The world’s oceans passed a threshold in 2014 as marine heatwaves became the “new normal” due to climate change, according to New Scientist. The science website reports that new research shows that since then extreme temperatures – which can cause algal blooms, coral bleaching and mass die-offs of fish – have been recorded across more than half of Earth’s seas. The article notes that, although scientists have projected heatwaves will be exacerbated under future climate change, “it is less appreciated that they have already gone from a rare phenomenon worldwide to a common occurrence”. The Guardian states that such extreme temperatures occurred just 2% of the time a century ago, but have occurred at least 50% of the time across the global ocean over the past eight years. It adds that in some hotspots, extreme temperatures occur 90% of the time, severely affecting local wildlife. According to MailOnline, scientists arrived at these conclusions after assessing a century-and-a-half’s worth of global marine temperature data.

Another new study, reported by the Independent, warns that even limiting global temperature rises to 1.5C – the more ambitious target of the Paris Agreement – will be “catastrophic” for coral reefs. It compares the climate risk for coral reefs described in the new study to the message from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 1.5C report in 2018, which warned 70-90% of coral would be lost at 1.5C of warming. The new research concluded that more than 90% of tropical coral reefs would suffer frequent “intolerable” heat stress even under the 1.5C limit, it says. In a piece for the Conversation, the authors of the study say such outcomes “would spell catastrophe for the thousands of species that depend on coral reefs, as well as the roughly one billion people whose livelihoods and food supply benefits from coral reef biodiversity”. Carbon Brief also has a write-up of the new study.

Meanwhile, the Press Association reports on a scientific expedition to Antarctica’s Weddell Sea, which has found that huge colonies of Adelie penguins living there have remained stable in the last decade, “suggesting the area remains a climate refuge for them”. Reuters also has a piece documenting the expedition, describing the “gentoofication” of Antarctica as gentoo penguins, another species, expand southwards to take advantage of the decreasing area of sea ice in the warming region.

Beleaguered UK prime minister Boris Johnson is poised to announce billions of pounds in state-backed loans to curtail the impact of rising energy prices on household bills, the Times reports in a frontpage story. The newspaper says that Johnson and Rishi Sunak, the chancellor, have agreed to a “rebate and clawback” scheme, in which taxpayers will underwrite loans to energy firms and companies will pass the money on to every household in the form of a rebate on energy bills. Firms will subsequently recoup the money from consumers in the following years to pay back the loans as energy prices fall, it continues. The Times notes that the prime minister “is attempting to refocus his premiership” amid a police investigation into 12 parties in Downing Street while Covid restrictions were in place. The Daily Telegraph notes that industry sources said energy firms could be offered up to £6bn in loans, equivalent to a rebate of up to £200 per household.

BBC News has covered the documents obtained via FOI by Carbon Brief which reveal the presentation that was given to Johnson by scientists two years ago to convince him of the reality of climate change. It includes a quote from Dr Emily Shuckburgh, head of Cambridge Net Zero, who says it is “shocking” Johnson only came to this realisation in 2020 “given how much effort scientists have made to communicate the risks of climate change over the years”. The full details can be found in Carbon Brief’s article. The story has also been picked up by the Politico “London Playbook” newsletter under the heading “Johnson’s climate school”. It hihglights the email exchange also obtained by Carbon Brief which shows queries about climate science and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) from No 10 staff.

An “exclusive” story in the Daily Telegraph reports that Johnson’s government has “watered down plans for a post-Brexit bonfire of Brussels regulations”, which it says has often been cited as a benefit of leaving the EU, “in favour of net-zero regulations”. The piece refers to a decision to drop the idea for a “one in, two out” rule to cut two EU regulations for every rule written, as the government has decided this is not “consistent with delivering world-class regulation to support the economy in adapting to a new wave of technological revolution or to achieving net-zero”. The article talks of anger among backbenchers, backing this up with a quote from a member of the Net Zero Scrutiny Group, a small group of MPs who oppose climate policies. An opinion piece by Eleanor Salter in the Guardian reports that the Net Zero Scrutiny Group is taking aim at net-zero “with tactics learned from Brexit”. She concludes: “We could be entering an era in which we are not just pushing to transform promises into action, but battling to get climate on to the agenda at all.”

Meanwhile, an opinion piece in the Sun by anti-fuel duty and pro-motoring lobbyist Howard Cox says recent changes to the Highway Code, which some perceive to have benefited cyclists over motorists, “have the foul stench of being a small part of the ­government’s net-zero aspirations”, although he notes that this may be the “basis for a conspiracy theory”. A separate article in DeSmog reports on a poll, carried out by Cox’s organisation FairFuel UK which was covered by the Sun and “supposedly” showed public opposition to the government’s plans to phase out petrol and diesel cars. The article quotes Cox saying he “doesn’t care” about issues with the way the poll was carried out.

