CCL staffers Dana Nuccitelli and Elissa Tennant
Episode 104: Saving Clean Energy Tax Credits: Inside the Inflation Reduction Act Fight
Episode Summary:
In this episode of Citizens’ Climate Radio, we dive into the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA)—the biggest climate legislation in U.S. history—and the urgent effort underway to protect its clean energy tax credits.
CCL’s Content Marketing Manager Elissa Tennant joins CCL’s Research Manager Dana Nuccitelli to break it all down. You’ll learn what the IRA funds, how clean energy tax credits work for individuals and businesses, and why these policies are now under threat. Dana also explains the budget reconciliation process, the challenges in Congress, and the surprising level of bipartisan public support for clean energy investment.
You’ll leave this episode knowing exactly why clean energy tax credits matter — and what simple actions you can take to defend it.
Featured Guests:
- Elissa Tennant is CCL’s Content Marketing Manager, leading strategy and creation for web, social media, and volunteer resources.
- Dana Nuccitelli is CCL’s Research Manager, an environmental scientist, and an award-winning climate journalist with a background in physics and over a decade of science communication experience.
Listen Now!
Resources Mentioned:
Take action to defend clean energy tax credits: cclusa.org/IRAdefense
Register for the 2025 Citizens’ Climate Lobby Summer Conference: cclusa.org/conference
Get involved with other climate actions: cclusa.org/action
Schoolhouse Rock: Tyrannosaurus Debt (explainer video): Watch on YouTube
Join CCL’s Nerd Corner (for policy deep dives): CCL Community – Nerd Corner
Highlights:
- Why the Inflation Reduction Act focuses so heavily on clean energy.
- What “tax credits” mean for individuals, businesses, and the broader economy.
- How budget reconciliation works—and why it’s mostly a partisan process today.
- Why Republicans and Democrats alike have reasons to support clean energy tax credits.
- How CCL volunteers are defending climate investments—and how you can help.
We Want to Hear from You
Email: radio @ citizensclimate.org
Text/Voicemail: 619-512-9646
Social Media: Follow us on X, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook, and TikTok.
Transcript
Peterson Toscano:
Welcome to Citizens Climate Radio, your climate change podcast. I’m Peterson Toscano.
Each month, we take you behind the scenes of climate policy. We break down what’s happening in Washington and beyond, and we share real steps you can take to make a difference.
Today, we are going to do something new. In this episode, CCL’s Elissa Tennant teams up with our policy wizard, Dana Nuccitelli. They’ll unpack what’s going on with the IRA.
No, not the Irish Republican Army. You’ll find out what the IRA is—but you probably know already, if you’re listening to this podcast—why the IRA matters and how you can help.
Elissa and Dana join us to talk about CCL
Peterson Toscano:
Elissa and Dana, welcome to today’s show.
Elissa Tennant:
Hello, hello. Good to be here.
Dana Nuccitelli:
Hi, Peterson.
Peterson Toscano:
What is your title, Dana?
Dana Nuccitelli:
I am CCL’s Research Manager..
Peterson Toscano:
a.k.a. policy wizard. Since you’re going to be on the show a lot the next few months, I thought it’d be great for you to tell the listeners a bit about yourselves and what you do for CCL.
But before that, I have an icebreaker for you.
If you could title your very own climate bill, what would it be?
Peterson Toscano:
If you could title your very own climate bill, what would it be and why?
Elissa Tennant:
I will go first, Dana, if that’s cool. I’m already going. If I could title a climate bill, I would call it the “Future Generations Security Act.”
I was browsing LinkedIn on Earth Day, as one does, and I saw this quote that I fear-ate a little bit. It said, “The Earth is not something we inherit from our ancestors; it’s something we borrow from our children.” And I feel like that hit.
I think that the Future Generations Security Act would have broad appeal and speak to that need to protect the Earth for our children—not that I have any.
Peterson Toscano:
Great. I love that.
Elissa Tennant:
Wow.
Dana Nuccitelli:
You put a lot of thought into that answer. Well done. We’ve got the Inflation Reduction Act, and I always felt it should be called the Climate Changed Reduction Act. So I’m going to go with that simple answer.
Peterson Toscano:
Oh, good. I like that.
Elissa and Dana are content marketing managers at Climate Change Now
Peterson Toscano:
Could you tell the listeners just a little bit about yourselves? Whatever you want to share about your own lives and what you do at CCL.
Elissa Tennant:
Yeah. So I am the Content Marketing Manager at CCL. I work on CCL’s marketing team. Every video, social media post—I make content. I make cool stuff.
I like to call myself a metaphorical air traffic controller, deciding what gets made based on our messaging, what kind of bills are running through Congress, and what we want to say to the people.
Dana Nuccitelli:
I’m an environmental scientist and a climate journalist. As the Research Manager, I keep up with the latest climate science research and policy and do a lot of education of our volunteers. And I make social media videos when Elissa forces me to, which is all the time.
Peterson Toscano:
All the time.
Dana Nuccitelli:
All the time.
Peterson Toscano:
Well, great. I’m excited that you’re going to be here. I’m going to take a back seat on this one and just sort of let you go for it. I’ll listen and learn, as I really need to do.
