The European court of human rights could this week rule that governments have to protect people from climate change, reports the Daily Telegraph. Judges from the court will rule on three separate cases on whether people’s human rights have been breached by the failure of governments to protect them from the harmful effects of climate change, the newspaper explains: “The legal challenge is based on the claim that failure to tackle climate change sufficiently to protect the public amounts to a breach of Article 2, the right to life, and Article 8, the right to a family life.” Ruling in favour “would mean that individuals could seek redress with the Strasbourg court and compensation if their governments failed to take sufficient measures to prevent their citizens suffering the consequences of climate change”, it says. The Financial Times quotes the lawyer leading one of the cases, who says “the judgement we are seeking would in effect be the same as legally binding regional treaty…that would compel them to rapidly reduce their emissions but would also force them to compel major companies in Europe to cut their emissions throughout their global supply chains to be in line with 1.5C.” Reuters “lays out what is at stake” in the three cases, notes that “the 17-judge panel could issue very different verdicts for each case” and “the rulings cannot be appealed”. It adds: “A regional human rights court has never before ruled on climate cases, and the verdicts are likely to be game-changing…[A] ruling against even just one country could be applied as precedent against all 46 signatories of the European Convention.”

Meanwhile, the Press Association reports that campaigners are calling on Barclays – the UK’s largest bank – to close what they see as a “loophole” in its energy policy that allows the financing of fracking companies. Barclays amended its climate change statement in February and said it would no longer finance new oil-and-gas projects and would restrict its financing of “pureplay” companies – those that focus exclusively on fossil fuel extraction and exploration, the newswire explains. However, ShareAction, which campaigns for responsible investment, pointed out that pureplay companies working on short-term extraction projects are exempted from this commitment, the article notes.

US scientists have confirmed that levels of the three most important heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere reached new record highs again last year, the Guardian reports. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the global concentration of CO2 rose to an average of 419 parts per million (ppm) in 2023, while methane rose to an average of 1,922 parts per billion (ppb) and nitrous oxide climbed slightly to 336ppb, the outlet says. The increases “do not quite match the record jumps seen in recent years…but still represent a major change in the composition of the atmosphere even from just a decade ago”, it adds. The article quotes Vanda Grubišić, director of NOAA’s global monitoring laboratory, as saying: “As these numbers show, we still have a lot of work to do to make meaningful progress in reducing the amount of greenhouse gases accumulating in the atmosphere.” The Associated Press quotes climate scientist Dr Rob Jackson, who was not involved in the research, who says “methane’s decadal spike should terrify us”. He continues: “Fossil fuel pollution is warming natural systems like wetlands and permafrost. Those ecosystems are releasing even more greenhouse gases as they heat up. We’re caught between a rock and a charred place.”

Meanwhile, Reuters covers a new report from the London-based Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) warning that large amounts of climate-warming refrigerant gases from China and Turkey are being smuggled illegally into Europe. Following a two-year undercover investigation, the EIA finds that law enforcement agencies across the European Union are struggling to keep track of illicit shipments of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) entering via Turkey, Russia or Ukraine, with smugglers resorting to increasingly sophisticated tactics to evade detection, the newswire explains. It adds: “As part of the 2016 Kigali amendment to the Montreal Protocol, European and other industrial countries are committed to slash HFC use by 85% from 2012 to 2036. To make the phase-down happen, authorised HFC producers and consumers are assigned quotas that are reduced gradually. But with demand still strong, the phase-downs have driven up prices, creating incentives for smugglers – many of whom are also licensed traders – to make more supply available.”

In related news, the Observer reports on a study into the “simply mind-boggling” jump in Antarctic temperatures in March 2022 and BBC News tracks the world’s biggest iceberg – more than twice the size of Greater London – which has “begun to drift at pace once more” after a “few weeks loitering on the fringes of Antarctica”.

State-run media Xinhua reports that “the world’s first fourth-generation nuclear power plant has started providing heat to residents” in east China, marking “another breakthrough in the comprehensive utilisation of nuclear energy”. China’s State Council shared another report by Xinhua under the title: “China’s energy-rich provinces embark on green, modern development path.” The report says: “China’s energy-rich provinces are experiencing a profound transformation in their industrial structure and energy mix as they strive for high-quality growth. According to this year’s government work report, in 2023, China’s installed renewable energy capacity surpassed its thermal power capacity for the first time in history and China accounted for over half of newly installed renewable energy capacity worldwide. At the same time, energy technology and related industries have become new growth drivers that propel industrial upgrading and promote the development of new quality productive forces.”

Meanwhile, the US-based Business Insider covers the story of China’s “overcapacity problem” in “three new pillars of growth in the green-tech sector” – solar, new energy vehicle (NEV) and battery sectors – saying that, amid a property crisis and slowing demand, the country is “overproducing items and exporting them to a world that cannot absorb all of them”. Agence France-Presse says China’s “domination” in these three industries is now worrying the US and Europe. Xinhua reports that, according to Cui Dongshu, secretary general of the China Passenger Car Association, China’s NEVs “captured a 62% share of the global NEV market in the first two months of this year”. Bloomberg reports that many NEV owners in China are complaining on social media about the increasing cost of insuring their vehicles due to NEVs’ “higher repair and servicing costs” as the parts are “more expensive and harder to come by”. Business Insider reports that slow NEV sales growth could also be a problem for Tesla, which has been struggling to “keep up with Chinese rivals’ aggressive price cuts”. 

