Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, climate activist Greta Thunberg has said it was “completely ridiculous” that Sultan Ahmed al-Jaber, chief executive of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC), will preside over the next round of global climate talks in Dubai in November, reports the Guardian. Thunberg told a sideline event that lobbyists have been influencing these conferences “since, basically, forever”, the paper reports. She added: “And yet somehow these are the people that we seem to rely on [for] solving our problems, where they have proven time and time again, that they are not prioritising that…They are prioritising self greed, corporate greed and short-term economic profits above people and above planet.” Thunberg also demanded that fossil-fuel bosses immediately stop opening any new fossil-fuel extraction sites, the paper says, signing – along with fellow activists including Vanessa Nakate from Uganda – a “cease and desist” order that said “Big Oil” has known for decades that fossil fuels cause climate breakdown, and has misled the public and deceived politicians. The activists were joined for a roundtable discussion by Fatih Birol, head of the International Energy Agency, who said he was “very happy” that the activists were pushing the climate agenda forwards, the paper reports. Reuters, the Hill and the Independent also have the story, while the Guardian has a video of Thunberg’s speech.

The New York Times reports that US special climate envoy John Kerry offered a “full-throated defence” in Davos of the decision to hold this year’s UN climate talks in the United Arab Emirates. On the sidelines of the event, Kerry said not to “judge a book by its cover”, the paper reports: “Mr Kerry has worked closely with Mr Al Jaber for years and called him a ‘good friend’, adding that he believed the oil executive ‘would be a very serious and focused interlocutor on this’.” Kerry also said: “There’s an advantage to having a petrostate that is actually in the forefront of some of these cutting edge initiatives…I think the UAE is serious about it.” Kerry’s comments came before Thunberg’s, the paper notes.

In an interview with Reuters Global Markets Forum at Davos, Birol said that he “wouldn’t be too relaxed” about energy markets and that “2023 may well be a year where we see tighter markets than some colleagues may think”. Birol said there were uncertainties to watch out for, particularly Chinese demand and Russian supply. He said: “If (the) Chinese economy rebounds this year, which many financial institutions expect, then we may see demand to be very strong and put pressure on the markets.”

In other Thunberg news, the Daily Telegraph reports that “German police have denied staging photos with climate activist Greta Thunberg at a demonstration against a coal mine on Tuesday”. It says the “denial came after video clips were shared online which appeared to show officers treating Ms Thunberg differently from other activists at the scene”.

Also at Davos, Reuters reports that UK opposition leader Keir Starmer said there would be no investment in new oil and gas fields in the UK under a Labour government, in what the newswire describes as “a big change from current UK energy policies”. Speaking at a panel discussion, Starmer said: “What we’ve said about oil and gas is that there does need to be a transition…Obviously it will play its part during that transition but not new investment, not new fields up in the North Sea, because we need to go towards net-zero, we need to ensure that renewable energy is where we go next.” Starmer called on countries to form a “clean power alliance” to rival the OPEC group of oil exporting countries, reports the Daily Telegraph: He said: “One of the things that I am proposing is a clean power alliance where countries that are in the advance when it comes to net-zero share information, co-operate and share investment with a view to driving the global prices down…So, this is an inverse OPEC. Instead of trying to ensure prices stay at a certain level, it’s to drive them down, to see the common benefit, whether it’s in the UK or across the globe.” Bloomberg and MailOnline also have the story, while shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves tells the Times on the sidelines of Davos that the UK needs to “crack on” with a net-zero industrial policy as rival economies rush to offer financial incentives to boost their companies. She said: “Some country is going to be a global leader in the industries of the future and I’ve got every reason to believe it can be Britain…But other countries are trying to get a share of the action, whether it be in green hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, or floating offshore wind. We’ve got to crack on.”

Responding to Starmer’s comments, an editorial in the Daily Mail describes the Labour leader as a “disaster in waiting”. It says: “[H]e says if he was PM there would be no new investment in North Sea oil and gas. But that would leave our energy security at the mercy of global market shocks and the whim of tyrants such as Putin.”

Meanwhile, following its announcement to staff that it would be cutting jobs, Harbour Energy – the UK’s biggest oil and gas producer – confirmed that its capital expenditure in the UK this year would be “reduced compared to previous expectations with certain opportunities no longer being pursued following the changes to the energy profits levy”, reports the Times. The company, which pumped more than 200,000 barrels equivalent of oil and gas last year, said “certain opportunities” in the country will no longer be pursued, reports Bloomberg. The Financial Times Lex column warns that the “UK’s energy windfall tax is a roughly hewn instrument that could well weigh on future investments”.

