China and the US have agreed to improve cooperation on climate change and global debt relief after talks between US treasury secretary Janet Yellen and Chinese vice premier He Lifeng, the South China Morning Post reports. The talks came ahead of the much-anticipated meeting on Wednesday between presidents Xi Jinping and Joe Biden, the paper notes. It says: “Both sides agreed not to aim for economic decoupling and to enhance cooperation on global debt relief and climate change, [China’s finance vice-minister] Liao [Min] said. They also pledged to continue to work on strengthening the international financial architecture and promote increases in International Monetary Fund quotas.” Reuters says of the upcoming Xi-Biden meeting: “A main result is expected to be greater diplomacy – promises to talk more on key issues, including on climate, global health, economic stability, counter-narcotic efforts and potentially the resumption of some military-to-military channels after a high-level freeze.” Another South China Morning Post article reports: “Beijing is ‘serious’ about its climate change efforts and plans to scale up clean energy, according to US climate envoy John Kerry.” Meanwhile, the Hill reports criticism of the meeting by the US Republican opposition. Climate Home News carries a comment by Kate Logan of the Asia Society Policy Institute, saying the meeting “offers tantalising hope on climate action”. She writes: “A high-level US-China agreement could provide the much-needed ‘course correction’ to keep world temperatures on track to remain below 1.5C”. Logan adds: “And it could also set the stage for a successful outcome at the COP28, the UN’s largest annual international climate conference taking place the first two weeks of December in Dubai.” In the South China Morning Post, Wang Huiyao, founder of the Centre for China and Globalisation, a Beijing-based non-governmental thinktank, writes: “Amid increased geopolitical strife, our interconnected world requires a collaborative approach on climate change, conflict, infrastructure, public health, trade, and more, to safeguard our shared home.”

The US and EU are “leading a global push” for the upcoming COP28 climate talks to agree goals of tripling renewable energy capacity and doubling the rate of energy efficiency improvements by the end of the decade, Bloomberg reports. Citing “people with knowledge of the matter”, it says more than 60 countries are backing the targets, including COP28 host the United Arab Emirates, as well as Australia, Zambia, South Africa, Japan and Singapore. It adds: “However, its fate will largely depend on China and India, which so far haven’t signalled endorsement.” In other news ahead of COP28, analysis by the Associated Press suggests that “oil companies attending climate talks have minimal green energy transition plans”. Politico reports: “The United Arab Emirates is using its leverage as an oil producer and host of the upcoming UN climate talks to prod some of the world’s most secretive state-run oil companies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, according to documents obtained by Politico.” It says the effort, known as the Global Decarbonization Alliance, is set to be launched at COP28 and “has already been dismissed by environmentalists”. 

Meanwhile, Reuters reports: “Business will be central to the success of the COP28 climate talks, but companies need to back up their environmental and social pledges with firm action and money, special representative Badr Jafar told Reuters.” Separately, Politico reports: “The United Arab Emirates quietly established sweeping restrictions on the hundreds of journalists expected to visit the country for international climate talks later this month. Now, the UAE says it was a mistake. The strict rules against publishing news that could antagonise the rulers of the seven monarchies that make up the country were removed from the UN’s website for the climate talks after Politico’s E&E News asked the UAE for comment this week.” Another Politico article says the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, headed by COP28 president-designate Sultan Al Jaber, “is pledging lofty goals for cutting pollution”. The outlet continues: “But it has a ‘high’ probability of failing to meet them, a document obtained by Politico’s E&E News says.” Inside Climate News says US actions at a meeting over funding arrangements for loss and damage “fit a long pattern of ambivalence, and even disruption, at key moments during 30 years of climate talks”. Finally, Reuters reports: “A plan to recover degraded pastures in farm powerhouse Brazil will be officially announced as government policy and presented at the COP28 climate summit in Dubai by president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, an official said.”

