There is continuing media coverage of developments at the UK’s last virgin steel plant – a Chinese-owned plant in Scunthorpe. The Guardian says that “some parliamentarians and media commentators” have misleadingly tried to blame “Ed Miliband’s net-zero policies”, plus his “lack of support” for a proposed coalmine in Cumbria for “Britain’s declining steel industry”. However, the newspaper explains that experts have said “this characterisation is completely false”. It quotes Prof Rob Gross, the director of the UK Energy Research Centre, who says that “high energy prices are absolutely not created by net-zero policies”. The newspaper notes that the coking coal that could have been produced at the Cumbria coalmine, if granted planning permission, “would not have been of a high enough quality to be used in the Scunthorpe steelworks”. [Carbon Brief’s Dr Simon Evans has debunked the misleading claim that high power prices for the UK steel industry are “primarily” due to high wholesale prices.] Left Foot Forward writes that “the right-wing press is working itself into a frenzy”, arguing misleadingly that “Miliband’s ‘virtue-signalling push’ for net-zero has fuelled rocketing energy costs, which they claim have pushed Chinese-owned British Steel to the brink”. Reuters reports that the UK government has said “it could keep the country’s last steel blast furnaces burning for at least the next few weeks after securing a delivery of fuel”. The Financial Times adds that a spokesperson for UK prime minister Keir Starmer has said “we are now confident in being able to secure enough materials to keep the blast furnaces burning”. The Independent adds: “Treasury department minister James Murray said on Monday that sufficient raw materials were in the country, calling steel production a national security matter.” The Daily Mail says: “Raw materials needed to keep Scunthorpe’s blast furnaces going – including a huge shipment of coal – have now been paid for, [deputy prime minister] Angela Rayner confirmed today.” BusinessGreen says: “The government must now weigh whether to complete the nationalisation of the company and pursue the plans to switch to electric arc furnaces that can recycle used steel or explore alternative technologies, such as hydrogen-based systems, that could enable low-carbon primary steel production in the UK.” The Guardian has published an explainer on “why can’t you just turn a blast furnace off”.   (See Comment below.)

Meanwhile, the Times reports on its frontpage that Miliband “encouraged Chinese involvement in key parts of the UK’s critical infrastructure less than a month before the government wrested control of British Steel from its Beijing shareholders”. The newspaper says: “Miliband signed a memorandum of understanding on a ‘clean-energy partnership’, the first update to the agreement since the golden era of relations between China and Britain a decade ago. It outlined co-operation in key areas including the power grid, battery storage and offshore wind power.” The Financial Times says that “senior parliamentarians” have “urged” ministers to “review the security implications of Chinese investment in all UK critical national infrastructure and supply chains in the wake of the British Steel saga”. The i newspaper also covers the news, as does the Guardian which says “senior Labour figures [have called] for a review of Chinese investment in UK infrastructure”. The Associated Press reports that “China warned the UK government on Monday to treat the Chinese owners of British Steel fairly or risk undermining investor confidence in the country”. The Hill, Daily Mail and i newspaper also cover the warning.

In other UK news, the Daily Telegraph covers new government plans that will allow “green projects” to “skip the queue for connections to the electricity grid”. The newspaper adds: “The plans are part of the government’s push to secure a green electricity grid by 2030, which includes tripling solar power and doubling onshore wind.” The Press Association reports that the UK “may be on track to see its worst year for wildfires”, according to new data. And the Daily Telegraph reports that “vast gas-filled caverns could soon be excavated under Morecambe Bay as part of plans to increase Britain’s energy storage”. 

China plans to “keep building coal-fired power plants through 2027 in regions where they are needed to meet peak power demand or stabilise the grid”, reports Reuters in its coverage of a new guideline issued last week. The policy, however, may “raise questions about China’s commitment to phasing down coal use during the 2026-2030 period”, it adds. According to the plan, new coal plants must “burn coal more efficiently and their carbon intensity should fall 10% to 20% from [current] levels”, Bloomberg says, even as Chinese president Xi Jinping has called for coal consumption to “begin declining from next year”. BJX News quotes a government official saying that “clean carbon reduction is an important direction for upgrading the new generation of coal power”, adding that the plan “does not mandate all [coal-fired] units to implement low-carbon transformation”. International Energy Net carries the full text of the implementation plan. Shanghai-based news outlet the Paper reports on China’s efforts to regulate coal use in rural areas, quoting an expert saying that the “biggest” challenge encouraging rural areas to switch to renewable energy is the “difficulty of generating electricity for Internet access”. China Environment News reports that Sun Jinlong, party secretary of China’s environment ministry, emphasised the importance of adopting “ultra-low emissions” processes for iron and steel in a visit to central Hubei province.

