The Financial Times reports that “big investors have urged companies to maintain their focus on reducing carbon emissions, even as businesses grapple with the economic fallout of coronavirus”. It continues: “Eight investment groups, including BNP Paribas Asset Management, DWS and Comgest Asset Management, told [the FT] that tackling global warming must continue to be a priority for public companies, despite unprecedented pressure on businesses globally after government measures to tackle the pandemic left whole sectors unable to operate. The investors said businesses would be given leeway when it came to climate change this year, but warned against backtracking on targets to reduce carbon emissions.”

Meanwhile, in other coronavirus-related developments, BBC News reports today that the “price of US oil has fallen to a level not seen since 1999”, adding: “The price of a barrel of West Texas Intermediate, the benchmark for US oil, dropped 14% to $15.65 in Asia trading on Monday. The oil market has come under intense pressure during the coronavirus pandemic with a huge slump in demand. US storage facilities are now struggling to cope with the glut of oil, weakening prices further.” The Guardian says that “giant oil tankers are being used to hold record amounts of crude at sea due to a global oversupply that threatens to overwhelm the world’s storage facilities”. In a separate article, the Guardian also reports that “the US shale industry is expected to shrink by more than 2m barrels a day following a collapse in global oil prices which has forced oil producers to shut down their fracking rigs”. The Independent reports that “a leaked letter from Canada’s largest oil and gas lobby to the country’s government has revealed more than 30 requests to suspend environmental regulations, laws and policies due to the coronavirus pandemic”. Other publications focus on how reduced demand for energy has affected other sectors. Bloomberg notes how “a dozen Chinese anthracite coal miners have called on the industry to slash production by 10% from current levels amid weak demand caused by the coronavirus outbreak”. It comes as Austria shuts down its last coal power station, according to Associated Press. BBC News reports on how the UK’s domestic power demand has changed during Covid-19 lockdown with “home energy use up by up to 30% during the middle of the day…But, overall, the country is actually using less energy because of businesses being closed.” Current News says that “coal generation in the UK has fallen by 35% in the last month due to Covid-19”.

Several publications pick up on the impact the crisis is having on airlines. Politico say that “airlines [are bracing] for climate strings attached to coronavirus bailouts” but “with the industry desperate for cash, Brussels and EU capitals are sticking to their green guns”. EurActiv says that, according to Austria’s environment minister, “coronavirus state aid for Austrian Airlines should support efforts to cut aviation’s carbon footprint”. In the US, the Guardian reports that the crisis is “leading to a slew of near-empty flights”. Finally, Reuters reports that “Airbus CEO Guillaume Faury is proposing a government support programme to help airlines convert their fleets to more environmentally friendly planes, according to an interview given by Faury to Der Spiegel magazine”. The newswire adds: “Faury also warned against new tax burdens for airlines…’The governments should rather support the airlines in the climate-friendly conversion of their fleets.’”

This weekend saw the first online Citizens Assembly UK, reports the Thomson Reuters Foundation, which is tasked with drawing up a set of recommendations for how Britain should meet its net-zero emissions goal by 2050. The outlet continues: “With coronavirus restrictions now in place on public gatherings, the assembly this weekend was held for the first time online – a change some assembly members saw as a ‘test run’ for potential climate-smart shifts they had been discussing.” BusinessGreen says the meeting was the first of “several virtual meetings to run from mid-April to late May to help the group complete their work and finalise recommendations to be put before the parliamentary committees”. The move comes as the Spectator reported yesterday that Number 10 is exploring how to combine its three top long term priorities – Brexit, ‘levelling up’ the country’s regions, and delivering net-zero emissions – in a post-coronavirus recovery plan. ‘We’re emphatic that we’re not interested in the status quo ante,’ one cabinet minister told the magazine.“ The Press Association via ITV News says: “Sarah Allan, from Involve, the charity commissioned by Parliament to facilitate the assembly, said members had been very sad when the final meeting was postponed, though they understood the move. Participants expressed an ‘overwhelming feeling’ that they wanted to carry on the work of the assembly, she said.” Climate Home News reports that the same decision has been made in France: “France’s citizens’ assembly was launched following ‘yellow vest’ protests that were sparked by a 2018 hike in fuel tax. It was tasked to come up with measures to reduce the country’s emissions at least 40% by 2030 from 1990 levels ‘in a spirit of social justice’.” Climate Home News has also got hold of some of the French draft propositions, which will now be voted on in the final session.