The National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and the National Energy Administration (NEA) of China will establish a coal power capacity pricing mechanism, “with units receiving additional revenue based on installed capacity rather than generation”, reports the Chinese economic news outlet Jiemian. It quotes the NDRC as saying the policy will have a “positive impact on the electricity costs for end-users in the short and long term”. The energy outlet BJX News also covers comments from NDRC officials, quoting them saying that “by recovering a portion or all of the fixed costs through capacity pricing, [the policy] aims to stablise the expectations of the coal-fired power sector…which is essential for ensuring the secure operation of the power system, providing robust support for accommodating large-scale new energy sources, and prompting the green transformation”. The Chinese power sector outlet Dianlian News carries analysis by Chai Wei, a representative from the state-owned China Energy Investment Group, who writes that the policy will adjust the role of coal-fired power units in the power system from “being primarily quantity providers to becoming capacity providers”. Reuters coverage of the news says that the capacity mechanism will come into force on 1 January 2024 and adds that it comes as China is “expanding coal power capacity” ahead of the COP28. The newswire quotes David Fishman of Shanghai-based energy consultancy the Lantau Group saying: “It adds a lot of flexibility to the grid system and should allow more intermittent generation (like wind or solar) to enter the generation mix without compromising grid stability or energy security.”

Meanwhile, Climate Home News covers China’s 11-page plan on tackling methane emissions, which, it says, “did not include any targets for emissions reductions”. In related comment for Bloomberg, columnist David Fickling writes: “The roadmap to cutting greenhouse-gas emissions has no overall target or a date. It doesn’t help the country’s net-zero goals.” Separately, the state-run industry newspaper China Energy News reports that the state council has issued a white paper saying that China has accelerated the construction of national “clean energy bases”, with the proportion of low-carbon sources in installed electricity capacity reaching nearly 90% in Tibet (which the government now refers to as Xizang), accelerating its progress in achieving the “dual carbon” targets. The state news agency Xinhua covers the same story. Another Xinhua article quotes Yan Jinhai, chairman of the government of Tibet, saying that “the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, the highest plateau in the world, has achieved carbon neutrality”. 

Elsewhere, BJX News reports that the Chinese Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) has issued the 2023 energy storage equipment industry development report, which says that as of the end of 2022, China’s installed capacity of energy storage is approaching 60 gigawatts (GW), with an annual growth rate of nearly 40% and newly-added energy storage capacity reached 7.4GW, a year-on-year increase of 200%. Finally, Jiemian quotes Wu Kai, the chief scientist at Chinese battery manufacturer CATL, as saying that the new energy storage industry has to strive for “long-term” high-quality development. 

The Guardian reports new analysis for Carbon Brief on China’s CO2 emissions, which are set to decline in 2024 “after a record surge in clean energy investment”. Citing the analysis, the newspaper says: “the boom in clean energy generation could trigger a decline in China’s emissions from next year despite a wave of new coal plants across the country”. It quotes analysis author Lauri Myllyvirta writing: “This is because – for the first time – the rate of low-carbon energy expansion is now sufficient to not only meet, but exceed the average annual increase in China’s demand for electricity overall.” The analysis is also picked up by the Times [not yet online], which reports on page 13 of its print edition under the headline: “Flare for solar helps China towards cutting its carbon.” 

Separately, Foreign Policy has a comment by Myllyvirta and Byford Tsang of thinktank E3G: “In April 2021, Chinese president Xi Jinping pledged to ‘strictly control coal-fired power generation projects’ in China. Since then, government permits for new coal power plants have soared.” The pair write: “The recent about-face on coal is odd for Beijing, which generally under-promises and over-delivers on climate commitments. Controlling new coal power projects is one of the few pledges China has made from now until 2025. Furthermore, more coal power is not necessary to keep the lights on, since China has a booming clean energy sector.” They continue: “If China’s coal industry does not shrink soon, it will be extremely challenging for the world to avoid devastating climate impacts. To ensure this does not happen, Beijing needs to strictly enforce existing policies and cancel permits already granted in breach of those policies. It will also need to implement reforms to reduce reliance on coal power and firm up its commitments to limit growth in emissions this decade. This will require, among other things, reforming power grid operation.”

French president Emmanuel Macron has called melting glaciers an “unprecedented challenge for humanity”, Le Monde reports, as he launched “a call for nations to work together on slashing planet-warming emissions, protecting the environment and collaborating on scientific research into the Earth’s icy ecosystems”. The Guardian says Macron pledged €1bn (£880m) for polar research between now and 2030. Separately, Inside Climate News carries a “Q&A with Richard Alley, professor of geosciences at Pennsylvania State University, on how melting at the south pole could impact sea level rise.”