Meanwhile, Bloomberg says that China’s recent expansion of its vehicle-to-grid pilot project is “key to…alleviating [China’s] worries around energy security as the pace of battery-powered car adoption soars”. BJX News examines the impact of recent guidelines on “accelerating the development of virtual power plants”, saying that they will “ensure the security of electricity supply” and “promote the uptake” of renewable power. China Electric Power News also covers the news, stating they are becoming an “important way to promote” the construction of a new electricity system and “enhance” system flexibility. China has released a Q&A on “development and construction of distributed solar power”, addressing questions covering industry management, grid access, project operation and other topics, according to International Energy Net.

Finally, the official newspaper of the Communist party of Vietnam, Nhan Dan, has published a comment piece by Chinese president Xi Jinping saying that China and Vietnam have pursued “closer cooperation on industrial and supply chains” and that China’s support on “bilateral clean-energy projects have boosted electricity supply in Vietnam”. Xi also writes that “protectionism will lead nowhere”, the Financial Times reports, adding that Xi’s visits to Vietnam, Malaysia and Cambodia will send the message that “[China is the one] trying to defend the current international economic order”.

The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has cancelled a $3bn programme for “climate-smart farming”, after a review found the programme “did not align with the priorities of the Trump administration”, Reuters reports. According to the newswire, the Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities supported 135 projects in every US state that “encouraged soil health, carbon sequestration, reduced methane emissions and other climate-friendly practices”. E&E News reports that, according to a USDA review, most of the projects had ”sky-high administration fees”, which often provided less than half of the funding directly to farmers. The outlet adds: “In a news release, the USDA said it would rename the program to erase any reference to climate change, calling it the ‘Advancing Markets for Producers Program,’ and ensure that at least 65% of federal funds go to producers.” The Hill reports that the Biden administration estimated that the programme would cut more than 60m metric tons of CO2.

In other US news, Bloomberg reports that the Sierra Club and three other environmental groups have filed a suit accusing the Trump administration of “removing multiple tools for mapping climate, pollution and other overlapping risks facing the American public, particularly disadvantaged communities, from federal websites”. The suit alleges that removing the tools “violated the Paperwork Reduction Act and the Administrative Procedure Act”, according to the outlet. The New York Times reports that scientists, lawmakers and energy executives have warned that Trump’s “energy dominance” agenda “will be undermined by steep cuts to federal agencies that are said to be planned by the Trump administration”. Elsewhere, the Associated Press reports that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has denied a request from Washington state for emergency relief funds to help repair damage from a “bomb cyclone” in November. The newswire adds: “Under the Biden administration, the agency was instrumental in responding to a growing number of disasters linked to climate change. The agency also tried to address historical inequalities in how aid is dispersed after disasters.”

The latest European “state of the climate” report finds that floods and storms affected 413,000 people across Europe last year, according to Euronews. The outlet says that, according to the EU’s Copernicus climate change service (C3S), 335 lives were lost due to the extremes. It reports that 45% of days were “much warmer than average” and 12% were the warmest on record. It adds that Scandinavia and Svalbard experienced their highest rates of glacier mass loss on record. The Guardian also covers the report, adding that 2024 was the continent’s hottest year on record. It continues: “South-eastern Europe experienced its longest heatwave on record in July 2024, searing more than half the region for 13 days in a row, while high heat across the continent contributed to destructive wildfires that affected 42,000 people, the report found…Europe is warming twice as fast as the global average but has cut its planet-heating pollution faster than other big economies.” Reuters reports that 30% of the continent’s river network was hit by “significant floods”. The newswire adds: “Western Europe was hit hardest, with 2024 ranking among the region’s ten wettest years in records going back to 1950. Storms and flooding are Europe’s costliest weather extremes, last year causing damage exceeding 18bn euros.” Bloomberg says: “Half the continent reported new heat records in 2024 and ocean temperatures in Europe were the highest ever recorded.” Sky News adds that tropical nights – when temperatures do not dip below 20C – are becoming more common across Europe, with a record-breaking 23 recorded last year. “That’s nearly three times the average of just eight, and far above the previous record of 16 in 2012”, explains the outlet. Agence France-Presse, the Independent and Deutsche Welle also cover the report. Meanwhile, Politico reports that the European Drought Observatory has issued an orange warning for parts of Poland, Ukraine, Greece, the Balkans, Sweden, Ireland and Germany, as the lack of “April showers” has created “possible trouble” for farmers.

