The UK Labour party has confirmed that, if it wins the next general election, it will block all new domestic oil and gas developments, instead investing “heavily” in renewable sources including wind and nuclear, the Guardian reports. The paper continues: “[The proposal] will involve not just a ban on new North Sea oil and gas licences, but a pledge that any borrowing for investment should be limited to green schemes…This will not stop drilling on projects that have already been approved, with the exception of the Rosebank and Cambo schemes, which Labour has said previously it would block.” According to the Sunday Times, which first broke the story, the move is part of Sir Keir Starmer’s “radical blueprint to make Britain a ‘clean energy superpower’”. The newspaper says that Starmer is expected to set out his net net-zero energy policy – including the ban on new oil and gas licences – when he launches his latest “national mission” in Scotland next month. It adds: “The party expects the plan to create up to half a million jobs in the renewables industry, including at least 50,000 in Scotland. The move is expected to offset developments in the dwindling North Sea oil and gas fields that directly employ more than 20,000 workers and provide an estimated further 200,000 jobs onshore.” Separately, the Times says Starmer’s decision has been met with “fury” from industry, business and political leaders in the northeast of Scotland. According to the Daily Mail, Tory critics say the move would “leave Britain more reliant on foreign energy imports and cost thousands of jobs”. The Sun also says the plan puts thousands of jobs “at risk”. Separately, the outlet accuses Starmer of “pandering to eco-loons”. The Times reports that Scottish Labour has opposed the announcement, urging Starmer not to “impose a cliff-edge end to oil and gas production” in the North Sea. The Daily Telegraph reports that “a major oil-drilling project in the North Sea worth up to £24bn to the economy could be abandoned” in the wake of Starmer’s announcement. The National adds: “Former first minister Alex Salmond dubbed the Labour leader ‘the North Sea job destroyer’ and said every future development should be given consent – but only if it has carbon capture plans in place.” The Scotsman says the plan has been branded “pie in the sky”. And the Financial Times says “the head of the GMB union, one of Labour’s biggest donors, has called on party leader Keir Starmer to scrap plans to ban all new North Sea fossil fuel extraction licences”.

In other UK news, the Guardian reports that Ukraine built more onshore wind turbines in the past year than England. The paper quotes Ed Miliband, the shadow climate change secretary, saying: “This extraordinary revelation is a terrible indictment of Rishi Sunak and his staggering failure to end the onshore wind ban.” Separately, a Guardian “exclusive” reports that “more than 80% of households that have replaced their gas boilers with an electric heat pump are satisfied with their new heating system”. The Daily Telegraph reports that “British households will be asked to voluntarily cut their electricity usage again as Europe faces up to another winter without Russian gas supplies”. And the Times reports that Britain is “the private jet capital of Europe”.

Shanghai has recorded its hottest day in May for more than 100 years, with temperatures of 36.1C, Reuters reports. The newswire adds: “The peak recorded by the Shanghai Meteorological Bureau on Monday beat the previous May record of 35.7C set in 1876, 1903, 1915 and 2018, according to bureau statistics. Temperatures in the region typically climb even higher in June, July and August.” The Times of India says the heatwave has caused “widespread disruption”. This comes as the South China Morning Post reports that Hong Kong is expected to see temperatures as high as 38C in the coming days due to the impacts of Super Typhoon Mawar. Separately, the outlet says that Hong Kong’s weather forecaster is to launch a new alert when temperatures exceed 35C.

The news comes as the Washington Post reports that Super Typhoon Mawar is the most powerful storm on earth in more than two years. The New York Times says: “As it moves toward Japan this week, Mawar is not forecast to make landfall in the Philippines or Taiwan. But the cyclone is expected to bring gale-force winds and enhance the monsoonal rains that are normal in the region around this time of year.” The Independent reports that the storm did not cause any deaths in Guam as it passed through last week, but it did cause extensive damage. Inside Climate News says the typhoon offers insight into “climate colonialism”, noting that “Guam, like other colonial territories, largely relies on disaster aid in the wake of catastrophes”. 

