Five US senators are asking the Interior Department’s watchdog to look into whether references to the human impact on climate change were edited out of a government report, ABC News report. Last week Reveal News reported that National Park Service officials deleted all mentions of the human influence on climate change from 18 draft versions of the report on the impacts of sea level rise, with words like “anthropogenic” reportedly deleted. The senators wrote that the report “raises serious concerns with respect to how the department is – or is not – applying its scientific integrity policies to publicly released scientific reports.” A spokesman for the National Park Service said the draft report “has undergone several rounds of internal and external scientific peer review and is not yet complete”. Meanwhile, new data released by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and reported by Think Progress shows the US saw three climate and weather disasters, each resulting in more than $1bn in damages, in the first three months of 2018.

Negotiations over a long-term climate strategy for the global shipping industry are growing fractious as countries battle over the level of ambition, reports Climate Home News. Delegates are due to adopt an initial strategy by Friday at this week’s International Maritime Organisation (IMO) meeting. But the compromise emissions reduction goal on the table – 50% by 2050 compared to 2008 – is half the level small island states say is needed to prevent the most disastrous effects of climate change in their countries. “Yesterday and today make me less optimistic,” Green European Parliament member Bas Eickhout, from the Netherlands, told reporters on Tuesday. “What is on the table is the bare minimum, and it’s not good enough.” Carbon Pulse also reports on the talks. Carbon Brief last week published a detailed look at the different proposals on the table and the decades-long lead up to a climate deal for shipping at the IMO.

The National Grid said on Tuesday it expects low demand for electricity this summer due to rises in the output of small-scale renewables. “The increase in distribution connected generation, for example wind and solar PV, has contributed to this downward trend in demand,” the grid operator said in the report. Meanwhile, the Times reports on an announcement from British Gas that it will increase energy prices for more than four million households by 5.5% next month. “British Gas insisted that government policies were partly to blame for the increase,” the Times notes, “citing rising subsidies for green energy projects and the costs of installing smart meters, as well as higher wholesale gas and electricity prices.”

The XPRIZE Foundation unveiled 10 teams yesterday as semifinalists in its $20m contest to find a solution to carbon emissions, Scientific American reports. The competition is meant to find an economic use for planet-warming emissions, by turning them into a product. Ideas include using CO2 to make a stronger form of cement and bioplastics. The Mail Online also has the story.

The world’s most powerful wind turbine has been installed in waters off the coast of Aberdeen, its developer, Vattenfall, has confirmed. The 8.8MW turbine is the first of 11 the firm’s European Offshore Wind Deployment Centre (EOWDC). The giant device is so powerful that a single rotation of its blades could provide enough electricity to power an average UK home for a day, according to project director Adam Ezzamel. Energy Live News, Reuters and BusinessGreen also have the story. Meanwhile the Telegraph reports on a new BP pilot project in the US to store wind power using Tesla technology, set to launch this year. Reutersalso has the story.

Plans by EDF to build new nuclear reactors in Britain are facing fresh scrutiny after it admitted finding serious quality control failings that could affect the safety of a prototype project in France, the Times reports. The news comes weeks after Britain’s nuclear regulator raised concerns about substandard quality control checks on EDF’s supply chain for Hinkley Point. The Guardian also has the story. Carbon Brief published a detailed Q&A on Hinkley C in 2016.

Conservationists have said two butterflies in decline suffered their worst year on record last year as the species struggled in difficult weather conditions, Herald Scotland reports. While there were hopes the butterflies would bounce back after the summer in 2016, the fourth worse of the 42 on record, cold snap at the end of April and a gloomy wet summer hit many species already struggling due to habitat loss and climate change. Both grayling and grizzled skippers recorded their lowest numbers since records began. Speaking to the Guardian Prof Tom Brereton, head of monitoring at Butterfly Conservation, said butterflies are going from one bad year to another, not helped by the weather which is “going all over the place”. “A lot of climate change research has focused on average increases in temperature, which should be beneficial to many butterflies but the variable and extreme weather that comes with climate change is having a negative effect and disrupting butterflies.” The Express also has the story. Carbon Brief recently reported on new research showing the British swallowtail, the UK’s largest butterfly, could go extinct in the UK as a result of climate change.

“The precious inheritance of our environment…is not the property of this generation – or any other – to squander,” writes Vicky Ford , conservative MP for Chelmsford. In a piece looking at the growing importance of environmental issues for people, “especially many young voters”, she narrows in on onshore wind as an “easy win” that could also cut energy bills. While “this government is doing more than any other to tackle the greatest threat of all to our environment: climate change”, she says there is “even more that could be done”. “Onshore wind technology has improved significantly. It is now a cheap source of new electricity generation which does not need taxpayer subsidies to be competitive. It is supported by a majority of Conservative voters, while nationally it enjoys huge popularity – with only 2% strongly opposed to new turbines.”

“Furry, button-nosed and dependent on sea ice for their survival, polar bears have long been poster animals for climate change,” writes Erica Goode in the New York Times. The scientific evidence that the polar bear’s Arctic home is warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet is overwhelming, she adds. But in an peer-reviewed article published Tuesday, 14 prominent researchers argue that “denialist blogs with wide followings are using the bears to spread misinformation about the causes and consequences of climate change”. Goode details the resulting scuffle from the paper, noting that “mainstream scientists are in agreement that polar bear numbers will decline drastically as Arctic sea ice disappears”. Carbon Brief published an explainer on what the science says on polar bears and climate change in 2015.

Ice melt from the undersides of Antarctica’s ice shelves could increase by as much as 129% this century with efforts to cut CO2 emissions, a new study says. Using an ice shelf model and a collection of climate models, researchers simulated future changes in Antarctic ice shelves under intermediate and business-as-usual emissions scenarios. The projections show an increase in ice shelf melt by between 41% and 129% as a result of an increase in warm Circumpolar Deep Water intruding onto the Antarctic continental shelf. Every part of Antarctica affected in both scenarios, the researchers say, with the largest increases in melt occurring in the Amundsen Sea.

Meeting California’s goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by the year 2050 could prevent thousands of deaths a year from poor air quality, new research suggests. Compared with a business-as-usual projection, the “climate-friendly” scenario that meets the 2050 goal shows a reduction in air pollution deaths in California in 2050 by around a quarter – equivalent to 1537-2358 avoided deaths a year. These public health benefits make “a compelling argument for the adoption of low-carbon energy in California, with implications for other regions in the US and across the world”, the researchers conclude.