Connect with us

Published

on

Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.

This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.

This week

Unprecedented heat

‘RED ALERT’: The UN’s World Meteorological Organization (WMO) issued a “red alert” on climate change, after 2023 saw record heat, ice-melt and greenhouse gas emissions, the Associated Press reported. The WMO’s report confirmed that 2023 was the hottest year on record, with the average global temperature reaching 1.45C, noted the Guardian. The world is getting ever closer to temporarily breaching 1.5C, the ambition set under the Paris Agreement, the Independent said. 

IMPACTS REVEALED:  According to the WMO, extreme weather events are having an “alarming” impact on food insecurity, the Financial Times reported. The FT said there were 333 million people in 2023 who were “acutely food insecure”, compared to 149 million people before the Covid-19 pandemic. Elsewhere, Al Jazeera reported that “over 90% of ocean waters experienced heatwave conditions at least once” in 2023. 

SCIENTISTS STUNNED: Reacting to the report, Prof Jonathan Bamber, a glaciologist at the University of Bristol, told the i newspaper: “The pace of climate breakdown that we’re witnessing is faster than I think the vast majority of climate scientists were anticipating five or 10 years ago. Things are changing so rapidly that myself and quite a few of my colleagues do have concerns that some of our estimates could be on the conservative side.” It comes as leading climate scientist Dr Gavin Schmidt published a piece in Nature saying that researchers are finding 2023’s extremes “hard to explain” and that Earth could be entering “uncharted territory”.

Big Oil backtracks

TEXAS HOLD ‘EM: As Earth continues to face record-breaking extremes, executives from the world’s leading oil-and-gas companies gathered this week to “pour scorn” on efforts to move away from fossil fuels, reported the Guardian. According to the newspaper, Amin Nasser, the chief executive of state firm Saudi Aramco, told the industry’s annual Cera Week summit in Texas: “We should abandon the fantasy of phasing out oil and gas and instead invest in them adequately.” 

BUSINESS AS USUAL: Also reporting on the summit, Reuters noted that many oil-and-gas CEOs shared Nasser’s views, adding: “Shell’s Wael Sawan point[ed] to government bureaucracy in Europe as slowing needed development. Petrobras CEO Jean Paul Prates said caution should overrule haste. Exxon Mobil CEO Darren Woods also said regulations governing clean fuels have still not been resolved.” It came as the Guardian covered a new report from Global Witness suggesting that emissions connected to top oil and gas firms could cause 11.5 million additional heat deaths by 2100. 

Around the world 

  • CLIMATE MINISTERIAL: At a climate ministerial in Copenhagen, a “troika” made up of the United Arab Emirates, Azerbaijan and Brazil – the hosts of COP28, COP29 and COP30, respectively – urged countries to update their international emissions pledges by 2025, the Hindustan Times reported.
  • SCHOOL CLOSURES: South Sudan has closed all its schools for an expected two weeks as temperatures are forecast to reach 45C, BBC News reported. It comes as Carbon Brief covered a new attribution analysis finding climate change made recent heat in west Africa 10 times more likely.
  • US TRANSPORT: The Biden administration announced new rules to tackle pollution from the nation’s cars and light trucks, “imposing tailpipe emission limits so stringent they will compel automakers to rapidly boost sales of battery-electric and plug-in hybrid models”, Bloomberg reported. 
  • UK COURTS: The UK Court of Appeal has ruled that climate activists prosecuted in England and Wales for criminal damage can no longer use the “consent defence” – that they believe the property owner would have given their consent to the action if they understood the reason for the protest – the Financial Times reported. 
  • GREEN STEEL: A new report found that China is “falling short” in decarbonising its steel sector, due to “slowing demand, low recycling rates and lingering overcapacity concerns” impeding the transition to lower-emission production, said Reuters
  • BRAZIL HEATWAVE: Following a record “heat index” (which factors in the impact of humidity) of up to 62C in the Brazilian capital Rio de Janeiro last weekend, O Globo reported that heatwaves may become more frequent in the country.

13 million

The number of residents in India’s southern tech capital of Bengaluru who are running out of groundwater following an “unusually hot” February and March, the Associated Press reported. 