The NEA, China’s top energy regulator, last Friday issued a notice ordering power companies to prepare for floods and drought, reports the China Energy News. The official document asks to “seize the window [of opportunity] before the arrival of the primary flood season”, and to “revise and improve emergency response plans promptly” to address risks of extreme weather, the state-run industry newspaper notes. State media outlet Xinhua, citing a report by Economic Information Daily, says that the economic rebound and warm weather have led to increasing electricity consumption, especially in the southern regions where peak demand has reached a “new high” in 2023. The state news agency highlights that the peak electricity demand has arrived earlier than expected, adding that “all stakeholders are stepping up their deployments and adopting an approach from the electricity supply and demand sides to prepare for the summer peak”. Another state media outlet China Daily publishes a comment on extreme heat by Wei Ke, an associate researcher at the Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences. He writes that “there has been a significant increase in both the frequency and intensity of extreme heat events” across the globe and that “the global temperatures will continue to rise as greenhouse gas emissions are unlikely to reduce drastically in the next 20-30 years”.

Meanwhile, the Chinese website IN-EN.com focuses on “the 26th international photovoltaic (PV) power generation and smart energy conference & exhibition (SNEC)”, which took place in Shanghai last week. It quotes Liu Hanyuan, chairman of multinational new energy company Tongwei Group, saying that China could rapidly complete its energy transition and could even achieve carbon neutrality at the same time as developed countries with the support of solar energy. He adds that two-thirds or more of the products required for energy transition in developed countries rely on manufacturing in China and China will assist developing countries entering a new model of clean and sustainable development, the report notes. Industrial Energy Circle, a WeChat account belonging to Jiemian News, a Shanghai-based media outlet, highlights that the number of participants at the 26th SNEC set a “new industry record” worldwide. A representative from a leading solar company says that “due to rapid technological advancements, the current capacity being invested in May will be outdated in the coming years”, the article notes. It adds that with the large-scale implementation of new energy sources, the difficulty of grid regulation, especially on energy storage, has increased. China Electric Power News also covers the same event with focuses on the renewable energy cooperation between China and Africa.

Elsewhere, China News Service, a state news agency, reports that 17 Chinese and foreign thinktanks have jointly launched an initiative on the Belt and Road Initiative energy cooperation. An official from the NEA says that it is necessary to use high-quality innovation to lead and support the high-quality development of energy cooperation, the report says. Finally, Seatrade Maritime News says that China is actively supporting the adoption of shore power solutions as a means to reduce emissions in its ports and urban areas.

Ron DeSantis, the Republican governor of Florida, has launched his campaign for US president “by saying he rejects the ‘politicisation of the weather’ and questioning whether hurricanes hitting his home state of Florida have been worsened by climate change”, the Guardian reports. The paper continues: “While governor, DeSantis has adopted bills banning Florida’s cities from adopting 100% clean energy goals and barred the state’s pension fund from making investment decisions that consider the climate crisis due to what he called a corporate attempt to ‘impose an ideological agenda on the American people’. He has also attacked the US military for being ‘woke’ for warning about the national security risks posed by climate impacts.”

In other US news, the Guardian reports that America’s biggest car and home insurer will halt the sale of new home insurance policies in California, in part due to the growing wildfire risk. Axios also covers the news. Separately, the Guardian covers new research, which finds that between 25% and 70% of California beaches might be washed away by the end of the century. The Washington Post also covers the study.

Elsewhere in North America, Reuters reports that “Danielle Smith’s United Conservative Party (UCP) won the Alberta provincial election on Monday, securing another four years in power in Canada’s largest oil-producing region, and immediately fired a warning shot at prime minister Justin Trudeau over climate change.” This comes as the Guardian reports that “record-breaking wildfires have charred more than a million hectares of land in Alberta, pushing tens of thousands from their homes and choking the skies in a thick haze of smoke”. 

If Germany wants to deliver its plan to reach net-zero by 2045, the decarbonisation of residential buildings will play a significant role, requiring “a six-digit number of new skilled workers and additional capital in the three-digit billions to trillions”, reports Süddeutsche Zeitung. It says that the German economics ministry notes that 215,000 additional jobs should be created for “energy modernisation” in the building sector. However, the outlet adds, it is unclear where and how to recruit this number of new craftsmen and construction workers. Moreover, the investment needed for the transition by 2045 is estimated to be €448bn, reports Ntv. The outlet quotes ministerial experts assuming that a climate-neutral building stock is feasible by 2045, but the “solution corridor” is “very narrow” and, if everything does not “go smoothly”, the plan “will fail”.

