A new report from the International Energy Agency (IEA) shows that global coal consumption is set to rise to an all-time high in 2022 and remain at similar levels in the next few years if stronger efforts are not made to move to a low-carbon economy, says Reuters. The newswire adds: “High gas prices following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and consequent disruptions to supply have led some countries to turn to relatively cheaper coal this year. Heatwaves and droughts in some regions have also driven up electricity demand and reduced hydropower, while nuclear generation has also been very weak, especially in Europe, where France had to shut down nuclear reactors for maintenance. The IEA’s annual report on coal forecasts global coal use is set to rise by 1.2% this year, exceeding 8 billion tonnes in a single year for the first time and a previous record set in 2013. It also predicts that coal consumption will remain flat at that level to 2025 as falls in mature markets are offset by continued strong demand in emerging Asian economies.” The Financial Times says “the trend flies in the face of pledges made at the UN climate talks last year, when 194 countries pledged to phase down their use of coal to curb emissions”. It continues: “The three largest producers – China, India and Indonesia – will all reach production records in 2022, according to the IEA. ”

Reuters reports that European Union negotiators will meet today “to attempt to strike a deal on an overhaul of the bloc’s carbon market, its main policy tool for fighting climate change, plus a multi-billion-euro fund to shield poorer citizens from CO2 costs”. The newswire adds: “At stake is the EU’s ability to contribute to global efforts to fight climate change, and achieve its target to cut net greenhouse gas emissions 55% by 2030 from 1990 levels…’It is the biggest environmental and climate law that Europe ever dealt with,‘ the European Parliament’s lead negotiator Peter Liese said. Officials from EU countries and the EU assembly, who must both agree the final law, said it was unclear if a deal would be struck, given the large number of unresolved issues. Negotiators are considering a potential compromise that would cut emissions covered by the carbon market 62% by 2030 from 2005 levels – between the 63% sought by EU parliament and the 61% countries back. Other issues appear harder to solve. Negotiators are at odds over how quickly to end the free CO2 permits the EU gives industries to protect them from foreign competition.” Politico says in its headline that “weekend showdown looms for EU carbon pricing revamp”.

Several outlets cover the latest twists and turns at the COP15 biodiversity talks taking place in Montreal as some countries have pledged new funds to help restore nature. BBC News says that “progress has stalled amid disagreement on how to fund conservation efforts in poorer countries”. It adds: “It’s hoped the new commitments will provide momentum for an agreement on protecting a third of the planet for nature. But environmental groups have warned that political will must be turned into concrete agreement if the talks are to succeed…The conference is into its second week but progress has been slow with rows over finance and little sign of compromise.” Reuters says that the talks have “made progress in considering some 23 conservation targets to go into the final pact before the summit ends on 19 December delegates said…but entrenched positions by the European Union, Latin American countries, and the African group were keeping the talks snagged on the most contentious issues – providing billions of dollars of funding for conservation, and protecting at least 30% of land and sea by 2030”.

The Times begins its story, saying: “Britain, the EU and other countries are working to unblock stalled talks on a deal to avert ‘ecological disaster on Earth’ by pledging $10bn a year in nature finance for poorer nations. The commitment comes after Canada’s environment minister said that wealthier countries needed to offer developing nations money for nature protection similar to the $100bn pledged for climate change.” The Guardian notes that the “Australian and US governments have signed an agreement on the sidelines of a global summit on biodiversity, promising to better measure the economic value of nature and reflect it in national accounts”. BusinessGreen reports that “environment Secretary Therese Coffey has…announced the UK has earmarked £34m in new funding to support developing countries in their efforts to protect and restore nature”. While New Scientist says that “Chinese president Xi Jinping has urged delegates at the COP15 summit in Montreal to ‘turn ambition into action’ as discussions on a new set of global goals for nature enter their final stretch”. Climate Home News says China “has organised crisis talks to unlock negotiations, but tensions remain”.

Meanwhile, the Economist says that “reaching an agreement will be even harder than it was over climate change”. Gillian Tett in the Financial Times comments: “If the talks collapse, or only produce a mealy-mouthed deal, the world faces accelerating biodiversity loss. And that is something that investors, business leaders and everyone else should shriek about – very loudly.” And in the New York Times, Michael Grunwald has a COP15-facing comment piece under the headline: “No one wants to say ‘put down that burger,’ but we really should.”

