Deforestation rates in the Brazilian Amazon have “retreat[ed] from a 15-year high under outgoing president Jair Bolsonaro”, Reuters reports, citing the latest annual data from the national space agency Inpe. Forest loss fell 11% from a year earlier, it says, adding that this was “still more Amazon deforestation than any year from 2009 to 2020”. The newswire adds: “Ane Alencar, science director at the Amazon Environmental Research Institute, said that there has been no change in Bolsonaro’s policy of weakening environmental agencies to explain the drop in deforestation. Alencar and [Marcio] Astrini said that it was impossible to know immediately why deforestation fell, saying perhaps weather or economic cycles could be a factor.” Al Jazeera notes incoming president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva is seeking to “restore protection for the vital rainforest”. Another Reuters article says Lula “proposes pact to curb Brazilian soy linked to savanna deforestation”.

Investments in protecting and managing nature need to reach $384bn a year by 2025, more than double current levels, Reuters says, based on a report from the UN Environment Programme. It reports: “The calculation will inform a biodiversity summit starting next week in Montreal, Canada, where countries will try to agree on a deal to protect nature and wildlife from further losses and degradation of species and landscapes.” New Scientist previews the upcoming UN COP15 biodiversity summit, explaining: “Participants are holding out hope that the meeting could be as consequential for stemming biodiversity loss as the landmark 2015 Paris Agreement was for action on climate change.” BusinessGreen carries a comment from the RSPB’s Mark Varney on the “importance of COP15”. The Independent says: “The [UK] government is risking ‘major embarrassment on the world stage’ at the UN’s forthcoming biodiversity summit when it kicks off in Montreal, Canada, next week, campaigners have warned.”

There is continued coverage of the volcanic eruption at Mauna Loa, Hawaii, where the Guardian says: “The world’s premier measurement site for global carbon dioxide levels has been shut down.” The paper reports: “The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa), which oversees the facility, said that power lines to the observatory have been cut and an access road to the site is now inaccessible due to the flow of lava coming from the volcano.” It adds: “Measurement of the world’s CO2 levels, which has been ongoing at Mauna Loa since 1958 and has become a crucial benchmark in the escalation of the climate crisis, has been paused due to the eruption, with the observatory’s eight-strong scientific staff unable to access its instruments. A Noaa spokeswoman said that scientists are trying to formulate an alternative plan to continue the measurement of CO2, such as moving equipment to an alternative site.” The Associated Press reports the story, but notes: “There are hundreds of other carbon dioxide monitoring sites across the globe.” It adds: “During the 1984 Mauna Loa eruption the station was knocked out for 36 days but the global monitoring continued and long-term records are still complete, [lab associate director Colm] Sweeney said.” Citing Sweeney and another researcher, the newswire says the current eruption is “unlikely” to change global temperatures much. Axios also has the story.

The Pacific island nation of Vanuatu has published a draft UN resolution asking the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion on “states’ legal obligation for climate action and the consequences of causing harm”, reports Climate Home News. It says the court has no binding authority but “could inform lawsuits around the world and strengthen countries’ position in international negotiations”. The outlet says: “The draft resolution aims to establish the legal avenues for climate justice for present and future generations. It was prepared with a broad coalition of 17 countries, including Angola, Bangladesh, Germany, Mozambique, New Zealand, Portugal and Vietnam and a number of small island states.” It reports: “Kevin Chand, a legal advisor to Vanuatu’s permanent mission at the UN, told Climate Home more than 100 countries have indicated they will support the resolution – over the simple majority threshold of countries needed to give the ICJ a mandate in a vote at the UN general assembly.” The publication continues: “Experts have argued that the ICJ’s opinion could give prominence to the question of support for victims of climate disaster, known as ‘loss and damage’…The resolution doesn’t explicitly ask the court whether countries have a duty to provide loss and damage support – leaving it to the court to decide whether to weigh in on the issue.”