Meanwhile, Der Spiegel reports that improvements to the heating law, which aims to introduce a ban on new oil and gas boilers from 2024, announced by German economics minister Robert Habeck have been met with approval in the housing industry. The news outlet explains that, after a “fierce coalition dispute”, Habeck has promised to revise the plans for a switch to heating with renewable energies at some points, identifying the following areas for improvement: more time for old buildings to transition; using various technologies, including wood pellets; and starting “a major district heating offensive”. Habeck has announced that the improvements will be discussed jointly with his new state secretary Philipp Nimmermann in the coming week and with MPs from the ruling coalition – SPD, Greens and FDP – this Tuesday, notes the newspaper. Süddeutsche Zeitung describes the situation as “difficult weeks for the Greens” as their reform plans for climate-friendly heating are “triggering widespread uncertainty and disputes in the coalition”. Fundamental criticism also comes from the opposition leader, the outlet adds, quoting Friedrich Merz, leader of the Union faction in the German parliament, Bundestag, saying: “Above all, the Greens have to get off their high moral horse.” If the Union becomes the strongest force in the 2025 federal elections, which polls currently suggest is possible, it could form a coalition with the Greens – with Friedrich Merz as chancellor, explains the outlet. However, Merz is quoted saying that “the way [Greens] present themselves today, cooperation with the Greens in the federal government is impossible”. 

Elsewhere, Der Spiegel reports that Germany-based Siemens Energy has criticised German energy policy, but wants to massively expand investments in wind power, grids and hydrogen, given the subsidy programs in the US and Europe. The newspaper quotes Joe Kaeser, chairman of the company’s supervisory board, saying that “Germany has no recognisable consistent, long-term and coherent plan for the energy transition”. Therefore, the company plans investments of a “three-digit million” amount into the expansion of US power grids. The company also plans the production of electrolysers for hydrogen with a capacity of three gigawatts to be built at its Berlin site by 2025. In addition, Bloomberg reports that Germany’s thousands of solar panels set a new production record on Saturday, reaching an output of almost 41 megawatts (MW). 

Finally, Forbes reports that German car manufacturer Mercedes-Benz has agreed with German energy developer Umweltgerechte Kraftanlagen to build a 20-turbine wind farm that can generate more than 120MW of electricity for the company’s test track in Papenburg, Germany. And the Financial Times reports that a “German start-up has secured initial funding to develop a revolutionary fusion energy machine that it hopes can provide a future source of abundant, emissions-free power”.

“A majority of GB News [a rightwing, free-to-air TV channel in the UK] hosts attacked climate action on the channel in 2022, while one in three spread climate science denial,” according to new analysis by DeSmog. The outlet continues: “Our analysis found that at least 16 hosts (52%) attacked on air the UK’s climate policies, including its net-zero target. Presenters claimed that net-zero will cause ‘death by poverty and starvation’, ‘poses an existential threat to the free world’, and called for the UK to ‘drill, baby, drill’ for more fossil fuels…At least four GB News hosts have ties to right-wing political parties that are hostile to climate action, while its ranks include well-known anti-green MPs from the Conservative benches. The channel also frequently platforms activists from climate science denial groups such as the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF).” The Guardian and the Financial Times cover the new analysis.

COP28 president Sultan Al Jaber has been “accused of attempting to ‘greenwash’ his image”, after it was revealed that members of his team edited his Wikipedia page, according to a Guardian “exclusive”. The paper says: “Work by Al Jaber’s team on his and the climate summit’s Wikipedia entries include adding a quote from an editorial that said Al Jaber – the United Arab Emirates minister for industry and advanced technology – was ‘precisely the kind of ally the climate movement needs’. They also suggested that editors remove reference to a multibillion-dollar oil pipeline deal he signed in 2019, the Centre for Climate Reporting and the Guardian can reveal… Meanwhile,  Al Jaber has been working with major consultancy firms and PR agencies to promote his work as an advocate for Emirati investment in green energy.”

Elsewhere, the Press Association covers a new survey which shows that “limiting global warming to 1.5C is bottom of the list for global businesses’ desired outcomes at this year’s COP28”. According to the newswire, “business leaders across the majority of markets highlighted ‘private sector engagement’ as the key theme for COP28 that is most relevant to their business”. Covering the same survey, BusinessGreen reports: “research across 14 nations suggests corporates want louder voice at UN climate talks as 1.5C threshold looks increasingly threatened”.

