Following earlier reports, South Africa and Indonesia have confirmed that the US has pulled out of a flagship global climate financing programme to help developing countries move away from coal, according to Agence France-Presse. The US had previously committed to $56m in grants for the South African initiative, with $1bn in potential commercial investments, the article says. It was a “core member” of the Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) initiative, which was launched in 2021 and was also set to benefit Vietnam, according to the Financial Times. [Senegal is also set to receive support from a JETP, but not with money from the US.] It says that, following US president Donald Trump’s executive order calling for “putting America first in international deals”, the US has sent letters to participating countries stating its withdrawal. The newspaper notes that other members of the international coalition, including the EU, the UK and Japan, remained committed to the JETPs. “All the other partners are remaining and…deploying capital”, which will attract commercial investment, said UK climate envoy Rachel Kyte, according to Reuters. Meanwhile, Bloomberg highlights the withdrawal of the US from the overall $9.3bn deal with South Africa, specifically. Trump ”has clashed with South Africa over its land-expropriation and foreign policies [and] was widely expected to pull out of the deal given his scepticism about global warning”, it says. The US withdrawal means South Africa will lose more than $1bn in future investment pledges to help shut down the nation’s coal power plants, according to the Associated Press. In an interview, Kyte tells Bloomberg: “We have to plan for a world where the US is not transfusing funds into the green transition.” She adds that “there has been an uptick in calls for reform to make the multilateral development-bank system, the international financial architecture, more fit for purpose”.

Meanwhile, after the Trump administration terminated nearly all US foreign aid contracts, the New York Times says many programmes have received a questionnaire asking them to demonstrate how their projects align with US interests. According to the newspaper, one of the questions is: “Can you confirm this is not a climate or ‘environmental justice’ project or include such elements?” In the US, a federal judge has blocked the Trump administration’s freeze on congressionally approved federal funding, which has impacted climate activities approved under the Inflation Reduction Act, according to Inside Climate News. The article says the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether it would comply. A congressional investigation into “big oil” has been ended since the “capturing” of the Senate and House of Representatives by the Republican party, the Guardian says. It quotes Rhode Island senator Sheldon Whitehouse, who was leading the inquiry, who says it is necessary now more than ever because the fossil fuel industry is “running perhaps the biggest campaign of disinformation and political interference in American history”.

In other US news, Forbes has an article about the “heroes” in an “urgent race” to preserve US government environmental and climate data, in “direct response to concerns that a second Trump administration could purge scientific records”. Scientists have organised an event dubbed Stand Up For Science to protest as the Trump administration has “gutted climate policy” and taken aim at other science programmes, the New York Times reports. The New York Times Climate Forward newsletter is titled: “Will the shift to clean power continue under Trump?” The Hill reports that US energy secretary Chris Wright has “[thrown] his support behind a vast expansion” in geothermal energy, a clean source of power. The Associated Press says Wright and interior secretary Doug Burgum have appeared before a “crowd of cheering workers” stressing the importance of liquified natural gas (LNG) expansion.

Brazilian environment minister Marina Silva has warned of a “triple negative” effect on climate action amid an “increasingly complex geopolitical context” caused by the second Trump administration, the Reuters reports. Citing the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, new trade tariffs and an upended US policy on the war in Ukraine, Silva told journalists: “They may drain resources and they also may hamper the environment of confidence and trust among parties. We have a triple negative effect because the less action we see, the less money we see, resulting in less cooperation across countries,” the newswire reports. Silva “cast doubt on the agreement reached at last year’s COP summit to triple financing to poor nations to $300bn annually by 2035, saying it ‘cannot be taken for granted’”, the article says. She added that disputes over trade tariffs were “bad for everyone” and only had short-term political benefits. The Times of India says the minister was in New Delhi in India to attend the World Sustainable Development Summit. Silva said Brazil has “a very pragmatic relationship with different countries and regions, including China and the EU”, according to Bloomberg. The article notes that “seeing the US falter on climate is nothing new” – noting its withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol and adding that “the result was a stronger cooperation between like-minded nations”. The Hindu also has the story.