Latest climate research

  • Over the past 60 years, livestock grazing has reduced soil carbon stocks by 46bn tonnes of carbon at a depth of one metre, a study in Nature Climate Change found. 
  • Research in Nature Cities found that only 43% of 793 cities studied have implemented green recovery plans in response to the Covid-19 pandemic.  
  • A study in Climatic Change gathered the opinions of 20 policymakers and practitioners from different countries about the readability of figures drafted for the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on how to tackle climate change. It recommended ways that the figures could be improved, based on the feedback.

(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)

Captured

Replacing a gas boiler in the UK with a new heat pump would cut emissions by 77-86%

New Carbon Brief analysis debunked 18 of the most common and persistent myths about heat pumps. Heat pumps can significantly cut greenhouse gas emissions (see chart above) and are the “central technology in the global transition to secure and sustainable heating”, according to the International Energy Agency. Yet, in major economies such as the UK and Germany, heat pumps are the subject of hostile and misleading reporting across many mainstream media outlets, according to Carbon Brief’s new factcheck.

Spotlight

Rare-earth mining in Myanmar

This week, Carbon Brief interviews an expert about how rare-earth mining in Myanmar has increased since the country’s military coup in 2021, its impacts on local communities and the environment, plus how it can be better monitored and controlled.

Vicky Bowman for DeBriefed

Myanmar is rich in natural resources. It is home to a wealth of gemstones, energy sources, such as coal and uranium, as well as vast amounts of rare earths.

Dysprosium and terbium are two rare earths that are heavily mined in Myanmar. They are used in a range of everyday technologies, such as light bulbs, but are increasingly being used for renewable energy, including for electric vehicles and wind turbines.

As countries race to achieve their climate targets, demand for these rare earths is substantially increasing. The Irrawaddy reported that Myanmar exported more than 140,000 tonnes of rare-earth deposits to China between May 2017 and October 2021, valued at more than $1bn. 

However, much of Myanmar’s mining industry is illicit and controlled by armed groups. Illegal mining has grown since the country’s military coup in 2021, particularly along the Chinese border in Kachin State.

China, the world’s biggest low-carbon technology producer and the largest processor of rare earths, is now increasingly outsourcing its mining activities into neighbouring Myanmar amid growing national concerns over the highly polluting process.

Below, Carbon Brief speaks to Vicky Bowman (pictured above), director of the not-for-profit Myanmar Centre for Responsible Business, about escalating issues with rare-earth mining in the country. The interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Carbon Brief: Please can you give an overview of rare-earth mining in Myanmar and how it has developed since the military coup in 2021?

Vicky Bowman: Rare-earth mining has been taking place in Kachin state, north-eastern Myanmar, on China’s border for around a decade, mainly by Chinese miners in areas under the control of the pro-military Kachin militias. Chinese companies started to source more from Kachin state because of a clampdown on rare-earth mining in Yunnan due to environmental pollution.

Satellite footage commissioned by Global Witness showed that rare-earth mining has significantly expanded since the coup. It also takes place to a lesser extent in areas controlled by the Kachin Independence Organisation (KIO), which is opposed to the Myanmar military. The KIO planned to expand rare-earth mining to raise funds for their armed struggle, but they faced significant local backlash and dropped the expansion plans in 2023. 

CB: What impacts is rare-earth mining having on people, particularly Indigenous peoples, and the environment in Myanmar?

VB: Indigenous peoples in the areas where rare-earth mining is taking place in Kachin state, mostly Kachin ethnic minority, rely on agriculture and forests for their livelihood and culture. These areas are also rich in biodiversity. The leaching process for extracting rare-earth ores requires leaching it from the soil using ammonia and other chemicals. These chemicals enter the environment and poison the streams and fields, killing trees, cattle and local nature and making local people sick.

CB: What needs to happen to better monitor and control the impacts of rare-earth mining in Myanmar?

VB: The vast majority of mining in Myanmar nowadays is unplanned, unregulated and unlicensed. The national Mining Law is not fit for purpose. It fails to align with other laws, such as those concerning investment, environmental protection and land use. There are few, if any, officials in any of the ministries who understand how to regulate mining. Corruption is rife. If and when Myanmar’s political crisis is resolved, the policy and legal framework for mining needs to be completely overhauled into a federal system, which can ensure effective land-use planning and environmental protection, and transparent tax revenues for central and sub-national governments and local communities.