Elsewhere, BusinessGreen says: “More than 100 companies and experts involved in the emerging carbon removals market [have] writ[ten] to UNFCCC in dismay over [a] briefing note raising concerns over [the] viability [of] such technologies.” (A UN body that will supervise carbon markets under the Paris Agreement, known as the Article 6.4 supervisory body, recently published an “information note” summarising feedback received on carbon removals and other issues relating to carbon markets.) According to BusinessGreen, the note “raised concerns over the technological viability and environmental benefits of engineered carbon dioxide removals, provoking a backlash from companies and experts involved in the emerging global market”

There is widespread media coverage of global climate protests. Agence France-Presse reports that more than 1,500 people were arrested in the Hague on Saturday, after Extinction Rebellion activists blocked a section of a motorway to protest Dutch fossil fuel subsidies. Deutsche Welle reports that some 7,000 protestors took part.

Reuters reports that two Just Stop Oil protestors were charged with “aggravated trespass” after they disrupted Saturday’s Rugby Premiership final in London by throwing orange powder on the pitch. Sky News and the Daily Mail also cover the story. Separately, the Daily Mail reports that “a Just Stop Oil activist is at risk of losing her job as parish council clerk after she disrupted the Chelsea Flower Show by throwing orange powder over a garden”. The Daily Telegraph carries a video of activists who “stormed the dancefloor of Sweden’s equivalent of Strictly Come Dancing during the final”. Separately, the MailOnline reports that two climate activists “have been charged after smearing paint on a statue in the National Gallery in Washington last month”. The Daily Mail reports that “Just Stop Oil claimed a propaganda victory yesterday after the BBC’s Chris Packham attended one of its ‘slow march’ demonstrations.” It adds: “Paris police used tear gas and baton charges to stop climate change demonstrators disrupting oil giant Total’s annual general meeting.”

Meanwhile, Daily Mail Australia reports that “protesters in South Australia could face $50,000 in fines or three months jail under proposed changes to the state’s protest laws”.

Several right-leaning UK newspapers react negatively to Labour’s announcement that, if elected to power, it would ban new oil and gas developments in the North Sea. An editorial in the Sunday Times, which broke the story, says: “Like it or not, oil and gas continue to provide three quarters of our overall energy mix.…Talking about turning Britain into a ‘clean energy superpower’ is all very well. But sounding the death knell for the North Sea, where operators are already reeling from windfall taxes and hostile rhetoric from the Scottish National Party, is an economically risky idea that would risk leaving Britain permanently at the mercy of international price fluctuations…The big energy companies Labour would whack with its ban are precisely the ones it would then want help from for its green agenda. Giants such as Shell are not just oil and gas explorers. They are diversifying into solar, wind, hydrogen and carbon capture and storage projects…Until the UK has a new generation of nuclear reactors ready to come into service – which will be many years in the future, if at all – oil and gas will continue to be part of our energy supply. The lessons of energy security learnt the hard way in recent years shouldn’t be forgotten…Cutting off domestic production of oil and gas too soon would simply push up prices and leave the UK more vulnerable when the next crisis comes. By letting ideology trump pragmatism, Labour risks repeating the mistakes of the past.” An editorial in the Daily Telegraph says: “Sir Keir Starmer is reportedly preparing to ban all new North Sea extraction, even though the shortfall will have to be imported from countries with greater emissions. If Labour is serious about wanting to form a government they need to start acting like one and not as cheerleaders for a tiny, tiresome pressure group.”

Meanwhile, the Daily Mail also directs the ire of its lead editorial in today’s newspaper at Starmer: “Labour’s reported plan to halt all new North Sea oil and gas developments demonstrates just how aligned he is to Just Stop Oil’s crazed – not to say financially ruinous – demands.” The Sun’s editorial is even more enraged: “It is a total fantasy that our economy can get to Net Zero by 2050 without any reliance on oil and gas in-between. Yet that is the lie being peddled by Sir Keir Starmer. And in this grand deception he is being assisted by his bacon-munching failed predecessor turned eco-warrior Ed Miliband. Together the pair blithely announced yesterday that if they come to power they would ban all future oil and gas drilling in the North Sea. Miliband boasts meaninglessly of turning the UK into a global energy superpower. While Starmer accepts a £1.5m donation from an eco-tech boss who publicly backs Just Stop Oil. What dangerous, delusional nonsense. The Sun is firmly in favour of new technologies as the answer to our climate questions. But the simple truth is that solar and wind alone won’t get us to the promised green land…Starmer is in danger of turning his party into the political wing of the Just Stop Oil lunatics. We need a hard-headed, grown-up energy strategy. Not cheap, empty promises aimed at appeasing fashionable eco-dreamers.”