Brazil’s first raids against illegal deforestation in the Amazon rainforest under President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva got underway yesterday, reports Reuters, “after the new leader’s pledge to end destruction that surged under his predecessor Jair Bolsonaro”. The newswire “exclusively accompanied raids led by environmental agency Ibama in the rainforest state of Para to stop loggers and ranchers illegally clearing the forest”. It explains: “About 10 Ibama agents set out in pickup trucks on Thursday from their base in the municipality of Uruara, Para, along with a dozen federal police, heading toward an indigenous reserve where satellite images showed loggers and ranchers recently at work clearing the forest illegally. The mission aims to stop or scare off loggers to avoid further incursions into the forest and to issue fines to those caught with illegal wood.” Further raids have been launched in the states of Roraima and Acre. Ibama agents told Reuters that they already felt more empowered by Lula announcing environmental protection as a top priority. This follows a Bolsonaro government that had “gutted staff and funding for environmental enforcement by Ibama in his four years in office”, the newswire notes.

In a visit to California’s central coast yesterday, US president Joe Biden said the weeks of torrential rainfall was an example of the impacts of climate change, reports HuffPost UK. In a speech at Aptos’ Seacliff State Beach, where the series of storms has caused around $30m in damage, Biden said: “If anybody doubts the climate is changing, they must have been asleep for the last couple of years.” He added: “Extreme weather caused by climate change means stronger and more frequent storms, more intense droughts, longer wildfire seasons ― all of which threaten communities across California…So we have to invest in a stronger infrastructure to lessen the impact of these disasters because they become cumulative, in a sense.” Biden said that the federal government would help communities rebuild after the floods , reports the Independent. Biden said: “The country is here for you and with you. We are not leaving until things are built back, and built back better than they were before…As you recover…we’ll be with you every step of the way.”

The Guardian also covers Biden’s visit, while several outlets discuss the potential impact of climate change on the series of “atmospheric rivers” that brought extreme rainfall to the state. The New York Times says that, so far this winter, “cumulative precipitation across California is well above average for the past 70 or so years”. However, it adds, “it isn’t as high at this point in the season as it was in some years, including 2017, when drenching storms nearly caused a catastrophic collapse at the Oroville Dam in Northern California”. A separate New York Times article looks at some of the “colourful terms”, such as “bomb cyclone” and “atmospheric river”, that have been used to describe the recent storms. The Los Angeles Times reports that some researchers that they interviewed “said they had yet to see evidence” of the connection between climate change and California’s recent storms. However, Axios climate and energy reporter Andrew Freedman notes that “while California’s precipitation history is full of examples of wild swings from drought to flood and back again, the ongoing south-western megadrought and recent onslaught of atmospheric river events are taking place in a warmer climate”. He adds: “Studies show this is causing dry periods to become hotter and drier, and increasing the odds of severe droughts, while atmospheric rivers are expected to carry more moisture as ocean and air temperatures increase.”

Several UK publications report that UK business secretary Grant Shapps has said that US president Joe Biden’s plan to subsidise clean energy is “dangerous” and risks pushing the world toward protectionism. Bloomberg describes the remarks as “Britain’s strongest criticism to date of the US Inflation Reduction Act”. Speaking on a panel at Davos, Shapps indicated that the UK shares EU concerns while appearing reluctant to respond with its own protectionist measures. He said: “It’s very important we don’t slip into protectionism and that is where at the edges, the Inflation Reduction Act in the US is dangerous because it could slip into protection. It’s not its intention, I don’t think it’s necessarily where it is going but if it’s not amended…I think that’s where we have to be really careful.” The Sun says Shapps “blasts” the US president’s “package”. The Daily Telegraph carries a comment piece by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard under the headline: “Biden’s protectionism is an outrage, but Europe is learning to love it.”

Meanwhile, in US news, the Washington Post says that “mounting delays threaten to undercut President Biden’s climate agenda, worrying activists and lawmakers who say the president might miss a narrow window to make vital progress on the nation’s ambitious goals”. It adds: “The delays, which affect everything from the vehicles Americans drive to the power plants that light their homes, are raising concerns on whether the Biden administration can finalise enduring actions on climate before the end of the president’s first term…These include more restrictions on coal-fired power and tailpipe emissions, and higher efficiency standards on heavy industry and home appliances.” Separately, Reuters reports that the Biden administration has announced it will “invest another $490m to combat wildfire risk in the western US, citing a growing threat of devastating blazes due to climate change”. Finally, the Independent carries a piece by Louise Boyle under the headline: “Biden’s $369bn green plan was hailed as a triumph – but does it live up to the hype?”