There is continuing widespread commentary in the UK media reacting to the ongoing news about the Scunthorpe steel plant. An editorial in the Guardian says the steel industry currently accounts for 8% of global emissions, adding that cutting emissions “requires moving to electric steel mills that produce about 80% less carbon compared to a blast furnace”. It continues: “If the UK wants low-carbon steel, it needs a plan for virgin iron. But that means building direct reduced iron plants, greener supply chains and long-term access to high‑purity iron ore – none of which Britain currently produces.” It concludes: “The real challenge? Shifting workers fast enough to green jobs before the old ones vanish.” Kate Nicholson, a political correspondent at HuffPost UK, asks: “Is net-zero really to blame for the chaos surrounding British steel?” She notes that “Labour had been willing to go ahead with a coal mine in Cumbria, because that was given the go-ahead under the previous government”, but says that coking coal from Cumbria could not have been used at Scunthorpe anyway. She adds that “the cost of gas drives electricity prices 98% of the time in the UK, according to Carbon Brief”. The Financial Times Lex column says that British steel “needs a forever subsidy”. It continues: “The pathway for blast furnaces to go green requires using hydrogen, rather than coal, as a feedstock in the process. That means additional investments, and extra energy costs. There are workarounds. Europe could boost its competitiveness for a while with a carbon border adjustment mechanism, which is basically a tax on the carbon intensity of imported steel. But, in the long term, Europe’s green energy costs are likely to be a lot higher than those of sunnier and windier areas of the world.”

Meanwhile, the UK’s right-leaning newspapers continue to use the steel crisis to misleadingly attack net-zero policies. An editorial in the Times says: “Even as ministers struggle to save Scunthorpe, Ed Miliband, the energy ­secretary, obsessed as he is with rushing through net-zero, is intent on deepening Britain’s dependence on Beijing for supplies of green technology…The energy secretary’s obsession with attaining a net-zero electricity grid by 2030 threatens to award China another foothold in this country’s critical national infrastructure just as its motive in relation to one of our last-surviving steel plants is open to serious question.” The disgraced former UK prime minister Liz Truss writes in the Daily Telegraph that “Trump has been proven right about pretty much everything”. Truss, who resigned in 2022 after triggering a market crash, says: “It’s actually worse here than in America – with sky-high energy prices and a refusal to permit fracking making it hard for the remaining British manufacturers to survive. This was demonstrated by Saturday’s dash by MPs to Parliament to back what was tantamount to steel nationalisation – engendered by China and net-zero, for which MPs had enthusiastically legislated.” Shadow business secretary Andrew Griffith writes in the Daily Telegraph: “Until [Labour] ditch the mad dash to net-zero by 2050, this [legislation to protect the steel plant] is nothing but sticking plaster politics.” A Daily Mail editorial says that importing coal from Japan for the plant is “simply perverse” and “a perfect illustration of why Labour’s net-zero policies need to be fundamentally rethought”. Former TV news executive Jawad Iqbal writes in the Times: “Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, has much to answer for. His net-zero obsession – ostensibly aimed at ending reliance on expensive fossil fuels by going green faster – has left British Steel production on the brink of extinction.” The Independent’s chief business commentator writes that “the decline of British Steel is a story of political failure, economic turmoil and the unintended consequences of net-zero”. Independent consultant Chris Bayliss says in the Daily Telegraph: “Chinese investors aren’t to blame for the death of British Steel. Net-zero is. Nationalisation will force the Government to finally face up to the real costs of green utopianism.” Alistair Osborne, the chief business commentator of the Times, says “the government hasn’t so much rescued a business as taken on a financial black hole”. He says “no credible bidder will show up this time” when “fuelled by net-zero zeal, Labour blocks the Whitehaven mine in Cumbria, digging up the coking coal a domestic steel business needs”. Climate-sceptic writer Ross Clark says in the Sun that “other countries must snigger at the sight of [Miliband] on his high horse (or, more usually, a business class seat on a jet), preaching about climate change while Britain’s heavy industry is allowed to go to the wall”. An editorial in the Sun criticises China, then says: “Yet Labour still refuses to rule out Chinese involvement in our steel, while trusting it to make our wind farms, and other tech vital to the power grid.” Referring to the steel crisis, Brian Monteith, a former member of the Scottish and European parliaments, writes in the Scotsman that it is “time to tame the power of unelected climate campaigners”. 

