Warm ocean waters that sucked the colour and vigour from sweeping stretches of the world’s greatest expanse of corals last month were driven by climate change, according to a new analysis by scientists, who are warning of worse impacts ahead. Climate change made it 175 times more likely that the surface waters of the Coral Sea, which off the Queensland coastline is home to Australia’s Great Barrier Reef, would reach the record-breaking temperatures last month that bleached reefs, modelling analysis showed. The scientists found Coral Sea temperatures in March are likely to be 1.8°F (1°C) warmer now than before humans polluted the atmosphere. Temperatures recorded by the Australian government last month were slightly higher than that, in part because of a fierce El Niño. “This is the smoking gun,” said David Kline, a Scripps Institution of Oceanography coral reef scientist who wasn’t involved with the new analysis. Five climate scientists who authored the study have jointly written an article for the Conversation explaining the results. They add an important note: “We have analysed this coral bleaching event in near-real time, which means the results we present here have not been through peer review…As we are using a method that has been previously peer-reviewed, we can have confidence in our results. It is important, however, that these studies go through a peer-review process and these results will be submitted soon.” Meanwhile, climate sceptic James Delingpole writes in the Spectator that ocean acidification is “a trivial, misleadingly named, and not remotely worrying phenomenon which has been hyped up beyond all measure for political, ideological and financial reasons”. He cites other climate sceptics to back up his claim. Carbon Brief has more on this topic on its ocean acidification page.

Public support for fracking in the UK has fallen to a new low, according to government polling, at the same time as backing for renewable energy has hit a record high. The survey, which is repeated every few months, shows that public enthusiasm for the controversial energy extraction method has fallen steadily in the past two years while opposition to it has risen dramatically. The Guardian explains: “Just 19% of people back exploration for shale gas in the latest edition of the Department of Energy and Climate Change’s long-running public attitudes tracker, down from a high of 29% two years ago. The percentage against has risen to a new high of 31%, while the proportion neither for or against has remained largely stable, at 46%.” The Carbon Commentary blog also looks at the latest survey results: “Those saying they are ‘concerned’ total 70%, a new high. Those unconcerned fell to 29%, a new low. Those seeing climate change as being caused by man’s activities increased in number. Those who see it as a result of natural processes fell to the lowest number ever.”

Searing temperatures will cost emerging economies up to 10 percent in lost daytime working hours, if countries do not cut planet-warming emissions further than they have promised so far, U.N. agencies and international labor bodies said on Thursday. Countries likely to be worst affected by rising temperatures include India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Cambodia, Pakistan, Burkina Faso and parts of West Africa, said the joint report by the U.N. Development Programme, International Labour Organization, Climate Vulnerable Forum and other agencies.

The University of Cambridge has become the latest higher education institution to face growing pressure to withdraw its investments from fossil fuel companies following the launch of a student-led campaign. More than 100 staff, students, alumni, and others affiliated with the institution have signed an open letter saying the university has always made “a remarkable impact on the world.” However, when it comes to the climate, the signatories say Cambridge is making “exactly the wrong kind of impact.” Former Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has thrown his support behind the campaign to endorse Cambridge Zero Carbon’s official report which outlines the case for divestment. The Guardian also carries the story.

Europe’s highest court has ordered a recalculation of free Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) allocations to 2020, a move expected to raise costs for heavy industry by cutting its share of Phase 3 allowances by as much as 105m tonnes or 1.6%, while also having implications for the way the units are handed out in the future. The European Court of Justice ruled that the European Commission’s Cross Sectoral Correction Factor calculations to decide free EUA allocation are invalid, supporting a November opinion by a court advisor that regulators had set too high a ceiling for distribution and thus handed out too many free units. It gave the Commission 10 months to establish a new amount but that this would not affect annual allocations already handed out, the court said in its verdict released Thursday. Reuters also reports the news.

Saudi Arabia’s oil output will edge up close to record highs in coming weeks to meet summer demand for power, but is unlikely to be pushed to the limit and flood global markets, according to Saudi-based industry sources. Production may rise to around 10.5m barrels per day (bpd) during summer, the sources said. Supply in April has held steady to slightly lower at about 10.15m bpd, said three industry sources who monitor Saudi output. The predictions may help ease market fears that Saudi Arabia could steeply add to a global glut after production-freeze talks in Qatar this month collapsed following Riyadh’s refusal to sign the deal without participation by Iran. Meanwhile, the Financial Times reports that scepticism is growing over plans announced this week by Saudi’s deputy crown prince for a programme of privatisation in the cradle-to-grave Saudi state.