UK chancellor Jeremy Hunt wants to extend the 5p cut in the price of petrol and diesel for another year if the economic outlook improves, reports the Times, which says he has “accepted that there is a ‘strong precedent’ for freezing fuel duty”. The paper says it has been told that “the chancellor is minded to extend the reduction in his spring budget should the public finances allow, amid concerns that imposing additional costs on motorists would be ‘politically toxic’”. The paper continues: “He is also facing pressure to freeze fuel duty for another year, in line with Tory policy since 2011. However, the decision on whether to push ahead with the two measures – which would cost £6bn between them – is dependent on inflation falling and economic growth recovering.” The Daily Mail and Reuters pick up on the Times story.

Meanwhile, the Guardian speaks to the government’s “net-zero tsar” Chris Skidmore, who warns: “If the Conservative party does not get behind net-zero, then they will lose votes. And I’m not a psephologist, but the amount of votes that they potentially will lose is significant. I think unless the Conservatives are serious about net-zero and delivering on climate action, you have a perfect storm of potentially Conservative seats being lost either to Liberal Democrats in the blue wall or to Labour in the ‘red wall’.” The Guardian also has an explainer on Skidmore’s recent net-zero review. (See Carbon Brief’s coverage for more detail.)

Google is still allowing adverts to run alongside articles calling climate change a “hoax” and a “big lie”, reports the Times, “despite pledging more than a year ago to block Google Ads running alongside content containing climate misinformation”. In October 2021, Google announced it would ban ads alongside content that “contradicts well-established scientific consensus around the existence and causes of climate change”, the paper explains: “However…the Centre for Countering Digital Hate, a UK non-profit organisation, found Google Ads displayed on 63 of the 100 most widely-shared articles casting doubt on climate change…The sites carrying Google Ads alongside articles containing climate denial include Breitbart, CNSNews, The Daily Wire, HotAir, Newsbusters, Newsmax, MRCTV, RedState and Twitchy.”

Meanwhile, the Associated Press reports on how climate misinformation “has flourished on Twitter since it was bought by Elon Musk last year”. A coalition of environmental advocacy groups released a report yesterday “tracking climate change disinformation in the months before, during and after the UN climate summit in November”. The report also finds that Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, “allowed nearly 4,000 advertisements on its site – most bought by fossil fuel companies – that dismissed the scientific consensus behind climate change and criticised efforts to respond to it”. DeSmog also covers the report.

German chancellor Olaf Scholz – who has been “the only head of state of a G7 country to have made the trip to [Davos] this year” – detailed his government’s plan for fighting climate change, says Le Monde, which quotes him saying: “Our transformation toward a climate-neutral economy – the fundamental task of our century – is currently taking on an entirely new dynamic not despite, but because of the Russian war and the resulting pressure on us Europeans to change.” Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) also quotes the chancellor saying that “whether you are a business leader or a climate activist, whether you are a specialist in security policy or an investor – it is now crystal clear for each of us that the future belongs only to renewable energies”. By 2030, around €‎400bn will be invested in renewables in Germany, adds FAZ. Meanwhile, it notes that the German industry “needs” hydrogen, quoting Scholz: “Europe is the world market leader for patents on hydrogen. And one in 10 applications in the world comes from Germany.” However, Reuters notes that, according to the head of gas pipeline operator Open Grid Europe (OGE), “Germany must accelerate a hydrogen law revision to allow for related investments in gas transport networks up to the end of the decade”. Politico also reports on Scholz’s participation at Davos, noting that the chancellor welcomed the US Inflation Reduction Act, but he said “local content requirements for certain products must not result in discrimination against European businesses”, adding that “protectionism hinders competition and innovation and is detrimental to climate change mitigation”.

Meanwhile, Der Spiegel reports that a speed limit on autobahns, which the German ruling coalition have refused to impose, would reduce emissions much more than previously thought, according to a new study by the Federal Environment Agency (UBA). The models show that at a maximum speed of 120 kilometres per hour CO2 emissions from road traffic could be reduced by 4.2%. The outlet also notes that, according to surveys, almost two-thirds of Germans would welcome a speed limit, which already exists in many European countries. However, politically, “the project failed again and again” even though the Social Democrats and the Greens had anchored a speed limit in their election programs, adds the outlet.

Elsewhere in German news, the business magazine Capital reports that “managers and top politicians are dissatisfied with the federal government’s energy policy”, according to a survey commissioned by Capital and FAZ. The magazine adds that “half of the top German decision-makers in business, politics and administration consider the climate protection measures in Germany to be sufficient or even too extensive”.

In addition, Die Zeit carries an article saying that, “even under Greens’ minister Robert Habeck, the [fossil fuel sector has] not lost [its] influence in the economy ministry and the [German parliament] Bundestag”. It explains that the Bundestag briefly reformed the Renewable Energy Sources Act by adding that by 2030 at the latest, when the coal phase-out is complete, renewables should no longer be subsidised by the state. However, in the same session, the Bundestag has also decided “to subsidise new gas-fired power plants for an unlimited period, which will cost around a billion euros this year”, notes the outlet.