Indeed, creating an effective framework for responsible mining is central to resolving conflicts between local people and the central government, and should be a priority for anyone working on peace.

Watch, read, listen

WHEN HEAT KILLS: A new documentary by Deutsche Welle investigated the effects of extreme heat on human health, particularly for outdoor workers, as the climate warms. 

CLIMATE OF FEAR: Atmospheric scientist Prof Adam Sobel unpacked coping with the daunting uncertainties of climate change in an article in Nature

RIGHTS FOR NATURE?: The latest episode of the Guardian’s Science Weekly podcast explored the contested concept of whether nature should have rights. 

Coming up

Pick of the jobs

DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org

The post DeBriefed 22 March 2024: ‘Red alert’ for Earth; Heat-pump myths factchecked; Myanmar’s rare-earth mining crisis appeared first on Carbon Brief.

DeBriefed 22 March 2024: ‘Red alert’ for Earth; Heat-pump myths factchecked; Myanmar’s rare-earth mining crisis

Continue Reading

Climate Change

After another battery startup bankruptcy, can Europe ever cut reliance on China?

Published

on

Just one year ago, Lars Christian Bacher said his career embodied the energy transition – moving from CFO of Norway’s state-controlled oil company Equinor to leading one of Europe’s few home-grown battery makers.

Morrow Batteries was on a mission to compete alongside the industry’s dominant Asian, mainly Chinese, battery producers as Europe sought to reduce its reliance on imports, Bacher told a group of foreign journalists on a sunny day in Oslo last May.

But seven months later, Bacher stepped down as CEO, and earlier this month, Morrow Batteries said it had filed for bankruptcy after its financial situation “deteriorated”.

Coming a year after Swedish battery maker Northvolt filed for bankruptcy, industry analysts said Morrow’s descent into financial difficulties would likely deal a fresh blow to investor confidence in European battery manufacturers – potentially keeping Europe dependent on Chinese energy transition technology for longer.

While bigger European battery makers such as ACC, Verkor and PowerCo – linked to car-makers Stellantis, Renault and Volkswagen, respectively – are still in business, Europe needs to reduce its reliance on China, experts say.

“It’s just such a critical technology that you cannot rely on somebody else,” said Julia Poliscanova, batteries lead at the Brussels-based advocacy group Transport & Environment.

Lars Christian Bacher talks to journalists in Oslo on 13 May 2025 (Photo: Joe Lo)

State-backed eco-batteries

Established in 2020, Morrow Batteries expanded its workforce to more than 200 and has the ability to produce three million batteries a year at its factory in the forest outside the coastal city of Arendal, on Norway’s picturesque southern tip.

Investors in the startup included industrial engineering companies Siemens and ABB, and it received a 550 million krone ($59 million) loan from state development agency Innovation Norway. State-owned energy and investment companies were also among its shareholders.

Morrow has promoted its batteries as particularly sustainable, with solar and hydropower supplying energy to the factory. Its lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries do not contain nickel or cobalt, distancing them from the environmental and social problems often linked to critical minerals mining.

“From a sustainability point of view, this is as good as it gets,” Bacher said last May.

He did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the company’s decision to file for bankruptcy proceedings.

Morrow’s LFP battery pack and cells (Photo: Morrow)

It aimed to sell these batteries for energy storage, increasingly important as variable solar and wind power comes to dominate European grids, and for off-road and commercial vehicles. Those sectors, rather than electric cars and motorbikes, were being targeted because they were subject to less ferocious competition from Asia, Bacher said.

Industry experts say Morrow started smaller and slower than Northvolt, was selective about its target customers and secured deals with Finnish environmental technology company Proventia Oy and an unnamed German defence company.

But it still ran into financial trouble.

Cash crunch proves costly

In a statement announcing the bankruptcy, Morrow’s board said it had been trying to secure a new industrial investor and finance, and that “several of the ongoing efforts had reached an advanced stage”.

But these talks “could not be concluded within the constraints imposed by the group’s liquidity situation”, it said, blaming the failure on “the capital requirements inherent in an early industrialisation phase” combined with “increased capital costs, delays in the industrialisation process and a more restrained investment market”.

