Yesterday, the UN confirmed that both thresholds for the Paris Agreement to enter into force had been passed. “Today is a historic day in the fight to protect our planet for future generations,” said President Obama, speaking at the White House. There is now a 30-day period before the agreement takes effect. Obama added: “If we follow through on the commitments that this Paris agreement embodies, history may well judge it as a turning point for our planet.” In contrast, the Hill carried the reaction of the House Speaker Paul Ryan, a Republican, who said the deal would be “disastrous” to the US economy. “The abundant, low-cost energy that we have unlocked will now be shut in the ground.” Climate Home and Reuters also carry the story.

The fossil fuel industry’s emissions of a powerful greenhouse gas are dramatically higher than previously thought, according to researchers who pulled together the biggest database yet of worldwide methane emissions. They found that, after natural sources were discounted, emissions from gas, oil and coal production were 20-60% greater than existing estimates. The Guardian explains that methane makes up just 16% of global greenhouse gases and is shorter-lived than the CO2 which accounts for three quarters, but has a much more powerful warming effect. Lead author Stefan Schwietzke, of the University of Colorado and US science agency Noaa, said that methane from fossil fuels had played a significant role in global warming, but the gas’s short lifetime meant acting on it now could pay quick dividends. Time magazine and New Scientist are among the publications reporting the study’s findings.

BusinessGreen pulls out the couple of brief moments where climate change and energy policy featured in Theresa May’s conference speech yesterday. She said ratifying the Paris Agreement showed “Global Britain” in its “new, confident role”. She highlighted broadband, energy, and housing as three markets that are ripe for further intervention, declaring “it’s just not right that two thirds of energy customers are stuck on the most expensive tariffs”. BusinessGreen added: “However, May underlined how she will continue to support some high carbon infrastructure, confirming an announcement on a new runway in the south east is imminent. She also reiterated her support for the High Speed 2 rail link and the controversial Hinkley Point nuclear project, declaring it was the duty of government to ‘take big, sometimes even controversial, decisions about our country’s infrastructure’.” The Times dedicates an article to May’s pledge to intervene in the energy market. The Independent says that May gave climate change “just one cursory mention” during her speech.

A new report by the the New Climate Economy, an influential project to map out the transition for a low-carbon world run by the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, says the world is currently performing badly against three benchmarks – reviving growth, tackling climate change and making the world a fairer, more sustainable place. “In the next 15 years the world needs to invest around $90tr in infrastructure around the globe,” Felipe Calderon, former president of Mexico and chair of the Global Commission. “We need to make a choice – either we can invest that $90tn in the dirty infrastructure of the past, or look forward to the clean and efficient infrastructure of the future.” The Independent also carries the story.

Reuters says that “talk of coal’s demise is proving premature, with prices soaring from 10-year lows this year and further rises on the cards into 2017 as the ‘dirty’ fuel continues to be very much in demand for power generation”. It adds that “following half a decade of steady decline, thermal coal physical and futures prices have all rallied between 50% and 80% this year, taking many in the industry by surprise. The price recovery is a boon for mining companies, such as Whitehaven Coal, Rio Tinto, and Glencore , and stands in sharp contrast to forecasts by Goldman Sachs and the International Energy Agency, who have said coal is in terminal decline.” Reuters says the price rise is down to “tightening market conditions in both the Atlantic and Pacific basins [which] mean that further price rises are possible, as demand picks up from Europe to Asia and as supplies fall”. Meanwhile, the Hill reports that an oil company says it has found a “world-class” oil reserve off the coast of Alaska that could be one of the largest in the state’s history.

The government is due later to reveal whether it backs fracking plans, in a landmark ruling for the UK shale gas industry. Communities Secretary Sajid Javid is deciding on a planning appeal by firm Cuadrilla to test frack in Lancashire. His backing would enable shale rock to be fracked horizontally for the first time, in a bid to yield more gas. Lancashire County Council refused permission to extract shale gas at two sites – Roseacre and Preston New Road – last year on grounds of noise and traffic impact, forcing Cuadrilla to appeal. In response, a planning inspectorate report was sent to the Department for Communities and Local Government on 4 July, with Mr Javid being given three months to reach a decision on both sites. Meanwhile, the Guardian reports that conservationists have dealt a last-minute blow to iGas’s “unlawful” bid to frack at a former Ministry of Defence missile launchpad known as the Rocket Site in Misson, north Nottinghamshire.

Professor Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University says he and other scientists have decided to speak out because of “the irreparable harm that would be done by a climate change-denying, anti-science-driven Trump presidency”. The scientists have set up a petition called “Scientists say: ‘Donald Trump is not who we are’” in an attempt to encourage other experts to make clear his “views on many pressing topics are at odds with scientific reality and represent a dangerous rejection of scientific thinking”.

Runevad, the CEO of Vestas Wind Systems, says that “one trend for which analysts voice increasing certainty is the accelerating pace of the clean-energy transformation reshaping how the world generates electricity”. He adds: “With increasing speed, global energy markets are turning away from fossil fuels and towards wind and other renewable sources, not just because they’re clean but because they’re cheaper, more competitive energy choices and offer a level of long-term certainty more price-volatile fossil fuels just can’t match…In the top energy markets on six continents, wind is now the cheapest or largest source of newly installed power and gaining share. In 2015, the wind industry crossed the 60 gigawatt (GW) mark for the first time and reached an unprecedented 63 GW installed globally. The bottom line: wind is winning. Not just in forecasts, but in today’s global marketplace.”

Mathiesen summarises the the “new climate math”, as also highlighted recently by “two of the most eloquent voices for action on climate change: Bill McKibben and George Monbiot”. He says: “McKibben notes that his initiation to carbon budgets came when he based a seminal essay on the subject on the work of Carbon Tracker. But he now clearly believes their approach is too weak for the times. Writing in the Guardian, Monbiot frames it as the conflict we must have: ‘Preventing climate breakdown means defending democracy from plutocrats. It’s their interests versus the rest of humanity’s.'”

A new comment paper discusses two global partnerships proposed in 2015 to push governments to make the massive investments in low carbon energy required to to keep global average temperature rise below 2 °C: Mission Innovation and the Global Apollo Programme. If these initiatives are to shape clean energy research over the next few decades, they need to improve in several respects, including clarifying baselines and definitions, say the authors. Importantly, neither covers private spending on R&D, which dwarfs public outlay but is harder to audit.

Scientists have constructed a new global methane budget to better understand the contribution of the fossil fuel industry to methane emissions. Using long-term global methane and methane carbon isotope records, they find that emissions arising from natural gas, oil and coal production and their usage are 20-60% higher than current estimates. The findings suggest a greater potential for the fossil fuel industry to mitigate anthropogenic climate change, the paper notes.