UK chancellor Jeremy Hunt is “planning to introduce levies on imported carbon-intensive goods from countries with weaker climate regulations from 2026, mirroring measures being introduced by the EU”, the Financial Times reports. It says the plan “could be announced in the autumn statement on 22 November and “follows a consultation earlier this year on whether to introduce a ‘carbon border adjustment mechanism’, or CBAM, to protect industries from unfair competition from regions with lower carbon costs”. The paper adds: “Confirmation that the government was going ahead with the plan would be welcomed by UK industries, although officials cautioned that cross-Whitehall negotiations were continuing and any announcement could slip to the spring Budget.” It notes: “But regardless of whether the UK creates a CBAM, if it does not legally link its carbon pricing to the EU’s, British exports could still face levies if UK carbon prices remain lower. Even exports of renewable electricity could face levies because it is not possible to identify whether power supplies come from green sources or fossil fuels when exporting from one grid to another.” BusinessGreen reports: “Why UK manufacturers are backing a carbon border tax.” It explains: “proponents of the policy argue it can help to combat ‘carbon leakage’, whereby emissions intensive companies shift manufacturing to countries and regions where there are less stringent climate regulations and it is therefore cheaper to operate, which can undermine decarbonisation efforts.”

In other news from the UK, the Observer reports: “The government has received no new applications for onshore wind farms in England since cabinet ministers eased planning rules earlier this year – in a further sign that Rishi Sunak’s anti-green policy shift is driving investment abroad.” The Sunday Times reports: “One of Britain’s largest offshore wind farm services suppliers has warned that the country’s leading position is at risk if the government’s ‘stop, start’ approach to the industry does not change.” The i newspaper reports: “Senior Tories have urged Rishi Sunak to back onshore renewable energy rather than off-shore oil and gas after a poll showed strong support for alternative power sources among Conservative voters.” A Guardian article from Friday reports: “The government is poised to offer higher subsidies for new offshore windfarms to avoid missing its green energy targets as developers grapple with a rise in supply chain costs.” Reuters says the head of Norwegian firm Statkraft has told the newswire it “could return to the British offshore wind market, but its key focus remains Ireland, Norway and Sweden”.

Meanwhile, another article in the Sunday Times says Centrica, the energy group that owns British Gas, has “made its first formal moves toward a potential investment in the proposed £30bn Sizewell C nuclear plant in Suffolk”. The newspaper continues: “The government and France’s EDF co-own the development vehicle for the project, but hope to retain stakes of only 20% each in the construction phase and are seeking to bring in private investors.” It explains that Centrica is “among at least four bidders that joined in an initial pre-qualification process run by the government last month, according to PeakLoad, an energy industry publication”. In the Observer, a feature reports on the impact of 2,000 potential job losses in Scunthorpe, where British Steel plans to close its coal-based steelmaking facilities in favour of electric arc furnaces. It says: “Unlike blast furnaces, electric arc furnaces are not capable of making iron from iron ore. Chris McDonald, chief executive of the Materials Processing Institute, which runs its own experimental electric arc furnace, said the British Steel and Tata Steel announcements were ‘necessary but not sufficient’…McDonald, who has been selected as a Labour candidate at the next election, said the government should invest further to build a direct reduced iron (DRI) plant that could use methane or, later, zero-carbon hydrogen to make iron without adding to the climate crisis.” A feature article in the Sunday Times looks at the construction of the 1.5 gigawatt, 30 gigawatt hour Coire Glas pumped hydro facility in Scotland, which it says “will double the industry’s capacity”. Another Sunday Times article reports: “Drax is facing questions over biomass supplies for its Yorkshire power plant [in northeast England] after one of its biggest suppliers warned that its future was in doubt.” The Press Association reports: “The government is facing a legal challenge over its reliance on burning trees for green energy in its climate plans.” It explains: “The case alleges that the government’s biomass strategy – a key part of its transition plans – is unlawful and will undermine the UK’s ability to achieve net-zero by 2050.”

