There is widespread coverage of the WWF Living Planet Index report showing, says Agence-France Presse, that “wild populations of monitored animal species have plummeted nearly 70% in the last 50 years”. The newswire says that the report includes “data from 32,000 populations of more than 5,000 species of mammals, birds amphibians, reptiles and fish”. It adds: “The report found that the main drivers of wildlife loss are habitat degradation due to development and farming, exploitation, the introduction of invasive species, pollution, climate change and disease.” The Press Association reports: “Global wildlife populations have fallen by nearly 70% in less than 50 years, conservationists warned as they called for immediate action to halt the nature and climate crises.” The newswire adds: “When world leaders meet in Montreal in December for the biodiversity conference COP15, the UK should play a leading role in making sure an action plan is agreed to ensure nature is starting to recover by the end of this decade, [Tanya Steele, head of WWF UK] added.” The Guardian quotes Steele saying: “Despite the science, the catastrophic projections, the impassioned speeches and promises, the burning forests, submerged countries, record temperatures and displaced millions, world leaders continue to sit back and watch our world burn in front of our eyes…The climate and nature crises, their fates entwined, are not some faraway threat our grandchildren will solve with still-to-be-discovered technology.” The Daily Mirror also has the story: “Life on Earth is on the brink of catastrophe as climate change and destruction of nature undermine our planet, conservationists warn.”

An editorial in the Daily Mirror says: “The scale of the devastation to the natural world is shaming…Nature has been left on its knees because of the climate crisis and over-development spurred on by our pursuit of riches.”

There is continuing coverage of how the energy crisis is affecting Europe. Reuters reports that “Russia’s president [Vladimir Putin] said Europe was to blame for its energy crisis with policies that starved the industry of investment as EU states struggled on Wednesday to agree on a gas price cap to offset its impact on consumers”. The newswire adds: “Putin said Moscow was not to blame for Europe’s sky-high energy prices and pointed at the EU’s green energy drive, saying it led to underinvestment in the global oil and gas industry.” EU energy ministers, meanwhile, met yesterday but “agreement on a gas price cap proved elusive”. In contrast, Politico says that “the Russian president has inadvertently sped up Europe’s Green Deal”.

Another Politico article says a new package of measures will be introduced by the European Commission next week: “There remains uncertainty about key aspects of the package – including whether the preferred intervention of many countries, an EU-wide cap on gas prices, will be part of it, and if so, in what form. It could also take until November to get next week’s proposals fully signed off and operational, officials said.”

Separately, another Politico article says that the Polish pipeline operator PERN has detected a leak in a pipeline which carries oil from Russia to Europe. “The company said the leak was located some 70km from the western city of Płock and was on the main route transporting crude oil to Germany…The report comes two weeks after several leaks were detected on the Nord Stream pipelines – which carry gas from Russia to Europe – in the Baltic Sea after suspected sabotage.”

Elsewhere, Reuters carries the views of Norway-based consultancy DNV, which says that Europe will more rapidly reduce its reliance on natural gas as a result of the war in Ukraine, replacing Russian energy and boosting the continent’s security of supply. The newswire adds: “The consultancy now predicts annual European gas consumption of 170bn cubic metres (bcm) in 2050 versus 310 bcm per year predicted one year ago, and down from around 580 bcm in 2020. European gas consumption in 2030 is now expected to be almost 26% lower than in DNV’s pre-invasion forecast made one year ago, accelerating the continent’s energy transition.” In contrast, Bloomberg reports the views of Gazprom CEO Alexey Miller who, speaking about the winter ahead for Europe at Russian Energy Week in Moscow yesterday, said that “winter can be relatively warm, but one week or even five days will be abnormally cold and it’s possible that whole towns and lands, god forbid, will freeze”.

Meanwhile, the Financial Times says that “the German government has joined economists in warning that the energy crisis caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will push Europe’s largest economy into recession next year”. Reuters says: “Germany will not take Russian gas via the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, a government spokesperson said on Wednesday after Russian President Vladimir Putin offered to resume supplies. The spokesperson added, however, that if Russia wanted to resume gas deliveries it could do so via the Nord Stream 1 pipeline.” Finally, the New York Times carries a news feature headlined: “Germany’s new hunger for coal dooms a tiny village.”

