A huge investment in adapting to climate change over the next decade could yield even larger economic benefits, according to a widely covered new report from the Global Commission on Adaptation, led by figures including Microsoft founder Bill Gates, World Bank chief executive Kristalina Georgieva and former UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon. It says an investment of $1.8tn in the decade to 2030 could return $7.1tn of benefits, Reuters reports, adding that the commission is urging governments to do more on adaptation. It continues: “The report highlights five areas where investment is needed most urgently – early warning systems, climate-resilient infrastructure and water resources, dryland agriculture and mangrove protection.” The Guardian quotes the report foreword, which says: “The climate crisis is here, now: massive wildfires ravage fragile habitats, city taps run dry, droughts scorch the land and massive floods destroy people’s homes and livelihoods. So far the response has been gravely insufficient.” BBC News describes the report as a “global cost-benefit analysis” and says it is led by 34 leaders in politics, business and science. It adds that the commission “argues that it is an urgent moral obligation of richer countries to invest in adaptation measures that will benefit the world”. Agence France Presse quotes the report’s line that there is a need for “a massive effort to adapt to conditions that are now inevitable”. It adds a quote from one of the report’s co-authors, from the UK’s Department for International Development, saying this should not detract from efforts to cut emissions: “The purpose of this commission was to raise the visibility of adaptation, not shift away from mitigation.” Associated Press, Climate Home News, New Scientist, BusinessGreen and Bloomberg all cover the report. The Times also has the story but headlines its coverage: “Coastal homes ‘must be sacrificed to the sea’, the Global Commission on Adaptation says.” It says the UK was one of 20 countries to establish the commission to advise governments on how to adapt to climate change.

Reporting continues in the US over events surrounding President Trump’s incorrect claim that Alabama was at risk from Hurricane Dorian and the subsequent effort by some officials to defend him. The Washington Post reports: “A top NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] official said he would investigate if NOAA violated its scientific integrity policy, while at the same time the director of the National Weather Service broke with NOAA leadership over its support of President Trump’s Alabama tweets and statements.” The paper says NOAA’s acting chief scientist told colleagues of the investigation in an email sent on Sunday “obtained by the Washington Post”. The message called the agency’s response “political” and a “danger to public health and safety”, the paper adds. The New York Times reports that Wilbur Ross, the commerce secretary, “threatened to fire top employees at the federal scientific agency responsible for weather forecasts last Friday after the agency’s Birmingham office contradicted President Trump’s claim that Hurricane Dorian might hit Alabama, according to three people familiar with the discussion”. The paper adds that NOAA’s response in a statement issued on Friday is now being “examined by the Commerce Department’s Office of Inspector General”. It continues: “The National Weather Service [NWS] ‘must maintain standards of scientific integrity,’ the inspector general, Peggy E Gustafson, wrote in a message to NOAA staff members in which she requested documents related to Friday’s statement. The circumstances, she wrote, ‘call into question the NWS’s processes, scientific independence, and ability to communicate accurate and timely weather warnings and data to the nation in times of national emergency.’” The Hill reports that Ross has denied the New York Times report that he threatened to fire officials in the wake of events and a second Hill piece says Democrats have called for his resignation in light of the reports. According to Associated Press: “The acting chief scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said his agency likely violated its scientific integrity rules last week when it publicly chastised a weather office that contradicted president Donald Trump’s claim that Hurricane Dorian threatened Alabama.” The Atlantic says the National Weather Service “is one of the most free and reliable parts of the federal government. It must stay that way.”

Australia’s minister responsible for drought and natural disasters has told the Guardian he doesn’t “know if climate change is manmade”, the paper reports. The minister added that he wanted to give the country the tools to adapt regardless of the causes, the paper says. Meanwhile ABC News reports on the findings of a new survey, which it says, shows that “Australians want action on emissions, but are divided on nuclear [energy]”. It adds that 64% of respondents agree that the country should aim for net-zero emissions by 2050. The Guardian also reports the survey results under the headline: “Australians increasingly fear climate change-related drought and extinctions.” It adds that the same survey has been tracking Australian attitudes to climate change for more than a decade. A comment for the Guardian asks “What will it take for [Australians] to wake up to the climate crisis?” Separately, the Sydney Morning Herald reports the findings of a study which, it says, shows that extreme heat is a far greater threat for most Australians than extreme cold weather, with the risks falling largely on the elderly. Finally, writing in the Australian, environment editor Graham Lloyd says: “Debate [has been] reignited over the role climate change plays in fires.”

The UK’s National Farmers’ Union (NFU) has said the sector can become climate neutral by 2040 without cutting beef production or converting substantial areas of land to forest, the Guardian reports. In a new plan for reaching net-zero emissions, the NFU says instead that three-quarters of UK agricultural emissions can be offset by growing fuel for energy and then capturing and burying the resulting CO2 emissions, according to the paper. Relatedly, BBC News has a feature headlined: “Five ways UK farmers are tackling climate change.”

“Heatwaves, droughts and storms made more likely by climate change are already hitting cricket and risks to the game are predicted to rise,” says the Press Association, covering a new report that has been “briefed to the World Cricket Council”. A rise in heat and humidity poses health risks to players, umpires and spectators while drought could affect playing surfaces, it says. MailOnline also covers the report under the headline: “Cricketers may have to wear shorts and play later in the day to keep cool as climate change raises temperatures on the pitch, report warns.”

“Sustainable land use is the best way to prevent deforestation,” writes Sylvia Coutinho, head of investment bank UBS in Brazil, in a piece for the Financial Times. She argues that reversing the threat posed by fires in the Amazon: “[W]ill require not only a zero-tolerance policy against all illegal activity in the Amazon, but also a new development model for a region that is more than half the size of continental US. Such a model cannot be imposed unilaterally, but rather must involve all local stakeholders.” She adds: “We in finance can contribute by helping the country become a leader in green finance, developing innovative solutions to fund green and sustainable ventures and monetise Brazil’s valuable environmental assets.”

The majority of deaths related to temperature in Australia were caused by heat from 2006-17, a new study finds. The findings throw into question earlier research which, using the same methodology, found that most temperature-related deaths in this time frame were due to cold weather. “This led to studies that associated this with a net benefit from climate change,” the authors say. “This analysis indicates that studies that found net benefits from climate change need to be re-assessed, especially for Australia and warmer climate zones.”

Rising interest rates could threaten the fast adoption of renewable sources of energy, a new study says. The analysis finds that this could be the case “particularly in Europe with its historically low interest rates”. The authors say: “In Germany, interest rates recovering to pre-financial crisis levels in five years could add 11% and 25% to the levelized cost of electricity for solar photovoltaics and onshore wind, respectively, with financing costs accounting for about one-third of total levelized cost of electricity.”