British prime minister Rishi Sunak’s attempts to “stir up a culture war over climate change” have been criticised by Chris Skidmore, former Conservative Party vice-chair, former energy minister and author of the UK government’s net-zero review, the Sunday Times reports. It quotes Skidmore telling Times Radio that Sunak’s shift on climate policy would have “dire long-term consequences” for the country. It quotes him continuing: “It’s making no difference to Conservatives polling, we are as far behind as we have ever been…yet we are abandoning that traditional coalition the Conservatives tried to build up, that one of the most important things we seek to conserve is our environment and our natural world. We’re abandoning that. And that is not just the wrong thing to do. It’s a tragedy…I would say it’s never too late to do the right thing in life. And the right thing here is to recognise that we do need to take action on climate and we need to understand that if we can move sooner on net-zero, we will reduce costs and we will make bills cheaper for householders.” The Guardian quotes Skidmore saying the Conservative Party is going in a “very dark direction” and saying: “I’ve not got much time left in parliament; I’m going to make the case for net-zero. Net-zero is measured, proportionate and will achieve economic growth. I will be speaking in contrast to those extreme voices that want to somehow suggest that net-zero is an imposition. What is the alternative they are offering, apart from maintaining the industries of the past that are going to be shutting down anyway?” The paper adds: “Skidmore said he was particularly angry about attacks on the Climate Change Committee, an independent body that advises the government on five-year ‘carbon budgets’ necessary to meet its 2050 target, which has been politicised of late by politicians and the media.” He tells the newspaper: “There have been specific attacks coming from the Telegraph, claiming that it has powers that it does not have. It’s an advisory body. It doesn’t have any ability to make specific policy recommendations. All it does is report on the impact of the government’s policy recommendations. This is another classic case of misinformation.”

Elsewhere, a frontpage article in today’s Daily Telegraph reports: “Heat pumps are too loud to be installed in millions of homes under the government’s noise guidelines, ministers have been told.” An article in the Sunday Telegraph criticises “a handful of billionaires ploughing money into civil society organisations that lobby local and national governments to enact net-zero or clean-air policies”. The article reports on calls for greater transparency around funding for climate-related organisations, based on a report from Climate Debate UK, which says on its website: “We will not reveal any of our funders’ names or their interests.” Separately, the Daily Telegraph reports: “The last hope for trialling hydrogen heating in Britain is teetering on the brink, as the gas network behind the project faces a local revolt…The fate of the project has significant implications for UK energy policy, because it is seen as the last chance for the gas industry to prove to the government that hydrogen heating can be practically implemented.” The article continues: “Ministers cancelled the only other proposed national trial in Whitby, Ellesmere Port, over summer because of a lack of ‘strong local support’. Now, a group of residents in Redcar are campaigning for the hydrogen trial there to be cancelled as well, with just weeks to go before ministers are expected to announce whether it can go ahead.”

Germany has approved legislation to boost investment in the nation’s power and gas grids, a move that “could raise electricity bills for consumers during the transition to a greener economy”, reports Bloomberg. The outlet explains that this measure is a part of a package of energy laws passed Friday, which gives the regulator Federal Network Agency, known as BNetzA, more authority to increase the rate of return for companies that invest in grid upgrades. EurActiv reports that the proposal “to boost the regulators’ powers” was adopted thanks to the backing of parliamentarians from the German government coalition, despite opposition from the conservatives. BNetzA’s president, Klaus Müller, told Handelsblatt that they would “have to work out many regulations themselves in future”. Müller also noted that he wants to provide relief for network fees in regions with a high proportion of renewables. 

Meanwhile, Die Zeit reports that “after months of dispute”, the German federal government reached an agreement to reduce electricity taxes for the industry. In total, industry and manufacturing businesses are expected to receive a relief of €28bn in electricity prices over the next four years, notes the outlet. Focus says that the electricity price package is intended to relieve companies in Germany but “will not be able to solve the problems of energy-intensive industries in the long term”. 

Finally, Die Welt reports that according to a new study, obtaining energy from imported liquefied “natural” gas (LNG), which Germany is trying to use as a solution in the “energy crisis”, is “much more climate-damaging” than relying on burning traditional coal due to methane leaks in the supply chain. “In the worst case, greenhouse gas emissions from LNG are 274% higher than those from coal,” the study says, notes the newspaper.

The head of one of the world’s largest oilfield services companies, Baker Hughes, has warned that geopolitical risks are at their highest levels in half a century, the Financial Times reports. In an interview with the newspaper, Lorenzo Simonelli said: “From a historical context I’ve heard people say, you go back to the oil embargo of 1973 – that being somewhat similar…But in my tenure, no [the geopolitical climate has not been this fragile]…This is, from a political standpoint, very fluid.” The FT says the comments come as “the conflict between Israel and Hamas in the Middle East adds to an already febrile geopolitical environment as Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine nears the end of its second year”. 