Meanwhile, an editorial in the Los Angeles Times says: “The creation of a loss and damage fund is an important, if overdue, step toward climate justice and one of the top agenda items at the COP27 summit.” However, the piece is titled: “UN climate fund will become a money pit if we don’t stop burning fossil fuels.” Climate Home News says that “while the moral case for China paying in [to the loss and damage fund] is weaker, it could be a gamechanger if it did”. Separately, Reuters reports that the UN “will ask for 25% more money in 2023 to fund humanitarian aid operations globally”.

In the Washington Examiner, climate-sceptic British peer Dan Hannan writes: “The demands for climate reparations from wealthy countries are so absurd, so unscientific, and so offensive to natural justice that it is difficult to know where the criticism should begin. The argument is that, since countries that industrialised earlier produced a lot of carbon a hundred years ago, they now owe a debt to poorer states.” (Current global warming is a direct result of cumulative historical carbon dioxide emissions. The 23 developed countries required to provide finance under the UN climate convention, including the US and the UK, have 12% of the world’s population but are responsible for more than half of historical emissions from fossil fuels.) Finally, the Daily Mail reports: “Climate change will trigger migration to the UK that will make current, conflict-driven levels seem like ‘nothing’, the former head of MI5 has warned.”

The Australian government says it is on track to cut emissions to 40% below 2005 levels by 2030, slightly behind its recently boosted target of 43%, ABC News reports. It quotes climate and energy minister Chris Bowen saying he is “pleased, but not satisfied” with the projections and adding that the government sees the 43% goal as “a floor not a ceiling”. Reuters reports: “Australia is on track to meet recently beefed up climate action targets once a raft of new measures, including a A$15bn ($10bn) national reconstruction fund, is implemented, the government said on Thursday.” Carbon Pulse reports: “Australia will have to increase its emissions reduction rate to about 17m tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year – a 40% increase from current rates – if it intends to reach its 2030 and and 2050 climate goals, the country’s climate change minister said in a speech to parliament on Thursday. It quotes Bowen saying: “A third of Australia’s emissions come from our electricity system. Over the next eight years, we will need to transition our electricity system to 82% renewables, from the current base of around 30%.” It also quotes him saying that the country was only on track to cut emissions 30% by 2030 under the previous government.

Elsewhere, the Guardian’s Temperature Check column by Graham Readfearn quotes Bill Hare of Climate Analytics saying that while Australia’s 2030 target is “a major improvement” it is “still far from 1.5C aligned”. Separately, the Guardian reports: “Banks expect to reduce lending to households and businesses in northern Australia and to fossil fuel industries across the country as the risk of losses due to the climate crisis escalates, the industry regulator says.”

The EU’s energy chief has defended a proposed cap on gas prices “after a backlash from EU member states”, Reuters reports. It adds: “EU country diplomats will discuss the proposal on Friday, aiming to negotiate a final version for their energy ministers to approve at an emergency meeting on 13 December.” Separately, Bloomberg reports that EU states “are discussing capping the price of Russian crude oil at $60 a barrel to help secure an agreement among the bloc’s wider membership and the broader Group of Seven, according to people familiar with the matter”. It explains: “The aim of the price cap – first proposed by the US amid concern EU sanctions were too strict – is to keep Russian oil flowing to avoid a global price spike, while also limiting Moscow’s revenue.” Reuters says the Biden administration “broke its silence on Wednesday on European Union deliberations over a $65-70 per barrel Russian oil price cap on Wednesday, warning far-lower prices cited for some Russian Urals crude shipments should be approached with caution”. Another Bloomberg article is titled: “Why finding a real Russian oil price cap is proving so hard.”

Meanwhile, the Financial Times reports Europe’s business leaders “turn more upbeat”: “Sentiment picks up after immediate threat of power blackouts recedes.” Politico reports: “The energy emergency is making this winter difficult but next year will be even tougher, International Energy Agency executive director Fatih Birol warned during a Politico event on Wednesday.”