Separately, several commentators zoom in on the same topic. Leo McKinstry in the Daily Mail writes: “Given the erratic unreliability of renewables, Britain’s market will be dependent on oil and gas for decades to come, which makes his surrender to the hardline environmental lobby still more disastrous. Starmer aspires to lead our country, yet on this issue he has exposed himself as economically illiterate. Even one of his allies said at the weekend that this stance on North Sea development is ‘crackers, reckless, vote-losing stuff’.” That unattributed quote repeated by McKinistry is taken from a Patrick Maguire column in the Times who, again, turning to an unnamed “shadow minister”, says: “The truth is that the Labour leadership don’t quite yet know what the public are willing to hear – an uncertainty attributed to its reliance on focus groups over polling. ‘We will focus on what it will deliver – green steel, battery factories, sustainable aviation fuel – rather than the input,” says one shadow cabinet minister.’” In the Daily Mail, climate-sceptic columnist Dominic Lawson argues that “under Keir Starmer, we face: lower, not higher salaries; less, not more, tax raised for public services; and higher, not lower carbon emissions. If that’s what Labour thinks will make us a ‘green energy superpower’, it needs to think again.” The Times has a comment piece by Ryan Crighton, policy director at Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce, who is, unsurprisingly, keen to defend the interests of the oil and gas industry centred in Aberdeen: “The price of getting the energy transition wrong is 17,000 jobs in the northeast of Scotland alone, plus an £8bn annual hole in Scotland’s GVA (Gross Value Added) by 2030. Labour needs to reflect hard on these numbers, talk to the people and companies at the heart of the transition, and come back with a sensible position.” And the Daily Telegraph’s Alan Cochrane writes under the headline: “Starmer’s North Sea oil plan might be a welcome gift for the Scottish Tories.”

“A growing number of western politicians are concerned this year’s UN climate summit in the UAE will be too beholden to the oil and gas industry,” write journalists Camilla Hodgson and Aime Williams in the Financial Times. They cite a letter signed by 100 US and European politicians, calling for the replacement of oil executive Sultan Al Jaber, appointed to the role of COP28 president. The appointment of Al Jaber was followed by a series of “uncomfortable developments”, write Hodgson and Williams, including the news that the UAE had invited the Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad to the conference and hired a political adviser from the UK who was opposed to windfall taxes on oil and gas firms to help with communications. 

For Reuters Breakingviews, business journalist Hugo Dixon writes on: “How US allies can mitigate Trump 2.0”. Trump is unlikely to unwind current president Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, he writes, “not least because Republican-leaning states like Texas benefit from the act’s subsidies for green tech”. The “bigger worry” he writes, is if Trump pulls out of the Paris Agreement again. This could “ease the pressure” on other countries, including China, to accelerate their decarbonisation plans, Dixon writes. To mitigate such an outcome, the G7 could “accelerate” its efforts to combat climate change, including a “climate partnership” with India, Dixon concludes.

Elsewhere, the Financial Times carries commentary on the scale benefits of “multiple small, modularised [nuclear] reactors”, in its Lex column. Also in the Financial Times, journalist Siddarth Shrikanth writes that climate tech indicates “a fresh path” to those “stuck” in an “old model of conservation”, when it comes to protecting nature and biodiversity. In a comment piece on carbon accounting for the Financial Times, Fabiola Schneider, assistant professor of finance at Dublin City University, writes: “Too often, companies’ reporting gives a misleading sense of how much progress has been made towards a net-zero target.” Finally, Financial Times columnist John Gapper warns that a surge in demand for summer holiday flights “presages an environmental squeeze on low-cost fares”.

Restoring marine ecosystems can increase ocean alkalinity, leading to “permanent carbon dioxide removal”, according to new research. The authors run “biogeochemical simulations” of marine ecosystems. They find that restoring mangroves – which are common in tropical shallow marine settings – “will lead to notable local ocean alkalinity enhancement across a wide range of scenarios”. The authors conclude that their work “provides further motivation to pursue feasible blue carbon restoration projects”.