Scientists say they have made a startling discovery about the link between domestic oil and gas development and the world’s levels of atmospheric ethane — a carbon compound that can both damage air quality and contribute to climate change. A new study in the journal Geophysical Research Letters has revealed that the Bakken Shale formation, a region of intensely increasing recent oil production centered in North Dakota and Montana, accounts for about 2% of the entire world’s ethane output — and, in fact, may be partly responsible for reversing a decades-long decline in global ethane emissions. The Washington Post explains that ethane is technically a greenhouse gas, although its lifetime is so short that it is not considered a primary threat to the climate. That said, its presence can help extend the lifespan of methane — a more potent greenhouse gas — in the atmosphere. This, coupled with ethane’s role in the formation of ozone, makes it a significant environmental concern.

The chairman of Royal Dutch Shell, Charles Holliday, has joined executives from BHP Billiton and other big energy companies on a new body exploring whether some of the fossil fuels that businesses such as theirs produce should stay in the ground. The chief executive of Germany’s RWE, Peter Terium, has also joined the Energy Transitions Commission, which was set up by certain energy companies, investors and non-governmental organisations, and is chaired by Lord Adair Turner, former chairman of the chief UK financial regulator. The commission will produce a series of papers this year on how to create low carbon energy systems that enable strong economic growth while meeting the aims of the global climate change accord agreed in Paris in December.

Randall, who runs the Climate and Migration Coalition, has produced a richly visual article responding to how to the media has started connecting climate change with the conflict in Syria and subsequent refugee movements across Europe. “When journalists and commentators responded to the situation in Syria and new academic research, they did so with mixed levels of accuracy…Many journalists and commentators also included predictions about future episodes of climate driven human movement. These predictions about the kind of movement that might happen are not well supported by existing evidence.”

Darby says that the double trigger that would bring the Paris agreement into force – 55 countries accounting for 55% of global greenhouse gas emissions – is “tantalisingly close” following pledges by a series of countries to ratify the deal this year. “The largest polluter not on the list is the EU, which represents 12% of emissions. Despite ambitious positioning in UN climate talks, the 28 member states are expected to take a couple of years to thrash out their contributions to the EU-wide target. Yet lawyers say it is technically possible for European countries to break ranks and ratify early. Germany and the UK or France represent a big enough carbon footprint.”

As it stands, says the chief executive of the Carbon Trust, the pledged annual US$100bn of climate finance, “won’t deliver – other than by sheer chance – the scale or pace of carbon emission reductions that the science tells us will be required”. Delay adds: “Past evidence shows that even when there is a positive effect, the amount of carbon saved per dollar invested is often low. And, there is currently no single body with overall responsibility for quantifying the impact of all these projects and sector initiatives, reconciling them with science-based outcomes…This is an occasion where development banks and investors might be able to take the lead from the corporate sector. Almost 150 big businesses – including Ikea, Unilever, Axa, Toyota and BT – are now committed to science-based sustainability targets based on a 2 degree trajectory.”

BusinessGreen lists the seven ideas inside a new Policy Connect report which sets out recommendations for how to transform the UK’s “increasingly moribund energy efficiency market into a major decarbonisation initiative”. They include: “Domestic energy efficiency policy shouldn’t just be about financial savings”; “Consider emulating the Dutch ‘Energiesprong’ approach”; and ” Provide policy security and genuine financial mechanisms”.

The two Lords have written a short follow-up letter to the Times about the quality of its climate change coverage: “Sir, Matt Ridley misses the point of the personal letter to the Editor of The Times that we signed with 11 other peers. The letter was not an attack on free speech and we clearly stated that a free press is essential for a healthy democracy. Our point is that misleading stories on the science of climate change undermine the credibility of The Times. We expressed particular concern that the views of the Global Warming Policy Foundation appear to be unduly influential. That it was an adviser to GWPF who criticised us in your pages adds to our concern. The letter was discussed with several people, including the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, but it was from the 13 peers and not from anyone else.”

“Climate denial is largely limited to a small and dwindling group of old, white, male conservatives,” says Nuccitelli, “hence, it’s not a tenable long-term position for the Republican Party. He adds: “Like opposition to gay marriage, science denial is a position that will increasingly alienate young voters in particular, who will bear the brunt of the consequences of climate inaction. The party’s chosen path has also resulted in the Donald Trump candidacy, which has GOP leadership in a panic. For these reasons, a rebound away from extreme partisanship and towards reality may be imminent.”

Models used to forecast wildfire damage in the future should account for human behaviour as well as climate change, a new study says. Climate change affects the severity of the fire season and the amount and type of vegetation on the land, the researchers say – and humans contribute another set of factors, such as where structures are built, and how and where fires are started. Looking back at fires in California since 1975, the study finds that human behaviour explains as much about wildfire frequency and location as climate influences.