A group of 10 major economies, including the US, Germany and all other G7 nations, are “building momentum to scale-up climate finance for developing countries by reforming how development banks spend money, starting with the largest: the World Bank”, Climate Home News reports. The outlets says the group of countries have submitted proposals for “fundamental reform of the World Bank” to the body’s management, adding: “The proposals aim to make the bank fit to address global challenges, including climate action and biodiversity conservation.” The publication continues: “Development minister Svenja Schulze, who serves as Germany’s representative on the World Bank’s board of governors, said: ‘The World Bank’s current model…is no longer appropriate in this time of global crises. Challenges and investment needs are so great that the model needs to be adjusted.’ Schulze said the reforms should include ‘climate lending on better terms’ and ‘targeted budget support for governments which want to pursue policy reforms to make their economies climate neutral’.”

Meanwhile, Bloomberg reports: “Addressing global warming should be an explicit purpose for multilateral development banks and international financial institutions given the urgent need to arrest greenhouse gas emissions, climate negotiators and financial leaders said Wednesday, less than four weeks before UN talks in Egypt.” It also says International Monetary Fund (IMF) head Kristalina Georgieva called for higher investment in climate action, quoting her saying: “If we don’t shift our trajectory this decade, we are cooked.” BusinessGreen says the UK’s COP26 president Alok Sharma is “to call on IMF and World Bank to ramp up climate finance”.

China needs “up to $17tn in additional investments” for green infrastructure and technology in the power and transport sectors to “reach net-zero emissions by 2060”, reports Reuters, citing a new World Bank report on China’s climate and development challenges. Manuela Ferro, the World Bank’s vice president for East Asia and the Pacific, is quoted saying: “China’s long-term growth prospects are increasingly dependent on rebalancing the economy from infrastructure investment to innovation, from exports to domestic consumption, and from state-led to market-driven allocation of resources.” The newswire adds, citing the report, that China could “leverage existing advantages, including higher returns on production of low-carbon technologies, a high domestic savings rate and a leadership position in green finance”. Bloomberg also covers the same report, adding that “the country is well positioned to meet its climate commitments and transition to a greener economy”, according to the World Bank.

Meanwhile, according to the ministry of foreign affairs, China has “proposed development of a global clean energy partnership” that will “support investments and integrate clean energy supply chains to help countries meet their net zero targets”, reports S&P Global Commodity Insights. The article adds that the proposal comes just ahead of COP27, which is “likely to set the stage for China to initiate dialogue with potential partners in the coming months”. Separately, the South China Morning Post writes that China is “ramping up construction” of liquefied natural gas (LNG) infrastructure – including “receiving terminals and storage facilities” – as the country “secures more long-term buying contracts for the fuel amid growing concerns over energy security”. The outlet adds that China’s power shortages and interruptions over the past two years highlight the urgency of securing alternative forms of cleaner energy.

The Shanghai-based outlet Sixth Tone carries an article, titled: “After a blistering summer, China braces for a frigid winter.” Noting the “effects of climate change on weather patterns”, it says, citing weather forecasters, that winter in “many parts of China will arrive earlier than usual and temperatures might be colder, too”. The “La Niña phenomenon, which developed in September 2020”, will “continue through this winter”, “adding more uncertainties” in the country, the outlet stresses, according to China’s National Climate Center. China Dialogue carries an article by Mark Wang, professor of geography at Melbourne University, who says not to “overestimate water diversion under extreme weather”.

Elsewhere, Caixin writes in an “exclusive” that China will “chiefly use a relaunched loan program to finance major infrastructure projects”, citing sources “familiar with the matter”. The outlet adds that the move comes as the government ramps up effort to provide extra liquidity and shore up an ailing economy. Finally, Shanghai-based financial outlet Yicai writes that China’s automobile exports “reached a record high in the first three quarters on the back of surging sales of new energy vehicles (NEV)”, which “more than doubled” from the same time last year.

Businesses using cheap carbon offsets to meet their net-zero targets “could curb their efforts to cut emissions and slow the delivery of climate goals, Britain’s climate change advisers said on Thursday”, Reuters reports. It says: “The current low price of many offsets, which can be purchased from exchanges for less than $4 a tonne of carbon dioxide, are providing a cheap way for companies to meet net zero goals which could reduce the incentive for them to directly cut emissions, a report by Britain’s Climate Change Committee (CCC) said.” The newswire quotes the CCC report saying: “Offsets can mask insufficient efforts from firms to cut their own emissions, they often deliver less than claimed and they may push out other environmental objectives in the rush to capture carbon.” BusinessGreen says: “Lack of guidance, standards, and regulations underpinning carbon offsetting risks slowing net zero transition, the Climate Change Committee has today warned.”