At the same time, Brazil intends to use a $3.5bn social fund that receives oil and gas exploration royalties to boost the economy as polling shows that president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s popularity has “slump[ed] to all-time lows”, according to Bloomberg.

The UK Treasury is considering cutting the funding for GB Energy, a state-owned company that was set up with a mission to invest in renewables, the Financial Times reports. The company was initially promised £8.3bn in taxpayer money over the five-year parliament, but the Labour government’s first budget in October only gave it £100m to cover the first two years, the article says. Now, ahead of a spending review, the newspaper cites “people familiar with the discussions” who say the Treasury is considering “whether they can afford to give GB Energy the full £8.3bn”. It adds that one option being considered is whether to cut the £3.3bn previously earmarked to fund low-interest loans via local authorities for projects such as rooftop solar panels and shared-ownership wind projects. The newspaper describes this development as “blow to energy secretary Ed Miliband”, who “has already been overruled on the government’s backing for the expansion of Heathrow airport’s third runway”. Reuters notes that the news comes as the government aims to achieve a net-zero power sector in Britain by 2030. In related news, Politico profiles Miatta Fahnbulleh, a relatively new Labour MP who is “juggling one of Whitehall’s trickiest tasks: slashing Brits’ energy bills at a time the government is strapped for cash”.

In more positive news for the UK’s clean energy transition, BBC News reports that the number of UK homes installing heat pumps backed by government incentives rose by 52% in 2024 – reaching a record level. The rise was the result of an increase in the grant offered by the government’s boiler upgrade scheme (BUS), designed to persuade people to switch from gas boilers, the article says.

Meanwhile, analysis of UK campaign finance data by the New York Times shows an “influx of funding” to Reform UK – 40% of which came from “those who have openly questioned climate change or have investments in fossil fuel or other climate polluting industries”. The article notes that the right-wing populist group has attracted “more than a dozen donors from Britain’s once-dominant Conservative party”. Reform UK deputy leader Richard Tice has said his party would scrap “net stupid zero” policies during a visit to Scotland, BBC News reports. Tice later appeared on the BBC’s Question Time, where he continually “interrupted a discussion on climate change”, the Independent reports.

The move to a low-carbon economy could leave fossil-fuel assets worth $2.3tn stranded by the end of the next decade, according to a new analysis by the UK Sustainable Investment and Finance Association, covered by Bloomberg. Oil, gas and coal reserves, as well as other fossil-fuel infrastructure and investments, may “lose economic viability” as investors bet on “demand that won’t materialise”, according to those behind the reports, the news outlet notes. It adds that, while the losses are large, they are “considerably smaller than the economic destruction that would follow if the world abandons its efforts to slash greenhouse gas emissions”. The UK is singled out as being “disproportionately exposed” to these stranded assets, facing risks totalling $141bn, according to BusinessGreen. It notes that the report shows global fossil-fuel stranding risk has roughly doubled over the last five years, as companies have “continued to pump money into projects that are incompatible with global climate goals”. The Daily Telegraph covers the story under the headline “net-zero to cost British workers equivalent of £2,600 each”. 

In its coverage of the report, OilPrice.com rejects the notion that demand for fossil fuels is falling, noting that the “clearest evidence of the not so gloomy outlook for hydrocarbons” is major oil companies ditching their climate goals in recent months. Relatedly, oil giant BP’s emissions from both its operations and the use of its products rose last year, according to Reuters. And the Bureau of Investigative Journalism asks why banks with “net-zero” commitments continued to finance BP after it indicated it was dropping its climate goals.

Meanwhile, the UK’s biggest oil and gas producer, Harbour Energy, “fell to a post-tax loss last year, as North Sea taxes wiped out a doubling in pre-tax profits”, according to the Times. The article says the UK’s windfall tax on oil and gas profits has been “repeatedly increased and extended”, and is currently an extra 38% levy that will remain in place until March 2030. The Wall Street Journal quotes chief executive Linda Cook, who says the tax should be ended earlier to avoid what the newspaper calls “irreversible damage to the sector”. The Scotsman reports that Conservatives have said Scotland faces “dole, baby, dole” due to the Labour UK government’s plan to stop issuing new oil and gas licences in the North Sea.