Northvolt’s bankruptcy may have also damaged Morrow’s attempts to raise money. Last May, Bacher himself acknowledged that it “didn’t help”. 

Morrow also cited oversupply in the global battery market, and the resulting downward “price pressure”. The price of LFP batteries fell by nearly half between 2022 and 2025, eating into producers’ profit margins, according to the International Energy Agency.

Morrow’s factory near Arendal pictured in June 2024 (Photo: Morrow)

The hefty state investment in Morrow has generated controversy in Norway following its bankruptcy. The leader of the right-wing Progress Party (FrP), Sylvi Listhaug, has said Norwegian taxpayers’ money was wasted on an unviable business. 

But others, like Poliscanova and the head of the European Battery Alliance trade association Emma Nehrenheim, told Climate Home News that if Europe wants a battery industry, it will need to back home-grown manufacturers whole-heartedly.

“Valley of death” kills startups

As European battery manufacturers work to perfect and scale up their technology and processes, they face “a valley of death” with severe competition and little patience from investors or battery customers who “can easily buy them from China”, Poliscanova said.

Startups like Morrow typically raise project financing to get them off the ground, according to Nehrenheim. In the period between that finance ending and reaching profitability, they have to rely on money they set aside as a project reserve. 

If they underestimate this reserve, which she said is easy to do when setting up a new factory making a new product, they need more money to bridge the gap. This can come from specialised bridging investors, from customers or from governments.

For Morrow, however, the money did not arrive in time.

Nehrenheim – who was previously Northvolt’s chief environmental officer – said it was a characteristically European failure from investors.

“We’re not good at this,” she said. “We’re not bold enough to compete with Silicon Valley or the Asian (countries), who have been scaling industry now for decades.”

Clean energy sovereignty vs price

Since Northvolt’s bankruptcy filing, the European Union has announced policies to support European battery makers.

It is introducing a €1.5 billion ($1.7 billion) “battery booster“, providing interest-free loans to battery manufacturers. It is considering putting tariffs on imported batteries, subsidising European battery makers and tying electric car incentives to locally made batteries through the Industrial Accelerator Act. None of these policies are yet in place.

With trade disputes rising up the agenda of UN climate talks, Poliscanova conceded that such moves are protectionist, although she said she prefers to call them industrial policy.

“Honestly,” she said, “the EU and the UK are the two large global blocks left that don’t have such industrial protectionist policies. India has it, Brazil has it, China has it, the US has it – we’re literally the last fool standing thinking that [the World Trade Organization] is the way to go.”

Li Shuo, China Climate Hub director at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said that the trade-offs between cheap foreign batteries and more expensive European ones “need to be discussed honestly”.

“How much higher are Europeans willing to pay?” he said. “How much delay in climate deployment is acceptable? Can we really decarbonise and de-risk at the same time? How long can politicians condemn cheap Chinese imports while consumers simultaneously demand affordability?”

While European policymakers want to fight China, the average European just wants a cheap battery, he added.

Closing the cost gap

But once European battery makers scale up, the price gap with Chinese batteries will shrink, Poliscanova said.

While German LFP battery cells are 90% more expensive than those made in China, scale-up could close this gap to a “sovereignty premium” of just 25% by 2030, Transport & Environment estimates.

Nehrenheim acknowledged that most of Europe’s batteries will continue to come from Asia or the United States. “I’m very happy for that because they’re scaling fast and they get great support subsidies in their respective countries to supply us to help us in the [energy] transition,” she said.

But European-headquartered companies must make at least a quarter of the region’s batteries, she said, otherwise if supply is disrupted – whether by geopolitical factors, a pandemic or natural disaster – the industry will have nothing to scale up from.

Nehrenheim said she was almost 100% confident that Morrow’s factory will continue to produce batteries. The company said it expected a court-appointed bankruptcy administrator to assume control over the company’s assets and operations.

Citing investors’ €1.4 billion ($1.62 billion) reprieve of Swedish green steelmaker Stegra in April, Nehrenheim said there were reasons to be hopeful about Morrow’s survival as Europe demands batteries for diverse uses beyond cars – from energy storage to drones and forklift trucks.