Financial executives and Texas state senators have clashed over company concerns for climate change at a hearing, reports Reuters, which it describes as “a rare in-person confrontation as Republicans ramp up attacks on the use of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in investing”. The newswire continues: “Texas Republicans at the hearing, which was webcast, questioned whether the participation of BlackRock Inc and State Street Corp in industry efforts to cut emissions put too much pressure on portfolio companies…Even as they take heat from energy-producing US states, asset managers have faced pressure from climate activists and Democrats to take more environmental action. With some $8 trillion under management, BlackRock has been singled out by Texas for alleged over-pressuring of its important energy sector. The company has been penalised under the terms of a new state law to protect fossil fuel companies.” The Financial Times adds that “Texas legislators have excused Vanguard from being grilled on its practices at a hearing on environmental, social and governance investment factors, a week after the asset management giant quit the main global financial alliance on tackling climate change”.

In other US news, Reuters reports that “the US Department of Agriculture said on Thursday it will invest nearly $600m in clean energy projects for farms and rural communities in its effort to cut the nation’s emissions while increasing energy security”. Separately, Reuters reports that Californian regulators voted yesterday to “approve a plan to reduce the state’s carbon-dioxide emissions by 85% by 2045, reaching carbon neutrality then, including by cutting petroleum usage to one-tenth of the current level”. The Guardian says that scientists have discovered a record number of dead fir trees in Oregon, in a “foreboding sign of how drought and the climate crisis are ravaging the American west”.

Finally, Lisa Friedman of the New York Times has written a news feature about the Inflation Reduction Act which is headlined: “How to hand out billions in climate subsidies? Very carefully.”

The UK’s largest North Sea oil producer is refusing to bid for new oil and gas wells and reviewing its investments in response to the government’s “tax raid” on the sector, reports the Daily Telegraph. It adds: “Harbour Energy said it had decided not to bid for new blocks in the ongoing North Sea licensing round, the first since 2019, after the government imposed a windfall tax on oil and gas producers earlier in the year. The company, which has just been demoted to the FTSE 250 after a share price slide, said it was also reviewing investment levels.” Separately, Reuters reports that “Octopus Energy, Britain’s fourth-largest energy supplier, has signed a power purchase agreement with Shell Energy for up to 2.4 terawatt hours (TWh) per year from the Dogger Bank offshore wind farm project”.

Meanwhile, in other UK news, the Daily Mail reports that “the Glasgow climate summit last year cost taxpayers £250m while increasing the air miles flown by civil servants, it has emerged” It continues: “Official figures reveal the staggering amount spent by the government on hosting the COP26 conference, including staff, accommodation and security. Costs for the two-week event totalled £290m, but £40.5m was received in sponsorship cash, including £3m each from Microsoft, National Grid and NatWest.” BusinessGreen says new polling “reveals how voters are more likely to support Labour when they see its leaders talking about climate change”. It adds: “The Labour Climate and Environment Forum (LCEF) has formally launched today, providing a rallying point for supporters of climate action in Labour ranks and a platform for green policy development and promotion.”

Finally, BBC News reports that “UN Climate envoy and ex-Bank of England boss Mark Carney’s firm sold farms in Brazil linked to deforestation claims”.

The German parliament has approved measures to relieve households and companies from rising energy prices by imposing price caps on gas and electricity from 2023, reports Die Zeit. It adds that the Federal Council’s approval, which is still pending, is expected today. The outlet quotes the Greens co-leader Ricarda Lang commenting that the measures turned a “winter of anger” into a “winter of solidarity”, underlining that Russian president Vladimir Putin has used energy as a weapon “to break solidarity with Ukraine and divide society”. However, the outlet notes that the opposition has criticised the measures saying that the federal government is reacting “far too late” to the energy crisis, according to Christian Democratic Union MP Andreas Jung. Der Spiegel explains that the gas “price brakes” guarantee a “gross gas price” for households, as well as small- and medium-sized companies, of 12 cents per kilowatt hour for 80% of their consumption. For heat, it adds, the price should be 9.5 cents for 80%. For the remaining 20% of consumption, the regular contract price should apply – to “keep the saving incentive”, notes the outlet. In addition, for industrial customers, the cost per kilowatt hour is capped at 7 cents net and the relief is limited until April 2024. Manager Magazin adds that the government has promised up to €200bn for electricity and gas price brakes. Reuters reports that Germany has spent half a trillion dollars to “keep the light on”. It quotes Michael Groemling from the German Economic Institute, saying that “the national economy as a whole is facing a huge loss of wealth”.