In other news, Xinhua publishes an editorial, saying that US treasury secretary Janet Yellen’s comment about “advancing a healthy economic relationship [with China]” requires “true cooperation over self-interest”. The outlet says that “Washington’s notion of healthy economic ties is largely self-centred”, whereas China has always been committed to relationships “built on mutual benefits and win-win outcomes”. The Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post reports that China’s trade delegation and vice-minister for commerce, Wang Shouwen, has raised China’s concerns over US trade restrictions with his Washington counterpart Marisa Lago, with Wang saying that “China is willing to work with the US…to create a good environment for enterprises…to conduct trade and investment cooperation”.

Finally, the Financial Times reports that Australian mining billionaire Andrew Forrest has called on China to demand higher environmental standards from its global supply chain, particularly its companies conducting nickel processing in Indonesia, an industry he accused of “complete environmental irresponsibility”. Two economists write for Project Syndicate on “the right response to China’s electric-vehicle subsidies”. And Daily Telegraph assistant editor Jeremy Warner claims that “net-zero Britain is already hopelessly hooked on China”.

The Charity Commission is facing a legal challenge by MPs over its failure to investigate campaigning by the climate-sceptic thinktank the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), reports the Guardian. Three MPs, supported by the Good Law Project, have sent a legal letter to the regulator over an unresolved complaint they made in October 2022 in which they urged the regulator to strip GWPF of its charitable status, arguing it does not meet its aims as a charity and, is in fact, a lobbying organisation, the newspaper explains: “The original complaint accused the GWPF of breaching charity law by spending hundreds of thousands of pounds on one-sided research and passing money to its subsidiary Net-Zero Watch to attack policies aimed at tackling the climate emergency. Net-Zero Watch, a campaigning platform highlighting what it calls the ‘costs of net-zero’, was set up after a previous investigation by the Charity Commission found that the GWPF had breached rules on impartiality.” The MPs now argue that the regulator has acted unlawfully in failing to make a timely decision on whether GWPF or its trustees have breached charity law, and, where necessary, what regulatory action it will take, the article says. The delay is leading to an “unlawful distortion of the public debate regarding the most pressing issue of our time”, the letter says. In response, the Charity Commission said it has “been constructively engaging with trustees on the issues raised” and that it plans to “publicly report on the outcome of the case once it has been concluded”, the newspaper says, while GWPF previously described the allegations as “unfounded”.

Meanwhile, DeSmog reports that a senior figure at the free-market thinktank the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) contributed to a new documentary that “spreads numerous myths about climate change”. It continues: “Stephen Davies, an academic who has worked in educational outreach roles at the IEA since 2010, appeared several times in Climate The Movie: The Cold Truth – a new film directed by climate science denier Martin Durkin.” And Reuters factchecks a “misleading comparison of Antarctic sea ice levels on two specific days 27 years apart [that] has been used by people online to falsely claim that climate change warnings are a scam”.

Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil co-founder Roger Hallam has been given a suspended sentence after planning to disrupt Heathrow airport by flying drones in the area, reports the Press Association. Wanting to close the airport until the government reversed plans for a third runway, Hallam and other activists launched the “Heathrow Pause” protest in September 2019, the newswire explains. A claim by two of the defendants, including Hallam, that the protest was a publicity exercise and had no intent to cause a public nuisance or close Heathrow was rejected by the jury, the article says. After a four-week trial, the two were found guilty of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance, it explains, while a third activist had already pleaded guilty and a fourth was found not guilty. The Guardian notes that “drones were in the air between 14 and 18 September 2019 and in the words of Judge Edmunds, when passing sentence on Friday, ‘the action fizzled out, with no more than 20 drones within a five-day period’ flown”. The policing cost to the public was in excess of £1m, says BBC News. The judge sentenced Hallam to two years in prison, suspended for 18 months, says Agence France-Presse, while all three activists were also ordered to carry out community service. The Daily Telegraph also has the story.

Elsewhere, Swedish campaigner Greta Thunberg was among dozens of people detained on Saturday by police in The Hague as they removed protesters who were partially blocking a road in the Dutch city, reports the Associated Press. The Independent says Thunberg was arrested “twice on the same day”. And the Mail on Sunday reports that “hundreds of eco-zealots” from Youth Demand – a new wing of Just Stop Oil – are “plotting to wreak havoc on the London Underground this week”.

Germany’s governing “traffic light” coalition has agreed to finance establishing a hydrogen core network, which should be completed by no later than 2037, reports Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ). The news continues that the project could now be approved in the German parliament next week, the energy policy spokespersons of the three factions announced on Friday. Unlike what was initially proposed by economy minister Robert Habeck, the 10,000-kilometre network is now expected to be completed by no later than 2037 rather than 2032, FAZ notes. Handelsblatt adds that the network will connect industries, power plants, ports, and storage facilities. The article explains that transmission system operators estimate the costs to be nearly €20bn. It also adds that about 60% of existing “natural” gas pipelines can be repurposed for hydrogen transmission, but new construction will be necessary for the remaining portion. Reuters adds that the project will be funded by user fees and constructed by private firms. It also notes that, to promote investment in emerging technology, network operators will not bear responsibility in case of bankruptcy, supported by a government guarantee of approximately 6.7% pre-tax return on equity.