Several outlets in the US report on fresh remarks made by the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden about climate change. The New York Post note that Biden says the coronavirus crisis offers an “opportunity” to make shifts in the way Americans consider global warming policy. Speaking at a CNN-hosted town-hall event last Thursday, Biden said: “We have an opportunity now to take in a recovery act, a real recovery. We can fundamentally change the science relating to global warming. And we can create, seriously create 10m good-paying jobs. We can do it. It’s within our power to do it.” The Guardian says that the Biden camp is now “courting” the progressive favourite and climate hawk Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: “The discussions, she said, revolved around his policy positions on healthcare, immigration and climate change. These discussions are part of a wider effort by the Biden campaign to engage progressive leaders and organisers.” The Hill, meanwhile, reports that “ex-campaign staffers for former presidential candidate Jay Inslee are reviving the Washington governor’s ambitious climate plan by pitching an updated proposal to congressional Democrats and the Biden campaign”. It adds: “The new plan is a condensed version of Inslee’s 200-page climate manifesto but contains many of the same objectives: transitioning to 100% clean electricity by 2035, slashing subsidies for the fossil fuel industry, creating a Climate Conservation Corps, and revitalising the economy through investment in green technology and clean energy.”

BBC News reports that the veteran climate scientist Sir John Houghton has died aged 88 from suspected Covid-19 symptoms. It adds: “The Denbighshire-born climate change scientist, who described global warming as ‘a weapon of mass destruction’, was co-chair of the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] when it shared the Nobel Peace Prize [in 2007]…In 1958 he became an Oxford professor, later becoming chair of the World Climate Research Programme.” Anadolu also describes the career of the “legendary” scientist: “In the 1980s he was the chairman of the Joint Scientific Committee of the World Climate Research Program. He was designated director-general of the UK Meteorological Office in 1983 until 1991. In 1988 was the year the first IPCC was created and Houghton was also co-chair of its scientific assessment working group until 2002. He was lead editor of the first three IPCC reports.”

There is continued reaction to how the coronavirus crisis might impact efforts to tackle climate change. An editorial in the Melbourne Age says: “Surely if there is one lesson to be learnt from Covid-19, it is that credible warnings of worst-case scenarios threatening the planet should no longer be branded as fear mongering or put in the too-hard basket. As some warned of a future pandemic, thousands of scientists have sent up the red flag over the consequences of global warming…If there is one lesson for governments it is that they must finally put politics aside on climate change and, as they have with Covid-19, let science lead the way in finding a solution…Kickstarting and rebuilding the economy in a way that prioritises tackling climate change would go a long way in ensuring that does not happen.” Writing on LinkedIn, Fatih Birol, the International Energy Agency’s executive director, says: “Accelerating wind and solar PV can be pillars of post-pandemic stimulus efforts, making a vital contribution to efforts to accelerate clean energy transitions. Meanwhile, two important emerging technologies for clean energy progress – lithium-ion batteries and hydrogen electrolysers – are at the stage in their development where wind and solar were in 2008-2009. They have the potential to be the coming decade’s breakout technologies.” IPCC scientist Adelle Thomas, writing for Climate Home News, says “the pandemic is a new setback for island states already suffering from climate change and storms such as Cyclone Harold and Hurricane Dorian”. She continues: “Budgets allocated to address cyclones may likely be limited as nations have had to transfer scarce resources into the urgent needs presented by the pandemic…It will be critical to ensure that climate resiliency is ingrained in the response to the pandemic in SIDS and that strong climate action continues to be supported.” E&E News reporter Benjamin Storrow speaks to a number of scientists about the forecasted fall [including Carbon Brief’s analysis] in global CO2 emissions this year. He quotes Shahzeen Attari, a professor who studies human behaviour and climate change at the University of Indiana, who says: “I think what we need is structural change, and that comes from transitioning our entire energy system, the type of vehicles we buy, electricity we consume, weatherising our homes. Individuals can, in aggregate, push the system, but we need to figure out these pathways of pushing the system.” In the Boston Globe, writer Mary Annaïse Heglar says: “There’s a specific role I want to play in this child’s life, and it has everything to do with the world this beautiful, curious little boy has entered: one shaped by a climate in decline, deeply scarred by one pandemic and more sure to come. I want to help teach him about his place in a vast and wondrous ecosystem.”

