advisory research body on a similar scale or with comparable impact, and none on the immediate horizon”. It says a book published in December “helps to explain why the climate panel and IPBES remain two of a kind — and why we might not see their like again”. The editorial says: “The authors describe an organisation [the IPCC] that was a product of a particular set of circumstances, some of which cannot be recreated easily – if at all.” It continues: “The IPCC’s founding researchers considered government involvement to be essential to both attracting decision makers’ attention to the body’s findings and gaining their trust. But there are good reasons that other research networks cannot replicate this level of involvement.” Other scientific disciplines do not have the same level of government access, the piece says, adding: “Even if they did, such involvement would be more complicated to navigate now than in the 1980s. The book’s authors detail how, over time, IPCC meetings became more politicised as government representatives – mainly, but not exclusively, from oil-producing states – interfered in the scientists’ discussions.” Nonetheless, the piece concludes: “Today’s myriad global challenges need research-based evidence more than ever, and it’s clear that faster, more focused and more inclusive assessments – such as those that the IPCC and IPBES are starting to do – are the way forward. The world might never again see a research assessment on the scale that the IPCC pioneered, but that is far from the only way for policymakers to access – and act on – scientific evidence.”

New research finds that, globally, algal blooms became 13% larger and 60% more frequent over 2003-20. The authors used satellite observations to map daily marine coastal algal blooms over 2003-20. They find that algal blooms occurred in 126 out of the 153 coastal countries examined. While blooms strengthened globally, the paper finds that they weakened in tropical and subtropical areas of the northern hemisphere. The authors also “documented the relationship between the bloom trends and ocean circulation, and identified the stimulatory effects of recent increases in sea surface temperature”.

Methane emissions from the Prairie pothole region – North America’s largest wetland complex – will double by 2100 under moderate warming scenarios, according to a new study. The authors combine an “exceptionally large methane flux dataset” with remotely sensed information to model wetland methane emissions from the Prairie pothole region. They predict that under “severe” warming scenarios, emissions from the region will increase threefold by 2100. The study concludes that “international efforts to decrease atmospheric methane concentrations should jointly account for anthropogenic and natural emissions to maintain climate mitigation targets to the end of the century”.