“Somebody will pick this up,” she said.

The post After another battery startup bankruptcy, can Europe ever cut reliance on China? appeared first on Climate Home News.

After another battery startup bankruptcy, can Europe ever cut reliance on China?

Continue Reading

Climate Change

‘Energy Vampires’: Greenpeace calls for moratorium on data centres as new report reveals frenzied rollout would derail energy transition

Published

on

SYDNEY, Wednesday 27 May 2026 — A new report from Greenpeace Australia Pacific and independent expert Ketan Joshi reveals how the frenzied rollout of AI data centres in Australia is set to derail the renewable energy transition, entrench gas and turbocharge climate pollution, prompting calls for an urgent moratorium on data centre approvals until appropriate guardrails are in place.

The report, Energy Vampires: the AI data centres draining Australia, reveals the staggering scale of data centre growth in Australia, set to follow a US path of emissions blowout and rising community opposition to the resource-hungry facilities. The report exposes the links between the data centre lobby and the gas industry, who are using data centre growth to justify extracting more gas.

Greenpeace Australia Pacific is calling on the Federal Government to urgently implement a moratorium on the construction and approval of new data centres, until appropriate regulations and safeguards have been put in place to protect the climate and communities.

Key findings:

  • Data centres are already failing to cover their own demand with additional renewable energy, and resisting calls to mandate that they do.
  • At its peak, Australia’s biggest proposed data centre, the 1GW Mamre Road Data Centre Campus in Western Sydney, will generate annual emissions equivalent to 560,000 petrol cars, or all domestic flights within NSW in 2023.
  • There are early signs of a data centre-fuelled gas boom in Australia, including proposals for new on-site gas, as seen in the US. 
  • Cloud Carrier’s proposed gas-fired data centre in NSW would wipe out the state’s entire projected 2028 emissions cuts.
  • Even if only 1 in 4 new Australian data centres were powered by new on-site gas, it would result in 2.8x higher total emissions compared to using grid power.

Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “Australia is completely unprepared for the magnitude of impacts of the AI-driven data centre frenzy. Data centres are being rolled out at a feverish pace, with some of the largest planned for Australia consuming as much energy as Adelaide. The recent federal and state energy minister communique is a positive first step towards regulating the data centre industry, and managing its impact on the energy transition and the communities where they’re being built.

“But we should all be concerned by the extreme lack of scrutiny being applied to the companies leading the data centre charge in Australia and their proposals. Without strong, legislated standards, we risk replicating the disastrous US pattern, where Big Tech corporations have carte blanche to drain energy and water, and build new, polluting gas and diesel-powered plants to fuel their operations. This has seen mounting community opposition that transcends party politics, something we’re beginning to see here in Australia.

“Greenpeace is calling for a moratorium on new data centre approvals and construction until we have clearly defined, enforceable regulations and standards in place to govern this industry — essential if we hope to avoid the alarming outcomes outlined in this report.

“Australia is not a playground for Big Tech corporations. It is time our leaders stepped up and took seriously their role as custodians of our resources and protectors of our society and environment.”

Ketan Joshi, independent report author and climate expert said: “Impatience is not a virtue. The reckless data centre buildout is heaping massive new load onto the grid, meaning renewables have to run harder just to stay in the same spot. Currently data centres increase coal and gas output and delay shutdowns, while plugging polluting gas into data centres does the damage directly instead.

“Unless the data centre industry builds no new fossil fuels and far more new renewables than new demand, we end up worse off. Australia’s gas industry sees a lifeline in an unchecked data centre frenzy, and the feeling seems to be mutual.

“Data centre demand projections keep jabbing upwards each revision, and emissions projections keep getting worse. Everywhere in the world facing this frenzy sees the same trend.

“Data centre moratoria have bipartisan support in countries around the world as the only path to reintroducing careful, considered governance of data centre growth. In the context of an irrational, unjustified panic, a temporary pause brings reason and rationality, along with bringing power to communities.”

-ENDS-

Images and an interview clipreel of Greenpeace spokespeople at the Mamre Road data centre in Western Sydney available here.