Meanwhile, in the Financial Times, Megan Greene from the Harvard Kennedy School argues against the US government bailing out the oil industry: “A bailout would throw good money after bad, propping up an industry desperately in need of productivity gains and consolidation.” And an editorial in the New York Times uses the 10th anniversary of the Deep Water oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico to look at the fate of coastal communities in the region: “So far, their only dependable financing model has been the revenue from the catastrophic spill, but the BP money won’t last forever. One thing the state had been counting on is a steady stream of money from offshore oil leases under a 2006 revenue-sharing law passed by Congress. Which implies a robust oil industry, which in turn means more risk of offshore spills and more emissions of climate-forcing emissions from automobile tailpipes, which in turn means more sea level rise. One more argument, if any were needed, to wean the country off a carbon-based economy.”

The New York Times has a feature on how the “coronavirus is closing meatpacking plants, adding to financial strains from the China trade war and the rise of ‘fake’ meat alternatives”. it adds: “On top of that, the meat business had been attracting growing scrutiny for its climate change consequences in recent years, with scientists and environmentalists urging Americans to eat less meat, particularly beef. Meanwhile, an editorial in the Guardian argues that “the British food system, as well as individuals’ diets, needs to be balanced. Price is not the only factor.” It continues: “Because of Brexit and the climate crisis, food had risen from its previously lowly position on the political agenda…Change will not be easy. Our food system is complicated, as is the global one of which it is part. Competing priorities – including price, animal welfare, carbon footprint and consumer preference – produce inevitable conflicts. But some beneficial effects could follow from our having been forced to take more notice. What we grow and eat are the result of political choices.”

Ben Marlow, the Daily Telegraph’s chief City commentator, is not impressed with Shell’s new “net-zero” vision: “[Combined with BP’s own recently announced vision] these promises to cut carbon emissions are at odds with reality. Over that same 30-year time frame that BP laid out, the supermajor is projected to spend $71bn (£55bn) on new drilling. Shell’s spending will also be in the tens of billions, so the ‘net-zero’ claim doesn’t mean zero at all. Shell’s plan will inevitably be compared to BP’s and not just because they are arch-rivals but because in the premiership of polluters they stand an unenviable seventh and sixth respectively. Still, Shell can claim to have gone further by also laying out interim targets for it to be judged upon, including tackling so-called ‘scope three’ emissions produced by customers such as airlines by more than a third by 2030.” He continues: “There are some wishy-washy commitments to ramping up carbon capture storage and investing more in renewable energy and biofuels but overall the picture is still far too vague to be taken seriously. With this grand announcement Shell will have been hoping for a big pat on the back. But until it provides some proper detail, the most it deserves is a golfer’s clap.” BusinessGreen also has a feature on the topic in which it lays out the “five key takeaways” from Shell’s vision: “Questions will persist as to whether credible carbon offsets can be delivered at sufficient scale to cover for the continued operation of carbon intensive industries.”

Many parts of the world could see large increases in drought frequency and severity by the end of the 21st century, even if actions to tackle climate change are significantly increased, a study finds. Hotspots for drought increase include western North America, Central America, Europe and the Mediterranean, the Amazon, southern Africa, China, Southeast Asia, and Australia, according to the projections from Phase Six of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). It is worth noting, however, that drought risk will be significantly higher if little action is taken to tackle climate change, the authors add.

Global warming of more than 2C above pre-industrial levels could cause mountain forest ecosystems to pass a tipping point, a new study finds. Passing such a threshold could see mountain forests shift from conifer‐dominated landscapes characterised by large trees to landscapes dominated by smaller, predominantly broadleaved trees, the authors say. They add: “Our results show that overshooting ambitious climate mitigation targets could be dangerous, as ecological impacts can be irreversible at millennial time scales once a tipping point has been crossed.”