Xinhua reports that China’s state council information office has released a white paper titled: “China’s green development in the new era.” The white paper mainly focuses on “seven” aspects of China’s green development, including the “country’s commitment to green growth”, a “green territorial configuration”, an “adjustment and improvement of the industrial structure”, an “application of green production methods”, “eco-friendly living”, “institutions and mechanisms for green development” and “efforts to build the earth into a beautiful home”, the state news agency adds. Zhao Chenxin, deputy director of the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), the country’s top economic planner, is quoted saying: “It systematically summarises China’s actions and achievements in green development over the past decade, and expounds the country’s ideas and experience of green development.” The state broadcaster CGTN covers the same news, also quoting Zhao: “We [China] adhere to the bottom line of energy security and promote formation of an energy production system driven by coal, oil, gas, electricity, nuclear and renewable energy.” The state-run newspaper Global Times has an editorial on the release of the white paper, saying: “China’s sticking to realising its goals in this context once again reveals that China is a firm and positive force and plays a leading role in dealing with issues like the green development, climate change, and environmental protection. This is a prominent embodiment of China’s responsibility.”

Meanwhile, Ursula von der Leyen, the European Union president has said at the World Economic Forum in Davos that “in competing” with the US on clean energy programmes, the European Union plans to “revise its business dealings” with China, “de-risking, rather than decoupling” from China, reports the South China Morning Post. The outlet adds that “acknowledging” Europe’s “98%” dependence on China for “critical minerals that are expected to play key roles in transitioning to clean energy”, von der Leyen still “criticised” Beijing for “heavily subsidising” its “energy-sensitive companies” and called for a “level playing field”.

The Global Times writes that sales of Chinese-made vehicles in Australian market “jumped 61% year-on-year in 2022” with electric vehicles (EVs) “leading the charge”, according to Australian Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries data. The newspaper, citing a report by the Guardian on Wednesday, adds that the chief executive of Australia’s Electric Vehicle Council, Behyad Jafari, “predicted” that the “rise of Chinese automakers will probably quicken the country’s transition off petrol- and diesel-powered vehicles”.

Finally, CNN has an article, titled: “China’s population is shrinking. The impact will be felt around the world.” It notes that Mary Gallagher, director of the International Institute at the University of Michigan, tweeted: “For both climate change and the environment, a smaller population is a benefit not a curse.” Peter Kalmus, a climate scientist at NASA who has turned into a prominent activist, is quoted saying that population decline shouldn’t be viewed “as a terrible thing,” pointing instead to “exponentially accelerating global heating and biodiversity loss”.

Writing for Bloomberg, the site’s owner and UN special envoy on climate ambition and solutions Michael Bloomberg says the “line of attack” that solar panels and wind turbines are less reliable in winter than coal and gas plants is “predictable”, but “dead wrong”. He writes: “The most common cause of blackouts, downed power lines, is also the most visible. But there is one source of energy that safeguards against that danger: rooftop solar. If a tree takes down wires, or the energy grid fails for other reasons, solar panels with batteries can help families and businesses weather a blackout.” The “second-largest cause of electricity outages during extreme weather is production failure”, Bloomberg continues, noting that “once again, renewable energy has advantages over coal and gas in severe weather”. He explains: “For starters, extreme heat and ice shut down coal and gas power plants faster than they hamper the sun and wind. During last month’s cold snap, nearly 90% of the outages experienced by the nation’s largest grid operator were the result of coal and gas failures. If fossil fuels had been a backup source of power rather than the primary source, there likely would have been no power outages, or far fewer.” Bloomberg concludes: “Solar and wind power are already cheaper than coal and gas in much of the country. The faster we can build transmission capacity that will allow us to invert America’s energy mix – making solar and wind the primary source of power and fossil fuels the last resort – the more reliable our energy system will be during severe weather, the lower our monthly electric bills will be, and the healthier and safer our families and communities will be.”

Elsewhere, in the Guardian, columnist Zoe Williams writes that “this is an era of plentiful, cheap, renewable energy, but the fossil fuel dinosaurs can’t admit it”.

A new study finds that more than half of drought-affected ecosystems in the northern hemisphere “failed to recover” during the subsequent growing season due to changes in the vegetation’s seasonal cycles. Using several satellite-based datasets, researchers explore how changes in plants’ growing seasons interact with the timing and intensity of droughts. They find that the effects of the changes in growing season on recovery are “comparable to or larger than” the effects from factors such as temperature and precipitation. The researchers “strongly suggest” that these seasonal cycle-drought interactions should be better incorporated into models in order to better reflect ecosystem resilience.