China is “deploying both domestic and overseas energy resources to ensure stable supplies for winter heating”, while “further optimising” the country’s energy mix to “enhance supply security amid a complex international energy situation”, the Global Times writes, adding that “officials stressed on Wednesday that energy supply remains sufficient and stable”. The state-run newspaper says that industry analysts also “expect overall stable energy supply” for this winter and spring 2023 thanks to policy measures to increase energy output that will “effectively relieve supply pressure”. The South China Morning Post writes that China has “commended” energy cooperation and the importance of gas supplies from Kazakhstan during the “first high-level meetings” between the two nations since the Covid-19 outbreak. Chinese premier Li Keqiang is quoted saying: “Energy cooperation is the cornerstone of pragmatic cooperation between the two countries. It is hoped that Kazakhstan will ensure a stable gas supply to China in accordance with the contract and increase gas supply during winter as much as possible.”

Meanwhile, the Washington Post writes that “competition is heating up” between China and the US in the southern Pacific, with each “seeking to build influence among island nations that haven’t received much superpower attention since World War II”. The “stakes rose” in 2022 when the Solomon Islands signed a security accord with Beijing – a “first” for the region – “raising fears in Australia and New Zealand, both US allies, about a possible Chinese military base in the neighbourhood”, the article adds. It stresses that this “prompted a flurry of diplomacy and pledges of aid and cooperation in areas including climate change, which is seen as an existential threat by the island nations because of rising sea levels”. The Diplomat has an article by Robert Sutter, titled: “US China policy is about more than China.” The Ecologist has published an article by Jonathan Neale, a climate activist, who writes: “As with covid in China, the struggle over what to do about the environment will also be a struggle over who has power and what they do with it.”

Separately, Caixin Global reports that “reversing China’s real estate downturn will require broader efforts than just financing support and will depend more heavily on an overall economic recovery from China’s stringent pandemic controls”, quoting experts. Finally, Shanghai-based financial outlet Yicai writes that “speculation that China’s fuel vehicle purchase tax reduction policy may be extended” caused the shares of several Chinese automakers to “surge by their upper trading limit” today.

Local electricity grid operators have had £22bn in investment approved for the five-year period 2023-2028, Press Association reports, adding that regulator Ofgem “promised it will force them to shell out despite not allowing them to charge more for their services”. It continues: “The regulator said the local operators of the grid will have to reduce their operating costs and tap into their profits to deliver one of the biggest transformations of the country’s energy systems for decades.” The Times takes a different tack, reporting: “Power network companies will be able to charge households more than previously expected over the next five years after Ofgem eased a planned clampdown on their profits.” It explains that the £22bn in investment will go towards “operating their networks and upgrading them ready to cope with increased numbers of heat pumps and electric vehicles” and that Ofgem will not allow charges on bills to rise. However, it says “the settlement is more generous to the companies than Ofgem’s draft proposals in the summer, which would have actually reduced the charges on energy bills”. Bloomberg also has the story.

Separately, Bloomberg reports: “The boss of one of the world’s biggest renewable energy companies, Iberdrola SA, told the UK government it will boost investment despite a windfall tax on low-carbon power producers.”

India’s presidency of the G20, which begins this week, will have to “focus on forging unity within a disparate grouping to tackle larger global challenges such as an economic slowdown, indebtedness and the climate crisis amid persisting divisions over the Ukraine conflict”, the Hindustan Times reports. This approach will necessitate engagement “with all G20 members, including China, which is engaged in a dragging border standoff with India”, it adds.

The G20 forum represents both developing and developed countries accounting “for over 80% of global GDP, about 75% of its commerce and 60% of the population” and has acquired increasing importance, Deutsche Welle reports. However, “tensions among the grouping’s members have been on the rise over the Ukraine conflict, trade disputes and soaring prices of food and fuel worldwide, among other problems”, which the government in New Delhi must be expected to steer. According to DW, “India is expected to host over 200 G20 working group meetings, scheduled to take place in various locations across the South Asian country.”