The EU is set to finally unveil its new criteria for a “green label” for investment projects intended to help tackle climate change, Agence France Presse reports. It notes that the move will likely prompt the “fury of opponents to nuclear and gas energy”, both of which will be included in the so-called “energy taxonomy”, albeit with some caveats. The piece states that the taxonomy will be similar to the early version of the plan released at the end of last year, with gas and nuclear projects given green status if they are approved by 2030 and 2045 respectively, and meet a long list of sector-specific criteria. Bloomberg notes that the move has “triggered concerns among investors over the risk of greenwashing” and politicians in some member states have criticised the draft, pointing out it could harm the “credibility of the EU’s new rules and divert money away from renewables”. The plan is set for release today and will be scrutinised by national governments, it adds. It says the text has exposed divisions among member states, with, for example, Denmark – which does not rely on natural gas – opposing it, while Germany – which is phasing out nuclear and relies on natural gas – criticising the green label for nuclear. Reuters says the new criteria are expected to include minor changes from previous drafts that “could make it easier for some gas plants to earn a green investment label”.

India’s first annual budget to follow prime minister Modi’s net-zero commitment at COP26 was the first of its kind to emphasise “climate action” in its opening statement, reports Business Standard. Presented yesterday by finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman, who acknowledged that the “risks of climate change are the strongest negative externalities that affect India”, it still “fell short of making a significant budgetary allocation to key sectors of energy efficiency, sustainability and clean tech”, adds the news outlet.

The minister announced that “sovereign green bonds will be issued for mobilising resources for green infrastructure”, the proceeds from which “will be deployed in public sector projects which help in reducing the carbon intensity of the economy”. The Indian government’s “low-carbon growth strategy” included “a push to solar power manufacturing, circular economy transition and transition to [a] carbon-neutral economy”. Of these, only “solar received funding” with an additional outlay of Rs. 19,500 crore (US$2.6bn) for a production-linked incentive scheme for solar PV module manufacturing, the story says.

This $2.6bn solar push could “boost local manufacturing” and help India “curb reliance on China”, Bloomberg reports, given that it “imports nearly 80% of the components for solar power from China”. Besides aid to the solar sector, India would also “encourage the use of biomass pellets as fuel in thermal power plants” and “levy an additional duty of 2 rupees a litre on unblended fuel”, in order to promote the blending of ethanol with gasoline.

The minister announced that energy efficiency for large commercial buildings would be promoted through a new energy service company model, while a new “battery swapping policy” and “interoperability standards” for the EV sector would be formulated, Down to Earth reports.  At the same time, India’s budget session of parliament is “expected to discuss a new bill – The Energy Conservation (Amendment) Bill, 2022 – which aims “to provide regulatory framework for carbon trading in India”.

The publication notes that the estimated expenditure for India’s renewable energy ministry “decreased marginally”, while “public enterprises overseeing the mining of coal…together saw a boost in resources”. A rural employment guarantee scheme “with great potential for climate resilience and carbon sequestration” has had its budget slashed, according to the story.

As part of the country’s “carbon neutrality” measures for the coming financial year, Sitharaman announced four pilot projects for coal gasification, a move experts called a “red flag to the energy transition”, reports the Times of India. While many reactions to the speech were positive, experts quoted in the story also pointed out that rooftop solar, green hydrogen and battery storage technologies did not receive additional budgetary support or tax incentives. The Hindustan Times, meanwhile, reports a push towards “agro-forestry and private forestry”, and that “financial support will be provided to farmers belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes who want to take up agro-forestry”.

French energy major Total has approved the development of a multibillion-dollar oil project in east Africa that will make landlocked Uganda an oil producer for the first time, the Financial Times reports. It notes that the $10bn project, undertaken in conjunction with the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (Cnooc) and the Uganda National Oil Company, will also require the construction of the world’s longest heated pipeline. The article notes that while Total has committed to cutting emissions it has also demonstrated it remains willing to fund new hydrocarbon investments, adding that the decision is likely to be opposed by climate activists. According to the newspaper, observers have questioned the environmental impact of the project and the long-term economic benefits to Uganda given forecasts that global oil consumption could peak before 2030. Reuters notes that Total has also signed a memorandum of understanding with Uganda to collaborate on solar, wind and other renewable projects with a combined installed electricity output capacity of 1 gigawatt (GW) by 2030, up from the nation’s current generating capacity of about 1.2GW.

The Financial Times reports that US oil major ExxonMobil has registered its highest profits since 2014, “capitalising on strong oil and natural gas prices in a sharp reversal from the early months of the pandemic”. Another Financial Times piece notes that Chevron has also reported net annual profits, showing “a bit of the swagger of US supermajors” had returned after fending off questions over “their long-term prospects”. According to the Wall Street Journal, Exxon has been discussing its low-carbon business extensively since activist investors remade its board last May, “but the strong results underscore just how profitable the emissions-heavy business can be during the good times”. In Australia, the Guardian reports that fossil-fuel companies backing large gas projects gave nearly $1m in political donations to the three major political parties – Labor, the Liberals and the Nationals – last financial year. The Sydney Morning Herald says that UK oil company BP has struck a 10-year deal with Australian agribusiness firm Nufarm to buy a sustainable biofuel ingredient “that could help clean up the carbon-intensive aviation sector”.