Meanwhile, Manager Magazin reports about the “solar boom on German balconies”. It says that 50,000 balcony power plants were newly registered in Germany in the first quarter of this year alone. The majority of systems are in North Rhine-Westphalia with over 80,000, followed by Bavaria with over 60,000 and Lower Saxony with over 50,000, notes the outlet. However, Die Zeit reports that, according to a study by the German Environmental Aid (DUH), the majority of German cities are progressing “too slowly” in terms of solar expansion, noting that less than 10% of German major cities have installed “enough solar power systems” in the past two years. 

A new report warns that drivers of electric vehicles (EVs) could struggle to use around two-thirds of the UK’s most common type of public chargepoint because of patchy mobile signals, says the Press Association. According to the RAC Foundation, 66% of Type-2 chargers – which have speeds of up to 8kw – in the UK (excluding London) are in areas where at least one mobile network provider does not have usable 4G coverage, the article says, adding that “in the capital, the figure is only slightly lower at 61.3%”. It continues: “The vast majority of Type-2 public chargers require drivers to access them via mobile phone apps, and the chargers themselves need an adequate mobile connection to function. Unless all four of Britain’s mobile network providers – EE, O2, Three and Vodafone – provide adequate coverage at a charger’s location, there is a risk a driver will be unable to recharge their EV.” The Daily Telegraph and This Is Money, the money channel of the MailOnline, also have the story. 

In other EV news, the Times reports that “vast swathes of the UK are being left behind by the electric car revolution”. It says: “From Scotland north of the central belt, to Yorkshire, parts of eastern England and Wales and the far West Country, electric car registrations are significantly lagging the national average, and especially so compared with affluent parts of southern England.” The Sunday Times says that EV manufacturer Tesla has “abandoned a long-promised plan to offer an inexpensive electric car” in a “dramatic change of heart” by chief executive Elon Musk. And the Economist warns that “a fleet of electric-car startups is struggling to stay in business”.

Finally, the Daily Telegraph reports that “e-scooter start-up Lime is plotting a £25m expansion in London after the company was banned from Paris last year”.

An editorial in the Washington Post warns that US environmental laws could hinder the installation of the infrastructure needed for the clean-energy transition. The article cites a number of projects “pitting the environment against, well, the environment”. It says: “Solar plants and wind farms, transmission lines and carbon-capture projects face opposition from conservationists and other environmental groups asking courts to stop new infrastructure from encroaching on wetlands, forests and other ecosystems.” The outlet argues that “opposition is largely local…from groups vested in preserving local ecosystems”, but notes: “Others, motivated by less high-minded causes, exploit the environmental review process to preserve views, prevent bothersome construction or stop the character of their areas from changing.” The main tool of this opposition is the 1970 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which “not only requires environmental impact studies but also allows pretty much anybody to challenge in court a federal agency’s decision to greenlight projects on a virtually limitless set of environmental grounds”. The article concludes: “To be sure, big energy projects require public scrutiny. Sometimes, undisturbed habitats should remain that way. But the permitting process does not weigh reasonably the costs and benefits of building essential infrastructure. It needs streamlining. While lawmakers are at it, Congress should also preempt state and local rules that make it even harder to build projects of high national priority. Green power transmission lines certainly qualify.”

Elsewhere, an editorial in the Los Angeles Times welcomes the decision by Disneyland to replace the petrol-fuelled miniature cars of its race-track attraction “Autopia” with electric models in the next few years. It says that “Disney should go big, go bold and go green”.

In the UK, climate and energy get brief mentions in comment articles by the leaders of the country’s main two political parties. Writing about business in the Sun on Sunday, prime minister Rishi Sunak describes Labour’s now-scaled-back £28bn green investment plan as “[shadow climate secretary] Ed Miliband’s ­extortionate green pipe dream”. In the Sunday Mirror, Labour leader Keir Starmer sets out a vision “where a publicly owned energy company harnesses clean British power, not foreign oil and gas”. Finally, the Daily Telegraph’s energy editor Jonathan Leake and economics editor Szu Ping Chan have a long read on “why the death of North Sea oil is a disaster for Britain”.

Geoengineering methods that change the planet’s radiative forcing – aiming to reduce the amount of energy that reaches the surface of the Earth – could increase the incidence of fires in the Arctic, when combined with very high greenhouse gas emissions, new research suggests. The authors use an Earth system model to investigate three geoengineering methods – stratospheric aerosol injection, marine cloud brightening and cirrus cloud thinning. They find that these methods, when combined with the high emissions RCP8.5 scenario, are less effective at cooling the Arctic than the rest of the world, adding that they “worsen extreme conditions” in the Arctic, when compared to the middle-of-the-road RCP4.5 emissions scenario.