In other fossil-fuel news, Bloomberg reports that Tanzania is planning to start a licensing round for dozens of oil and gas exploration blocks in May – “the first in more than a decade for the nation with an estimated 57tn cubic feet of natural gas reserves”. Of the blocks, 23 are offshore in the Indian Ocean and three are in Lake Tanganyika, according to Reuters. On the other side of the world, in Argentina, the Wall Street Journal asks if it is time to “drill, baby, drill”, querying whether “pro-business regulation [will] be enough to start a shale boom” in the country. Finally, the Guardian has an article, based on an analysis of 1,400 investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) cases, about how the “fear of billion-dollar lawsuits” by fossil-fuel companies can block countries from phasing out fossil fuels.

China has set out this year to “reduce its energy use per unit of GDP by about 3%”, which is below the 4% reduction last year, said the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), China’s top planner, according to Xinhua. In addition, China will also “formulate guidelines for a unified national electricity market system…promote the optimisation of the oil and gas pipeline…and deepen the pricing reform for grid-connected new energy”, the article says. The report, unveiled at the annual “two sessions” gathering of leaders in Beijing, also says the NDRC will continue building the “dual control of carbon” and promoting the national carbon markets. The report continues that NDRC plans to carry out the second batch of national carbon peak pilot projects, accelerate the “energy-saving and carbon-reduction transformation”, as well as building more renewable facilities – including those on deserts and offshore wind power. The report also mentions the promotion of “new quality productive forces” and the distribution of “special treasury bonds worth 500bn yuan ($69bn)” to support the expansion of the “two new” policy on equipment update and consumer goods trade-in, the state news agency adds. Bloomberg says the NDRC wants refiners to “cut production of refined petroleum products and increase output of chemicals”, according to its work report, which raised “new questions about demand in the largest importing nation just as the world’s drillers” are trying to “revive output” amid falling prices.

Meanwhile, the National Energy Administration (NEA) pledged at the “two sessions” to “accelerate regulatory planning” and “expand the market demand for the green electricity certificates”, reports China Power, a newspaper under the administration. “Two sessions” deputy Lin Jianhua, president of the Hubei branch of the People’s Bank of China, said “carbon finance” is going to help with the expansion of the carbon markets, Shanghai Securities Journal reports. Commerce minister Wang Wentao noted that China’s trade-in policy has “provided a new momentum for the automobile industry, especially the new energy vehicles (NEVs)”, says Shanghai-based the Paper. An article in state-supporting newspaper Global Times suggests that “heated discussions on ‘Beautiful China’ at [the] ‘two sessions’ [highlighted] Xi’s concept of ‘green GDP’”. The Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post (SCMP) publishes a report under the headline: “China’s Xi Jinping makes tech and private sector appeal on ‘two sessions’ sidelines.”

In other news, China’s sale of NEVs in February grew 85% year-on-year to 720,000 cars, says industry news outlet China Energy Net, citing the passenger car association. The country’s wind turbine exports also jumped nearly 42% last year, with the biggest importer being Saudi Arabia, financial news portal Caixin reports. Data released by the State Taxation Administration showed an uptick in equipment purchases and retail sales revenue, as the “consumer goods trade-in policy bore results” and “boosted consumer confidence”, reports China News Network. Finally, Wang Jianxin, the Chinese battery association’s vice-chairman, has cited “overcapacity…irrational resource allocation, homogenous products and low profitability” as some of the “long and steep problems the new energy storage industry faced, while “low utilisation rate” has been the industry’s “pain point”, reports Securities Daily.

In the legal battle with German energy giant RWE over glacier melt in Peru, plaintiff Saúl Luciano Lliuya “has expressed confidence in the German judiciary”, reports Stern. Lliuya filed his lawsuit in 2015, arguing RWE’s CO2 emissions contribute to glacier melt threatening his home, seeking €17,000 for protective measures, the outlet details. In 2022, after Covid-related delays, judges, legal representatives and experts travelled to Peru for an on-site inspection. According to the news, oral hearings in March will provide further insights on the case. Nevertheless, RWE argues that it has always “complied with government emission regulations” and is committed to becoming “carbon neutral” by 2040. (See a Carbon Brief guest post from 2021 for more on how attribution science could provide evidence for the lawsuit.)