Finally, in the US, Bloomberg has an interview with Peter Erickson, the US climate policy program director of the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI), in light of his research being used by the District Court in Washington DC to void offshore oil and gas leases sold by the federal government to energy companies. The judge argued that the government had not accurately calculated the impact of the extracted fossil fuels on emissions, and this article asks Erickson whether he thinks this could lead to a new legal standard that would require governments to consider carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.

The Abigail oil and gas field off the east coast of Scotland was “quietly” approved by the UK government’s Oil and Gas Authority (OGA) last month, prompting a backlash from climate groups, the Guardian reports. The newspaper says the new North Sea oilfield defies climate experts who warned at the COP26 conference in Glasgow at the end of last year that no new fossil fuel developments would be compatible with the world’s climate targets. The Scotsman reports that, according to campaigners, the “tiny” new field will only produce enough gas to meet UK demand for roughly a day and a half. It notes the site, which is owned by Ithaca Energy, is expected to contain 5.5m barrels of oil equivalent, which will be split equally between oil and natural gas. The Independent quotes the Offshore Petroleum Regulator for Environment and Decommissioning (OPRED), which said that there would be a “short-term increase in emissions” linked to the development but added that “taken into the wider context of UK atmospheric emissions, I conclude that there will be no significant effect on the environment”.

Separately, the Financial Times reports that Parkmead Group, a small independent North Sea oil and gas group, has bought an onshore wind farm in Scotland in a “rare example” of such a producer branching out into renewables. It notes that while oil majors have come under pressure to switch to cleaner forms of investment, “most independents remain focused on producing oil and gas”. It adds that the group “retains oil licences in the UK North Sea”. BusinessGreen reports that Oil and Gas UK (UKOG), the UK’s leading trade body for the industry, has changing its name to Offshore Energies UK in a rebrand it says reflects its members’ growing interests in offshore wind, blue hydrogen, carbon capture and other low-carbon technologies. The piece adds that the body “stressed that it would continue to champion the oil and gas sector”.

Massive flooding in Ecuador’s capital Quito and a resulting landslide have killed at least 22 people, according to Al Jazeera. The city’s mayor Santiago Guarderas told reporters that 47 people were injured, two of them critically, and at least 20 people were reported missing, it continues. The news website notes in its reporting that “scientists have said climate change is intensifying the risk of heavy rains around the world, with the warmer atmosphere holding more water”. BBC News says the nation was experiencing its heaviest rainfall for almost 20 years, carrying mud and rocks down the slopes of the nearby Pichincha volcano which has engulfed homes and cars. In its coverage, the Independent notes that Ecuador is “highly vulnerable to the impacts of the climate crisis”, adding that mean annual rainfall is expected to increase by 3% in the period 2030-2049, compared to 1980-1999.

Climate Home News reports on Storm Ana, which last week killed more than 80 and displaced hundreds of thousands of people in southern Africa. The piece quotes experts who say the event shows the need for investment in early-warning systems and anticipatory action, as well as finance to help communities recover and rebuild.

The Guardian has an article about Kenya’s Lake Turkana, where shifting rainfall patterns driven by climate change are causing water levels to rise, threatening the El Molo community that has lived on the lake’s shores for millennia.

A new study finds that the “gravitational pump” – the sinking of plankton and their faecal pellets – is responsible for 70% of the carbon moved from the surface ocean into the deep. Researchers combine satellite observations and in situ measurements in an ocean model to determine rates of carbon “export” around the world. They find that carbon exported to the deep ocean in the high latitudes of the northern hemisphere is sequestered for the longest time, while the subtropical regions sequester carbon for the shortest length of time. As a result, the ocean’s uptake of carbon will decrease under future climate change as the subtropical regions expand.

An editorial in the Washington Post states that if US president Joe Biden intends to achieve his climate ambitions, he must to do everything he can to keep the costs of wind, solar and other clean energy sources low. “He can start by finally ending a long-running, ruinous trade war with China over the price of solar power equipment, which has made these products more expensive than they need to be,” it says. Ahead of a decision due on Monday, the newspaper says that the president should reject calls to extend tariffs on solar products such as the cells that make up panels. It notes that the supporters of the tariffs say US companies need protection from “predatory foreign governments that unfairly subsidise their solar industries and permit the use of slave labor in their factories”, and that they are essential for maintaining US energy independence. However, the article says these measures “have done far more harm than good” by keeping prices high, adding that the US solar industry still remains small despite the tariffs’ supposed benefits. “That does not mean the president should allow solar panels manufactured with slave labor to be sold in the United States. But across-the-board tariffs, which raise prices for US solar consumers, are far too costly a response,” it concludes.

Separately, an opinion piece by Justin Gerdes in Energy Monitor looks at how “front-runner states” such as California and New York are leading the way on climate action while the president’s Build Back Better climate agenda stalls in the Senate.