Land earmarked for new solar panels would be better used
for growing apples, environment secretary Liz Truss argues. She
says solar farms are ugly and the land they sit on could be better
used for agriculture. She confirms plans to cut subsidies to
farmers for hosting the solar farms. There is currently a
£100-an-acre grant scheme in place, worth £2 million a year.
The BBC, Times, and Independentalso have the story.

Fears over rising emissions should not obstruct efforts to
connect rural communities to the electrical grid, new research
suggests. A case study looking at new connections in India shows
their electricity use accounted for only four per cent of the
country’s emissions rise in a year. Industry and cities were
responsible for the vast majority of those emissions, it shows.

Three Telegraph articles look at former environment
secretary Owen Paterson’s calls to scrap the Climate Change Act.
The first, by Charles Moore, reflects Paterson’s view that the law
supports economically ruinous renewable energy. Another looks at
why Paterson is arguing for the changes now, once he’s left office.
Paterson says it’s because he didn’t realise the Act’s “brutal”
impactat the time. Finally, climate skeptic
columnist Christopher Booker juxtaposes Paterson’s positionwith
that of Labour leader Ed Miliband and an architect of the act,
Baroness Worthington. “Mr Paterson has at last set off a proper
debate on our energy future”, he says, “one that is years overdue”.

The US is suggesting any new global climate deal must be
designed in such a way that all the world’s largest emitters
participate, and President Obama doesn’t have to take it to the
Senate. It’s suggesting a ‘buffet option’ whereby countries set
their own targets to cut emissions by 2025, and would be required
to report back on progress. Critics point out that there is no
guarantee countries’ pledges would be large enough to avoid the
worst impacts of climate change. But negotiators say it could be
the most effective way to ensure the US and China both participate
in a new deal.

Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania,
Bulgaria, Latvia and Lithuania are planning to oppose plans to cut
the EU’s emissions by 40 per cent, the FT reports. Ministers are
meeting this week to discuss the details of the EU’s energy and
climate package. We’ve taken a look at which countries want
what, here.

People are not going to sacrifice heating their homes,
driving their cars or leaving their iphones uncharged, US officials
say. So the country is going to have to find a way to cut emissions
while remaining an energy superpower, they argue. Officials from
the Environment Protection Agency tell Reuters it is focusing on
new regulations to cut methane emissions from shale exploration,
and continues to look at ways to limit pollution from the country’s
power plants.

Columnist Geoffrey Lean says the prime minister is taking an
electoral risk by pushing ahead with his pro-fracking plans. A key
change to the infrastructure bill would allow energy companies to
frack under people’s homes without their knowledge. But most people
in the Conservatives’ Top 40 target seats for next year’s election
oppose the move, Lean points out.

Oil prices have fallen 30 per cent since June. That’s bad
news for Venezuela and Russia, but potentially good news for
Europe, the BBC says. Falling demand combined with increased supply
as a consequence of the US’s shale boom have forced prices down to
$83 a barrel. The BBC takes a look at the price slide’s winners and
losers. The Financial Timesalso has an
interactive chart showing how oil companies balance their books.

Robert Wilson takes a look at Owen Paterson’s alternative
energy policies. Paterson’s call for more efficient heating and
power generation is notable for its unusually green credentials.
But Paterson is wrong to say this should be done through combined
heat and power plants (CHP), Wilson argues. Instead, gas power
plants, windfarms or nuclear plants combined with gas turbines
would be more efficient, he argues. “CHP, then, is clearly a snake
oil solution to climate change, and should be treated as such”, he
says.

Sea level rise of more than 180 cm is less than five per
cent likely by the end of this century, say scientists. Uncertainty
about the behaviour of Antarctic glaciers, among other factors,
means the predictions can’t be considered definitive. But expert
opinion and process-based models suggest larger sea level rise this
century is unlikely, say the scientists.

Scientists examine recent evidence that rapid sea ice
retreat in the Arctic could be having a direct impact on weather
and climate in midlatitudes. While the mechanism could well be
playing a part, it’s likely to be just one factor influencing the
atmospheric circulation patterns that affect places like the UK and
northern Europe, the authors suggest.