Meanwhile, Politico reports: “Ukraine is open to the possibility of attacking Russia’s oil and gas infrastructure if Moscow ramps up its targeting of Ukraine’s electric system this winter, Ukraine energy minister German Galushchenko said in an interview.” Another Politico article says: “Critics accuse Bulgaria of punishing Russia to curry favour with Brussels, while quietly helping Moscow regain its grip on Europe’s energy supplies.” Separately, the Financial Times reports: “Shell and BP have asked Washington and Brussels to intervene in a bitter dispute with Venture Global LNG, warning the company’s refusal to honour a multibillion-dollar liquefied natural gas supply contracts threatens Europe’s energy security.” Another Financial Times article says: “US seeks to thwart Russia’s ambition to become a major LNG exporter.” The Times reports: “Nord Stream pipeline blast blamed on Ukrainian maverick.” And in energy-related comment, Charlie Penner, former partner at Jana Partners and the former head of shareholder activism at Engine No. 1, writes for the Financial Times that recent “megadeals” by Exxon and Chevron “will allow more room to manoeuvre if energy transition picks up pace”. In the Washington Post, columnist George Will writes under the headline: “The fossil fuel era isn’t done yet, not by a long shot.”

In a comment for the Financial Times, Vinod Thomas, former senior vice-president at the World Bank, notes that the upcoming COP28 climate talks in Dubai “will take place amid a confluence of geopolitical, health and economic emergencies”. He says: “The UN’s greatest strength lies in its access to the enormous quantity of scientific knowledge on global warming that is out there. But to shift public opinion and generate political will for climate action amid competing priorities, communication of that science needs traction.” Thomas continues: “COP28 will rightly stress the commitments countries need to make in order to decarbonise economies and slow global warming. However, the summit should also launch a global campaign to inform the public and rally political support, particularly among the big emitters.” He concludes: “Geopolitical turmoil makes focusing on climate harder. But with the planet’s vital signs heading the wrong way, climate mitigation through decarbonisation needs to be prioritised, as all else depends on it. Action will follow, even in the face of competing priorities, if – but only if – people see that their prosperity and wellbeing is endangered by global warming. If COP28 can launch a worldwide campaign to get public backing for the resources needed to avert catastrophe, then the Dubai meeting will have made meaningful headway.” For the Conversation, Lisa Vanhalla, professor of political science, writes: “At COP28, making the loss and damage fund real is a litmus test for the legitimacy of the entire climate change negotiation regime.”

An editorial in the Guardian, meanwhile, says: “This month’s COP28 climate summit will focus on greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. Governments need to take note.” The paper says: “At COP28 in Dubai, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization will foreground the need to transform patterns of consumption and production if the goal of limiting temperature rises to 1.5C is to be met. The emphasis on the impact of food systems is welcome and overdue. For various reasons it has been badly neglected at previous summits.” It continues: “But while the science is stark and straightforward, the politics is anything but…Changing the way we eat is an enormous cultural challenge, with huge economic implications. It cannot be done by stealth or diktat, or on the cheap. Nor can the task be swerved if sustainable farming is to flourish in the future. Governments must follow where COP28 leads.”

In related comment for Euronews, geologist Dr Julie Brigham-Grette at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and Dr Martin Siegert, deputy vice chancellor of the University of Exeter write: “The cryosphere – Earth’s ice sheets, sea ice, permafrost, polar oceans, glaciers and snow – is ground zero for climate change, and it pays no attention to rhetoric, only to our actions.” They add: “Our message – the message of the cryosphere – is that this insanity cannot and must not continue. COP28 and this December must be when we correct course.”

Finally, an editorial in the Sydney Morning Herald responds to the Australian government’s deal with Tuvalu to offer all of its 11,200 residents refuge in Australia if climate change makes the island uninhabitable, which was announced last week. The paper says: “The Albanese government’s offer of a lifeline to Tuvalu citizens threatened by climate change enhances Australia’s position as a trusted regional power in the Pacific.” The Times follows up the story with news coverage of the agreement. It says: “Citizens of the climate-threatened island of Tuvalu will be given the right to live in Australia under a landmark pact.” The paper adds: “In 2017 New Zealand became the first country to offer climate change visas to migrants but it dropped the initiative after six months. Pacific island nations said at the time that such agreements should be a last resort and that western nations should focus on cutting greenhouse emissions.” The New York Times reports: “Low-lying Tuvalu has reached a deal with its large Pacific neighbour to address the challenge of rising oceans, but it is not planning to pack up and go.” Separately, the Guardian has a story under the headline: “Global heating sparks first climate class action by Indigenous Australians.”