Simon Nixon, the former chief leader writer at the Times, writes in Prospect magazine that the UK Conservatives have gone on a “journey” when it comes to climate change. He says “the Tory trajectory is no outlier”, noting that “across the developed world a political backlash is forming against climate action”. He continues: “Yet the curious thing is that, while politicians such as [Kemi] Badenoch tend to frame their opposition to net-zero in terms of the need to protect business, most businesses do not want climate policies to be weakened. It has become an article of faith in right-wing political and media circles that net-zero policies are responsible for the high energy prices that are damaging industry. In fact, the opposite is true (and businesses know it). It is fossil fuels that are keeping prices high. A swift transition to clean energy is vital to reducing energy prices.” He adds: “Much business criticism concerns not the climate targets, but the lack of joined-up policy to deliver them.”

Meanwhile, Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap, writes in the New York Times that Donald Trump’s “volatile trade policy of the past weeks is helping to usher in a new and more paranoid era”. He continues: “A recession would be of little help to the climate. Fossil-fuel use and emissions might go down in the short term as Americans drive less, skip family trips and skimp on purchases. But only a sustained shift to cleaner technologies will reduce carbon pollution in the long term.” He adds: “The president’s punitive tariffs on China are a particular disaster. China has some of the world’s best advanced energy technology, particularly its batteries and electric vehicles. If the US wants to keep up with China – even for national security reasons – then it must learn from Chinese companies now, much as Chinese manufacturers learned from our top firms, like Tesla, over the last decade.” Gary Yohe, a professor emeritus of economics at Wesleyan University, writes for Project Syndicate that the “EPA’s rejection of climate science threatens everyone”. Nick O’Malley, the environment and climate editor at the Sydney Morning Herald, says that if Australia hosts the next COP, Adelaide would be “the perfect host”.

Elsewhere, Nigel Farage urges voters to choose his climate-sceptic hard-right populist Reform UK party in England’s 1 May local elections in a Sun comment piece. He says Labour’s “obsession with net-zero means even higher bills for pensioners, who are already choosing between heating and eating”. Nada Farhoud, the environment editor at the Daily Mirror, comments on Katy Perry’s brief trip to space yesterday, saying that she “could’ve urged climate action, but helped a billionaire’s vanity project”. 

Climate change has tripled the length of marine heatwaves and increased their maximum intensity by 1C since the 1940s, new research finds. The study compares real-world global sea surface temperature data from the 1940s to a constructed counterfactual world without climate change to calculate the influence of warming on marine heatwaves. The authors say: “We determine that global warming is responsible for nearly half of these extreme events and that, on a global average, it has led to a three-fold increase in the number of days per year that the oceans experience extreme surface heat conditions.”

Poor mental health attributable to high temperatures in Australia is projected to increase by 11-17% by the end of the decade and by 28-49% by 2050, compared to 2003-18, new research finds. The study assessed how higher temperatures have contributed to lost life years from 2003-18 and uses a range of climate scenarios to examine how this burden could increase in the future. The authors say: “Our study underscores the need for both adaptation and mitigation strategies to counteract the adverse effects of warming climate on mental health.”