The UK government has dropped its appeal against a High Court ruling that found its net-zero strategy was unlawful, the Times reports. The paper cites “a letter seen by the Times [in which] officials said: ‘We confirm that the new secretary of state has made a decision not to pursue the application [for permission to appeal].’” the paper says the decision to drop the appeal, by business secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg, “means the government must now draw up a new net-zero strategy by March”. The paper explains that the previous net-zero strategy “did not set out the emissions savings for individual measures”, leading to the court ruling over a “lack of detail on emissions savings, rendering public scrutiny impossible”. It adds: “What a new net-zero strategy will look like remains to be seen but the numbers for emissions reductions will now need to be put on individual policies. The Times understands that the government holds a spreadsheet containing those figures but has repeatedly refused freedom of information requests to release the document. A report by the Tory MP Chris Skidmore, due by the end of the year, is likely to influence a new strategy.”

Elsewhere, BusinessGreen editor James Murray writes: “The government’s ‘attack on nature’ and its opposition to new solar farms could have serious consequences for the UK’s long-term net zero strategy.”

UK prime minister Liz Truss has “confirmed” that the government will run a public campaign on energy saving measures, the i newspaper reports, calling it “another apparent U-turn”. The paper says Truss told MPs her government was “drawing up plans to give businesses and households advice on how to cut their consumption. It comes after widespread reports that Truss had scrapped…[such] proposals.” PoliticsHome also calls it an “apparent U-turn”: “The government has confirmed that it is looking at ways of better informing people about how they can cut down their energy usage this winter in an apparent U-turn on the issue.” The Evening Standard also has the story. The Financial Times reports that energy regulator Ofgem “urges public to cut energy usage to save money”. It says: “Britain’s energy regulator will on Thursday urge consumers to cut their energy consumption ‘where possible’, as it prepares to launch a campaign to help households reduce their electricity and gas usage.”

Elsewhere, the Guardian reports that activists from the Insulate Britain group that campaigns for more energy efficiency “glue[d] themselves to ground in PMQs-timed protest”, joining protestors from the Just Stop Oil group. An editorial in the Daily Mail complains: “Are we meant to be pleased that Met Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley says police shouldn’t hand cups of tea to road-blocking Just Stop Oil protestors? That officers indulge, not immediately arrest, these eco-zealots speaks volumes.”

In other UK news, the i newspaper says that transport secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan is “understood to be considering calls from the automotive industry to lower the number of new environmentally friendly cars and vans it must sell from 2024”. It continues: “There are fears that by lowering the mandated percentage of ZEV [zero-emission vehicle] sales, the government will discourage demand for zero-emission vehicles – and may also slow the development of a UK-wide vehicle charging network that will be required to cope with the 2030 ban on new fossil fuel vehicles.”

There is continued coverage of the UK government’s plans for a de-facto windfall tax on renewable and nuclear power generators, with the Times reporting: “Gas-fired power stations could make profits of more than £10bn this winter after being spared the windfall taxes imposed on other energy companies.” The paper explains: “Tom Edwards, of the consultancy Cornwall Insight, said that ‘clean spark spreads’, the gross profit margins for highly efficient combined cycle gas turbines (CCGT), were ‘very high’ at about £250 per megawatt-hour for November – about eight times higher than the historical average of about £31 per megawatt-hour between 2013 and 2020. He estimated that such plants could make more than £10bn profits in the six months of winter alone.” It adds: “Keith Anderson, boss of Scottish Power, said it was ‘strange’ that the government planned to ‘cap the price of low carbon generation and to leave gas generation untouched’.” Bloomberg reports: “The UK’s renewable energy industry is warning that a government plan to cap the revenues of low-carbon power producers could discourage investment in the sector. ” It explains: “Under the plan, which will come into place early next year, renewable and nuclear power generators will be allowed to cover their costs and then make what the government calls an ‘appropriate’ amount of revenue on top. Crucially, the level of the cap hasn’t yet been set, and there’s no clear end-date for the measure. Generators may also be able to switch to a long-term fixed-price contract starting next year.” The Financial Times reports: “Investors in Britain’s renewable energy industry are urging ministers to provide urgent clarity over the level of the de facto windfall tax on low-carbon electricity generators that will come into force at the start of next year.”