Meanwhile, Reuters reports that oil refinery in Schwedt will no longer need Russian oil after Poland committed to providing “enough supply” for it to run at 70% capacity from January, according to an economy ministry official in Berlin. The outlet notes that Germany aims to eliminate Russian oil imports by the end of the year, as per European Union sanctions. Die Zeit adds that, according to the state secretary in the economy ministry, “the security of supply can be guaranteed by deliveries via Rostock, Poland and Kazakhstan”. In the future, notes the outlet, more than €700m in state aid will be available for the transformation, including the production of green hydrogen in Schwedt from 2025. Euronews reports that Germany’s gas pipeline companies Gascade, Ontras and Terranets have agreed to convert high-pressure gas pipelines to transport low-carbon hydrogen from the Baltic Sea south of the country by 2025.

Finally, Clean Energy Wire reports that, according to a representative of EnBW, which is one of the largest energy providers in Germany, “a second runtime extension for Germany’s remaining nuclear power plants beyond April 2023 is technically unfeasible and, thus, no option for stabilising the country’s power grid in the winter of 2023-2024”.

The Shanghai-based financial outlet Yicai writes that China’s “economic recovery was plagued by new Covid-19 outbreaks last month as indicators of production, investment and consumption rebounded slower”, according to data released by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) yesterday. The “industrial value added”, which reflects changes in production, rose by 2.2% in November from a year ago, it adds. Tang Weiwei, deputy department director at the NBS, is quoted saying: “Because of the increased short-term impact of Covid-19 outbreaks, industrial production has decreased, but is generally stable from a cumulative perspective.“ Meanwhile, vice premier Liu He has said that China is “considering new measures to help the country’s debt-laden real estate market to improve its balance sheets”, reports Caixin Global.

In other China news, Xinhua reports that, as of the end of November, Fuling, which is China’s “largest shale gas field, has produced more than 53bn cubic metres of shale gas over the past decade since it was discovered in 2012”. The state newswire adds that “shale gas is mainly methane…it is considered a clean new energy resource”. [Shale gas is not a “clean” energy source in terms of its carbon emissions.] The Global Times writes that Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding, a subsidiary of China State Shipbuilding Corp (CSSC), has delivered a “mainstream liquefied natural gas (LNG) carrier 47 days ahead of schedule”, in “another show of China’s growing shipbuilding prowess and ability to ensure energy security”. The state-run newspaper China Daily has a comment piece by Pan Yuanyuan, an associate researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences’ Institute of World Economics and Politics, who writes: “Some people claim that China’s outbound direct investment, particularly for energy and infrastructure construction projects, have increased the host countries’ carbon dioxide emissions. Such arguments neglect the fact that every country has the right to develop its economy and are, thus, ill-founded and out of line with reality. As a matter of fact, China’s ODI [outbound direct investment] has helped reduce host countries’ carbon emissions, making a big contribution to global emissions reduction.”

Writing in the Times, interim director of the right-leaning Onward thinktank Adam Hawksbee and Conservative MP Saqib Bhatti argue that the energy transition will be “disruptive”. They propose a solution: “Many areas of the Midlands and the north have natural advantages when it comes to new green industries. They have close proximity to ports and pools of skilled technical workers that once worked in traditional manufacturing jobs. And they sit right at the heart of the new Conservative voter coalition. The aspirational blue-collar workers that voted for the Conservatives for the first time in 2019 need support to secure the green-collar jobs of the future. This opportunity will only materialise if green factories are built here in Britain.”

The Economist carries an editorial which begins: “As the world turns back to nuclear power, it should heed the lessons from France.” It concludes: “France’s obsession with nuclear power led it to downplay renewables. Today solar and wind drive 9% of its power supply, compared with 25% in Britain. In most countries this logic of diversification works in the other direction. By boosting nuclear-power generation, alongside the growth in renewables that is already under way, they could achieve a more balanced, low-carbon energy mix. Integrating national energy markets with those of neighbouring countries – something France has been wary of – can help increase resilience, too.”

Finally, Reuters carries a comment piece by Gavin Maguire under the headline: “Why G7 aims to crack Vietnam’s coal fix with $15.5bn deal.”

A modelling study on the complex interactions between the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) explores how achieving some aspects of these landmark agendas may compromise others, say the researchers. Some mitigation pathways could negatively affect food and water prices, forest cover and water resources, for example. Factors affecting demand for energy, on the other hand – such as technology choices, consumption, behaviour and lifestyles – could limit the potential for such trade-offs.

A process known as enhanced silicate weathering could, in theory, remove billions of tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere each year but there has been little scientific verification of this technology to date, says a new study. The researchers give an overview of existing literature on enhanced weathering and discuss a new interdisciplinary approach linking low temperature geochemistry and agronomy that they say could provide an effective way to study the potential of enhanced weathering as a carbon dioxide removal technique in field trials.