Media contacts:

Lucy Keller on 0491 135 308 or lucy.keller@greenpeace.org 
Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org

‘Energy Vampires’: Greenpeace calls for moratorium on data centres as new report reveals frenzied rollout would derail energy transition

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Energy Vampires: the AI data centres draining Australia

Published

on

A new report from Greenpeace Australia Pacific and independent expert Ketan Joshi reveals how the frenzied rollout of AI data centres in Australia is set to derail the renewable energy transition, entrench gas and turbocharge climate pollution, prompting calls for an urgent moratorium on data centre approvals until appropriate guardrails are in place.

The frenzied rollout of AI data centres in Australia is rushing through massive new projects, which will derail Australia’s energy transition unless the government urgently intervenes.

Greenpeace campaigner Solaye Snider at the site of the proposed Mamre Rd data centre with a banner saying "Data centres = energy vampires"
Greenpeace campaigner Solaye Snider at the site of the proposed Mamre Rd data centre in Sydney. If approved, the data centre will be the biggest in Australia and will generate peak annual grid emissions equivalent to that produced by 560,000 petrol cars. © Toby Davidson / Greenpeace

Key findings

  • The frenzied rollout of AI data centres in Australia is rushing through massive new projects, which will derail Australia’s energy transition unless the government urgently intervenes. Our conservative assumptions mean this impact is understated, in this analysis.
  • Australia’s biggest proposed data centre, the 1GW Mamre Road Data Centre Campus in Western Sydney, will generate peak annual grid emissions equivalent to that produced by 560,000 petrol cars for a year or all domestic flights within NSW in 2023.
Bitcoin Big Horn Data Center in Hardin, Montana. © Janie Osborne / Greenpeace
The Big Horn Data Hub and the Hardin Generating Station in Hardin, Montana. © Janie Osborne / Greenpeace
  • Data centres already fail to cover their own emissions with new renewables and their rollout will dramatically hold back Australia’s energy transition.
  • No data centre operator analysed in this report adequately proves their claim of driving Australia’s renewable energy growth. Claims they are doing this through truly “additional” new power purchasing agreements for renewable energy are unsubstantiated.
  • There are early signs of a data centre-fuelled gas boom in Australia, which will come with massive, nationally significant climate costs. For example, the Tamboran proposal for the Northern Territory would effectively double the state’s emissions. In NSW, Cloud Carrier’s proposed gas-fired project would wipe out NSW’s entire projected 2028 emissions cuts.

  • Even if only 1 in 4 new Australian data centres were powered by new on-site gas, it would result in 2.8x higher total emissions compared to using grid power.
  • New analysis shows that on-site gas for data centres globally could fuel emissions that exceed Brazil’s total power grid emissions by 2030.
  • Fossil fuel corporations are quietly joining the data centre lobby group as members, and sponsoring and attending technology industry conferences. The two industries are reinforcing each other’s talking points and PR spin.
Clean Our Cloud Action in Seattle. © Greenpeace © Greenpeace
Clean Our Cloud Action in Seattle. © Greenpeace
  • Data centre operators do not disclose the customers of an individual facility, the purpose of the computations performed there, or site-specific energy consumption, despite the industry’s defense of its ‘critical infrastructure’ status or claims of transparency. It is a matter of public record that AI is being used for abuse, war and other human rights violations.
  • Data centres can be ‘right sized’ through community ownership schemes, well-deployed AI software and strict moratoria to allow for democratic governance of this industry.
An aerial view of the Facebook Data Center in Forest City. The 150-acre facility is the second Facebook-built data center in the United States. © Greenpeace

This report recommends:

  • An urgent moratorium on data centre development until safeguards are legislated
  • Binding, legislated standards for AI development, including substantiated claims of additional renewable energy
  • Full disclosure of services delivered, emissions, finances and energy use, per project
  • Full assessment of compliance with human rights frameworks

Lead author: Ketan Joshi is an independent climate, environment and sustainability expert. He was the lead author on “The AI Climate Hoax”, published with several corporate accountability and environmental groups in 2026, and previously wrote “Windfall: Unlocking a Fossil Free Future” with the University of New South Wales Press. He worked for eight years in Australia’s renewable energy sector (corporate and government), and has worked with European NGOs working on climate communications and corporate accountability.

Energy Vampires: the AI data centres draining Australia

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com