India’s G20 priorities on issues such as climate change would be shaped in consultation with other global south countries “whose voice[s] often goes unheard”, reports Pakistan’s Dawn. At the latest G20 summit in Bali last month, members agreed to “pursue efforts to limit the rise in global temperatures to 1.5C including speeding up efforts to phase down the unabated use of coal”, the outlet adds, pointing out that “India, the world’s second-biggest consumer of coal, said it would prioritise a phased transition to cleaner fuels and the slashing of household consumption to achieve net-zero emissions by 2070.”

The Daily Telegraph, as well as many Indian newspapers, have published a G20-focused comment piece by Indian prime minister Narendra Modi (see below).

In the Daily Telegraph (and several other outlets – see above), India’s president Narendra Modi writes of his approach to the G20 presidency over the year ahead: “India’s G20 agenda will be inclusive, ambitious, action-oriented, and decisive. Let us join together to make India’s G20 presidency a presidency of healing, harmony and hope.” Modi says: “Today, we do not need to fight for our survival – our era need not be one of war. Indeed, it must not be! Today, the greatest challenges we face – climate change, terrorism, and pandemic – can be solved not by fighting each other but only by acting together.” He adds: “For healing our planet, we will encourage sustainable and environment-friendly lifestyles, based on India’s tradition of trusteeship towards nature. For promoting harmony within the human family, we will seek to depoliticise the global supply of food, fertilisers and medical products, so that geopolitical tensions do not lead to humanitarian crises.”

In a comment for the i newspaper, chief political commentator Paul Waugh says onshore wind “is now one of the cheapest, quickest forms of power available” and “the government’s own surveys say it is popular”. He writes: “Sunak has an outside chance of the Tories denying Labour victory at the next election, but his bigger prize is to restore his party’s reputation for doing the right thing. He may have done that in stabilising the economy, he’s yet to do it on green jobs.”

Meanwhile, the Independent reports new polling: “46% of [UK] adults believe bills including food, fuel and energy would not be as high today if earlier action had been taken to tackle climate change.” The i newspaper reports figures from the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit showing bills would be lower this winter if the government had not effectively banned onshore wind in England.

In the Independent, Donnachadh McCarthy writes under the headline: “The government is scamming us on insulation.” He says the recently-announced £6bn for energy efficiency is “not new money for this parliament, but just a promise to keep the current programme running in the next parliament, albeit with a significant cut”. BusinessGreen says a survey has found buyers are willing to pay an extra 10.5% more for energy efficiency homes.

For the Daily Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph editor Allister Heath has a comment trailed on the paper’s frontpage saying the country is “fast descending into chaos”. He writes: “The 1970s theme is toxic, and extends to energy: incredibly, the government has no plan to massively build up our supplies. [The energy security strategy, published earlier this year, aims to boost domestic supplies of oil, gas, nuclear and renewables.] It is wedded to net-zero, but too debilitated to work out how to organise the transition. All new cars will be electric, and yet there won’t be enough power to charge them. We are about to enter an era of rolling blackouts, of chaos and misery.” [The latest National Grid Electricity System Operator winter outlook says its “base case” is that margins will be adequate. It says there are scenarios where this might be challenged “driven principally by factors outside of Great Britain” but adds: “These scenarios are not forecasts and they do not indicate an expectation or likelihood of these situations materialising.” The outlook does not consider the likelihood of “misery” or other emotional turmoil that may or may not be induced this winter among certain members of the commentariat.] Elsewhere, the Guardian reports on the Rough gas storage site off the coast of Yorkshire, which has now reopened: “Ministers hope Rough’s extra supplies can complement other measures to reduce pressure on the energy supplies this winter – from putting coal plants on standby to National Grid incentivising firms and consumers to cut energy usage.”

The world lost an area of salt marsh equivalent to twice the size of Singapore between 2000 and 2019, a new study finds, resulting in 16m tonnes of CO2e emissions per year. Using Landsat satellite imagery, the researchers quantify the loss, gain and recovery of salt marsh ecosystems and then estimate the impact of these changes on blue carbon stocks. They find a net loss of salt marshes amounting to 719 square kilometres over this period, with Russia and the US accounting for 64% of the losses, which was “driven by hurricanes and coastal erosion”.