Meanwhile, Mitteldeutscher Rundfunk reports that Germany may possess “substantial” lithium deposits bound in deep water layers in northern Germany, which could be accessed through old “natural” gas drilling sites. The article explains that lithium, which is usually imported to Germany from Chile, Australia and China, is the essential raw material for lithium-ion batteries. However, the outlet notes that Germany aims to reduce its dependence on imports. 

Elsewhere in German media, Ntv reports that the new German government insists Nord Stream 2’s commissioning is “not up for debate”. However, experts believe restoring the damaged pipeline is technically feasible, with repairs costing around €0.5bn. Handelsblatt reports that the German government will continue controlling Russian Rosneft’s German subsidiaries and its shares in PCK Schwedt and two other refineries, extending trust administration until 10 September 2025, as announced by the German economy ministry. And, finally, Die Presse reports that Austria’s three-party coalition has introduced new special taxes on electricity producers, noting that the finance ministry, led by Markus Marterbauer, will tax windfall profits starting at €100 per megawatt-hour (MWh), while investments in renewables will “no longer be considered as a mitigating factor”.

An article in the Times by Sunday Times science editor Ben Spencer and data journalist Anna Dowell makes the case for focusing more on adapting to the impacts of climate change in the UK and around the world. There was “a narrative of hope, of a battle to be fought and won” around the “fight against climate change”, they write. But “climate change is no longer something that can be averted”, they say, “it has arrived”. The article mentions examples from around the world of these impacts, including wildfires in California and flooding in Valencia, but focuses on the case of the UK. “While we can still limit warming by cutting emissions, we now face having to adapt to more extreme weather,” it states. The article explains that “part of the reluctance to push forwards with climate adaptation is finding ways to pay for it”. It notes that, unlike clean energy investments, adaptation does not generally yield returns – meaning there is a need for “central investment”.

Frans Timmermans, former lead on the EU’s Green Deal and now leader of the Dutch left-wing political alliance GroenLinks/PvdA, has an article in the Guardian making the case for the EU and its allies to stand with Ukraine and against “states that promote [Russian president Vladimir] Putin’s and [US president Donald] Trump’s agenda”. He says that “it is the Russian aggression in Ukraine that has made our energy prices rocket” in the Netherlands and that it is in the “national security interest to make progress on a genuine energy union” across the region. The article describes high energy prices as the “primary economic threat” in Europe. “This requires much more collective investment in energy networks, renewable energy, and also joint procurement of gas for as long as we need it,” Timmermans concludes.

Elsewhere, the Lex column in the Financial Times notes that the UK government is exploring whether changes to electricity pricing could cut “costly payments to switch off wind farms”. It questions “why they wasted so much time” in doing so and lays out the political issues with different options – such as “zonal pricing”. The article concludes: “Ministers have dithered for years on electricity reform. Trying to please everyone will only fritter away even more precious time.” A different perspective comes from Kallum Pickering, chief economist at the UK investment bank Peel Hunt and a Daily Telegraph contributor. He argues against net-zero policies in general, arguing that they are causing “weak economic growth, stalling living standards, high energy prices and deindustrialisation”.

A new study finds that planting trees to lower temperatures in urban settings has a differing impact on energy demand for air conditioning depending on the humidity of the city. Researchers model the effects of changing levels of tree cover in seven “hot” cities with a range of humidities: Riyadh, Phoenix, Dubai, New Delhi, Singapore, Lagos and Tokyo. They find that, in the hot-dry climates of Riyadh and Phoenix, trees reduce the average summertime energy use for air conditioning by 17%. In hot and humid climates, however, the average energy reduction is only 6-9%. They write: “These results can inform urban planning strategies to maximise reduction in the AC energy demand using urban trees.”