An editorial in the Observer says the UK was “once a leader on global heating”, but prime minister “Rishi Sunak’s anti-green policies are making Britain look increasingly isolated”. The paper says: “The sad truth is that virtually every nation on Earth has turned its back on an impending calamity that will displace billions and kill thousands, if not millions, and has instead focused attention on local problems. A perfect example of this national shortsightedness is provided by the United Kingdom.” It continues: “Britain was once an influential player at COP conferences but has since seen its authority decline precipitously – first through Brexit, which meant we no longer led EU delegations, and later through our backtracking on development assistance pledges for developing countries. Worse has followed.” The editorial concludes: “These are clear signs that Sunak’s anti-green stance is driving investment abroad. Worse, it is damaging our prospects of playing our part in saving the planet. In fact, the UK appears to be signalling that it is possible to assert it is a climate leader while actually doing less and less about it. At COP28, there will be pressure from many delegates to agree to phase down or phase out the use of all fossil fuels. Sadly, it is now possible the UK may align itself with countries like Saudi Arabia in trying to water down or kill such a pledge…It may take another year, with the return of a Labour government, before Britain can again play its proper role in the fight against climate change. By then it may be too late.” BusinessGreen editor James Murray writes in a comment that “it [was] somewhat worrying to yesterday watch the lead of the UK’s COP28 delegation, dodge attempts by MPs to pin him down on whether the government supports the ‘phasing out’ or the ‘phasing down’ of unabated fossil fuels. These are two very different things.”

In other comment from the UK, the Financial Times Lex column highlights the need for major investments in British energy and water infrastructure, which it says “should lower costs” once built. However, the article says: “Britain is out of favour with infrastructure investors. Its attractiveness as a destination for private capital is at an all-time low, warns the Global Infrastructure Investor Association, whose members include Brookfield and Macquarie.” The Sunday Times has a piece by climate-sceptic columnist Dominic Lawson in which he attacks the climate protest group Just Stop Oil as “anti-democratic” and criticises its attempts to liken “itself to the suffragettes”. For the Observer, columnist Catherine Bennett writes under the headline: “In adopting suffragettes as role models, Just Stop Oil is painting itself into a corner.” Elsewhere, the Daily Telegraph continues its attacks on climate action, with opinion pieces by climate-sceptic columnists Ross Clark and Matthew Lynn. Another comment for the newspaper, by Daily Telegraph deputy comment editor and former director of communications for the free-market thinktank the Institute of Economic Affairs, is titled: “I’ll swap gas hobs for electric when hell freezes over.”

In a comment at the RealClimate climate science blog, Dr Rasmus Benestad – senior scientist at the Norwegian Meteorological Institute – looks at a recent discussion paper published by Statistics Norway, which he says “is problematic for sure”. He writes: “It was, authored by [John] Dagsvik and [Sigmund] Moen, and already in its introduction it claims that it is difficult to explain and predict weather and temperature (giving the false impression that it’s more or less impossible). This claim is both misleading and a distraction – weather forecasting has been one of the most important success stories in science.” Benested notes that the paper relies only on land-based temperature data, meaning they ignore two-thirds of the Earth’s surface. He also explains why their claims that the sun’s activity and planetary motion affect the Earth’s climate are false and addresses a number of other inaccuracies in their work, adding: “If Dagsvik and Moen had better knowledge about their chosen topics, they would have referred to other relevant information, not been so selective and been more critical of their own sources.” (The discussion paper was addressed in a September post by climate scientist Edgar Hertwich, who said it was “very surprising” that Statistics Norway had published it. He wrote: “The manuscript does not constitute a research paper but a piece of propaganda. The agency does not publish anybody else’s opinion pieces.” Hertwich added: “A discussion paper released by Statistics Norway contains standard talking-points of climate denial and a crude statistical model of selected temperature measurements which is unable to detect anything.”)

Over the last two decades, land-terminating glaciers in Greenland have been melting more than twice as fast as they did during the 20th century, according to new research. The authors analyse aerial photographs collected during mapping expeditions of Greenland’s coastline to document more than 1,000 land-terminating peripheral glaciers in Greenland over more than a century. These images “represent the only robust, widespread observations of 20th-century glacier change for this vast island”, according to a research briefing on the study. 

A new study presents a global database of tidal marshes, including more than 17,000 data points from more than 2,000 locations in 29 countries. The MarSOC database includes information such as location, soil depth and soil organic carbon content for each site. The authors estimate that on average, the top 30cm of tidal marshland globally contains 79 tonnes of soil organic carbon. “This data can serve as a basis for future work, and may contribute to incorporation of tidal marsh ecosystems into climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies and policies,” the paper says.