The £18bn Hinkley C new nuclear plant was hit by a “last-gasp delay” on Thursday night with the government deciding to hold a new review, shortly after EDF’s board voted 10-7 to approve the scheme, the Financial Times reports on its front page. It says prime minister Theresa May has never given the project her personal backing. The paper cites “one person” as saying the scheme would proceed after the review. Contracts had been due to be signed today, with the delay forcing EDF chief executive Vincent de Rivaz to cancel a trip to the site, reports the BBC. On Radio 4, the BBC’s Simon Jack reports that a VIP tent set up on the Hinkley C site had to be taken down after the shock delay. EDF also cancelled press interviews with de Rivaz planned for today, says theGuardian. The Times reports the news on its front page under the headline: “Chaos over £18bn Hinkley nuclear plant”. A decision is now due in September, reports the Telegraph, which adds that “government sources played down suggestions of a U-turn”. A second Financial Times article reports: “Officials said Mrs May’s cautious approach lies behind the delay but [EDF] will now worry that the political consensus could soon break”. Former prime minister David Cameron was one of the scheme’s biggest backers, the paper notes. Reuters also covers the surprise delay. Hours before EDF’s board voted 10-7 in favour of Hinkley C, a board member resigned, saying the scheme was financially risky, report the Financial Times, Telegraph and Guardian. The last-minute government delay left many journalists blindsided, with articles from Politico, the Hill, Business Green and Greenpeace Energydesk still saying the scheme would go ahead as of early Friday morning. Separate Guardian articles prepared in advance of Thursday interview locals near Hinkley Point and describe the technology behind the scheme. A Guardian piece that appeared on the front page of early editions of the paper reports critics condemning the decision to go ahead with Hinkley C. Another Guardian article asks if the project should go ahead. A retrospective in the Times looks back on how “electricity too cheap to meter” turned to Hinkley C’s “colossal price tag”.

Nearly half the UK’s electricity came from low-carbon sources in 2015, reports the Press Association, with renewables supplying a quarter and outstripping coal for the first time. TheTelegraph, Climate Home and BusinessGreen all have the story. Carbon Brief produced six interactive charts exploring the official figures in more detail.

A Philippine rights body has set a 45-day deadline for 47 global oil, mining and cement firms to answer a complaint that their CO2 emissions caused human rights violations, reports Reuters. Rights advocates are calling the move a landmark case, it says. The action follows a petition led by Greenpeace, seeking to hold the companies accountable for infringement of Filipino’s rights. Oil giant Chevron and miner BHP Biliton are among the companies named.

Scientists are calling for a “thoughtful debate” about the wisdom of attempts to limit warming to below 1.5C, reports the BBC. A new study shows the limit will soon be breached over land, even if greenhouse gas emissions were to cease immediately. Some researchers say the 1.5C limit will be a significant, if not impossible challenge, the BBC adds.

How should the world prevent dangerous climate change, asks Harvard philosopher Michael Sandel in a BBC special. Three key puzzles to solve are: who is responsible, who should pay and is carbon trading a good idea, explains producer David Edmonds, in a piece citing Carbon Brief.

“Brexit seemed to offer a god-given excuse to pull the plug” on Hinkley C, says Jeremy Warner in the Telegraph. He hopes the government is “finally getting cold feet” on the project, which was offering “far too big a price…for an untried technology which will very likely be obsolete before the plant is even completed”. He says gas “as a stop-gap” plus other new nuclear plants, including small modular reactors, offer better solutions for the UK.

The Hinkley C scheme “fails every test bar…political expediency”, says Damian Carrington in the Guardian. It would be “huge, expensive and difficult to build…a throwback to the last century, just as the world is embracing the smart energy systems of the future”, he writes, pointing to recent reports from the National Infrastructure Commission, National Grid and Energy UK. All talk of a “revolution” in energy, he says, citing Carbon Brief’s coverage of the National Grid Future Energy Scenarios.

Hinkley Point C offers considerable benefits including zero carbon power that help the UK decarbonise its energy system, says BusinessGreen’s James Murray. Yet the government and EDF have “consistently failed to successfully make the case” for what originally looked like a very good deal. Years of delays have “eroded the credibility and the rationale for the project”, he says, which now looks expensive compared to energy saving, renewables, smart grids and storage.

A discussion on what to do instead of large projects like Hinkley C is missing from the UK debate, argues Warwick Business School’s David Elmes. UK policy needs to reflect a shift away from “big is better” towards a focus on managing demand and thinking more about decentralised energy than centralised megaprojects, he argues, with a new industrial strategy for energy.

In an editorial written before the government’s shock decision to postpone its decision on the Hinkley C new nuclear project, the Guardian says approval would be “a disaster for British energy policy…it will displace billions of pounds of investment that could otherwise be spent reducing demand and developing renewable alternatives”. The new government should “stop it, now”, the Guardian concludes. The Times, Sun and Daily Mail all carry editorials criticising the Hinkley C scheme.

Wildfires in the African drylands can suppress wet season rainfall, a new study suggests. Using 15 years of satellite data over sub-Saharan Africa, the researchers find that more extensive and later dry season wildfires lead to a decrease in rainfall in the subsequent wet season of up to 30 mm (~10%). The reduced rainfall may act to reduce wildfires in the wet season, the researchers say, because diminished plant growth limits the fuel available to burn. The effect is stronger in the southern hemisphere, the paper notes, because these areas tend to get wildfires later in the dry season.