Climate minister Graham Stuart has told MPs that his government’s plans to allow fracking and to award new licences for North Sea oil and gas is “good for the environment”, the Guardian reports. It quotes him saying: “Producing [oil and gas] domestically creates only half the emissions around production and transportation than importing it from around the world…In terms of the economy and the environment, domestic production is a good thing and we should all get behind it.” [Stewart is citing figures that exclude the emissions from actually burning oil and gas. A seminal 2013 report from the late then-chief scientific adviser to the Department of Energy and Climate Change, Sir David MacKay, said: “The view of the authors is that without global climate policies…new fossil fuel exploitation [in the UK] is likely to lead to an increase in cumulative GHG emissions and the risk of climate change.”] BusinessGreen reports: “Stuart told the Committee he had been tasked by prime minister Liz Truss with accelerating domestic energy supplies on all fronts, including through new wind and solar projects, tapping new oil and gas wells in the North Sea, and lifting the moratorium on fracking in England.” The Press Association reports other comments made by Stuart during an appearance in front of the Environmental Audit Committee of MPs: “Labour’s pledge to decarbonise the electricity grid by 2030 would lead to blackouts and poverty, the climate minister has said.” [The government’s own target is to decarbonise the grid by 2035.]

A comment for the Daily Telegraph by columnist Robert Taylor says: “[B]lackouts could be just the ticket to shake some of today’s youngsters out of that sublime sense of entitlement and self-righteousness…a blackout or two might demonstrate the naivety of the extreme net-zero agenda. It’s all very well asserting the evils of fossil fuels when you’re sitting in a junior common room sipping tea, or blocking the M25 on a frantic Friday. But things become trickier once the lights literally go out. Suddenly, you’re grateful for a bit of Norwegian crude.” [The UK is at risk of blackouts because Russia has choked off gas supplies to Europe. The “capacity margin” between electricity supplies and peak demand would be larger if the UK had built more renewables, per recent Carbon Brief analysis.]

Meanwhile, the Sun reports: “Fury as Tory rebels plot with Labour to stop fracking from going ahead.” An editorial in the Sun says: “Any Tories plotting with Labour’s wreckers to thwart fracking should be ashamed.” [This is the Sun’s 15th editorial supporting fracking in 2022 to date.]

Finally, writing for Conservative Home, Ed Birkett of thinktank Onward says: “With National Grid warning of energy shortages this winter, the government is looking at emergency measures to boost supply, including signing long-term contracts with gas producers such as Norway. These contracts could have major long-term implications for UK energy bills, potentially saving money in the short term but raising bills in the long term. The government appears to be planning to sign deals without setting out a detailed strategy to Parliament to define the parameters of its extraordinary market intervention. But while ministers may not be obliged to involve Parliament at this stage, given the long-term implications for UK billpayers, MPs should expect to be able to scrutinise the plan.”

Writing for the Guardian, business secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg says he can “assure…readers that I am not a ‘green energy sceptic’”. But he says “if the green agenda does not provide economic growth, it will ultimately not have political support and it will be self defeating”. Rees-Mogg continues: “Getting the British people on board with net zero requires us to demonstrate that we can go green in a way that makes them better off, not worse off, that drives growth instead of hindering it and that stimulates investment and innovation rather than driving traditional industries to the brink of ruin.” He adds: “The war in Ukraine has thrown into sharp relief the need to rapidly increase our domestic energy supply and strengthen our energy security, from all forms of renewables to nuclear and our domestic oil and gas reserves, which are of course significantly greener than shipping liquefied natural gas from overseas.” The secretary of state concludes: “Given the stakes, it’s important that the public debate on net zero and energy security is robust and lively, but I hope my commitment to making it a reality is clear.” The Guardian reports that Rees-Mogg is “on collision course” with prime minister Liz Truss: “PM wants to prevent panels on 58% of farmland but business secretary says renewables need to be boosted.”

Elsewhere in the Guardian, Carbon Brief deputy editor Dr Simon Evans writes: “Banning solar farms from most of England’s farmland would place Truss squarely in opposition to the policy priorities she set out in her own speech to the Conservative party conference.” Evans adds: “Under the banner ‘get Britain moving’, the prime minister said she wanted faster economic growth, lower energy bills, reinforced energy security, more renewables and action to tackle the climate crisis. Yet the solar ban would hold back investment, lead to higher energy bills, lock in continued gas imports, stop renewable growth and stall efforts to reach net zero emissions.”

New research uses an “innovative statistical method” – combining the latest generation of climate model simulations, global observations and local observations – to reduce uncertainty in local temperature projections. The authors find that the model uncertainty is “reduced by 30% up to 70% at any location worldwide”, which “substantially improve[s] the quantification of risks associated with future climate change”. An evaluation of the results “indicates a robust skill”, the authors say, “leading to a high confidence in our constrained climate projections”.