So thank you, Elissa and Dana, for taking over the show today, listener. I leave you in capable hands.
Elissa Tennant:
Thank you, Peterson, for having us.
Elissa Tennant:
Before we dive into the show, I just want to mention that Dana and I will be live and in person at CCL’s summer conference this July in Washington, D.C., which is a great opportunity to lobby your members of Congress on the Hill, but also have a full, jam-packed day of action preparing you to meet with your members of Congress.
If you want to join us there, please visit cclusa.org/conference.
But now, let’s talk about the Inflation Reduction Act, which is the aforementioned IRA and the clean energy tax credits that come with it.
Citizens Climate Radio is digging into the Inflation Reduction Act
Elissa Tennant:
I’m Elissa Tennant. Welcome to Citizens Climate Radio. Today, I am joined by Dana Nuccitelli, CCL’s Research Manager—recently got a promotion, shout out!
We are digging into the Inflation Reduction Act—what it is, how it works, and why the clean energy tax credits in this historic act are suddenly under threat.
So if you’re hearing phrases like “tax credits” and “budget reconciliation” and feeling your eyes glaze over, please do not worry. We are in this together. We’ve got you. Dana and I are going to walk you through it.
The Inflation Reduction Act was passed in August of 2022
Elissa Tennant:
Let’s start with the big picture, Dana. What is the Inflation Reduction Act, when did it pass, and why is it such a big deal for climate?
Dana Nuccitelli:
The Inflation Reduction Act was by far the biggest climate bill that the United States has ever passed.
We passed it in August of 2022. It’s a big deal for the climate because it has lots of investments in clean energy that will result in a big reduction in climate pollution over the next decade or so—assuming it stays in place.
Elissa Tennant:
Throwback to your climate bill fantasy—you said you would have called it the Climate Changed Reduction Act.
Why wasn’t it called that? Why didn’t they take that brilliant idea and run with it? Why is it the Inflation Reduction Act?
Dana Nuccitelli:
It was a nice bit of marketing because everybody was very, very worried about inflation at the time—and still is.
So they called it the Inflation Reduction Act to make sure it would be very popular.
And to be fair, in the long term, it should reduce the risks of inflation because fossil fuels tend to be a big contributor to inflation.
Their prices are very volatile—the price of oil can go up and down quite a bit.
If we can reduce our reliance on fossil fuels like oil over the long term, that will reduce future risks of inflation.
So it’s kind of a long-term inflation reduction risk act.
But just calling it the Inflation Reduction Act was a nice bit of marketing.
Elissa Tennant:
I think I am biased, but I’m a really big fan of nice marketing. So I will allow Inflation Reduction Act to stand. Fine.
One of the IRA’s most powerful tools is this concept of clean energy tax credits. So can you break down why we are here today?
What actually are these clean energy tax credits?
Dana Nuccitelli:
Yeah, the bill had a whole bunch of different clean energy tax credits.
There are a couple of categories. There are investment and production tax credits for clean electricity and manufacturing.
So you can think about an example of a solar panel. If you are investing in a facility to manufacture solar panels, there’s a tax credit for that.
And then if you have a facility that’s manufacturing solar panels, you get a tax credit for the solar panels that you’re manufacturing.
Those solar panels can then go into building a solar generation facility—a solar farm.
If you’re investing in building a solar farm, you can get a tax credit for that.
Or if you are producing solar energy from an existing solar farm, you can get a tax credit for that too.
That’s one big category.
There’s also tax credits for things like carbon capture and storage, hydrogen, and nuclear power.
Then there are also a category of tax credits for consumers.
Some examples are:
- Electric vehicles (there’s a tax credit for new, used, and commercial EVs, and for leasing an electric vehicle).
- Home energy efficiency improvements or electrification with technologies like heat pumps.
- Putting solar panels and battery systems on your roof if you’re a homeowner—or you can do it as a business owner too.
Those are some of the main ones, but there are even more.
Elissa Tennant:
Wait, let’s talk more about the tax credits for the run-of-the-mill people.
I’m not at heat pump levels of income yet, but I am maybe at home energy audit levels.
Does it still cover that?
Dana Nuccitelli:
Yes!
There is a tax credit for home energy audits.
If you get an expert to come in and look at your house and figure out the most efficient things you can do to improve your home energy efficiency, there’s a 30% tax credit for that.
So if you spend $450 on that, you can get a $150 tax credit.
They’ll tell you: improve your windows, your insulation, your doors—and you can get tax credits when you make those improvements as well.
Elissa Tennant:
Fantastic.
But we are kind of focusing on the business side of tax credits today, right?
I just want to know about the individual side for like… my personal own gain and use.
Dana Nuccitelli:
They’re both important.
Elissa Tennant:
Alright, so these clean energy tax credits for individuals and businesses—and everybody who can benefit from the Inflation Reduction Act—they are under threat.
So let’s talk about that.
Let’s take a little turn here and go down the not-as-fun part.
Not as fun as talking about home energy audits.
Dana Nuccitelli:
Yeah, it’s a little more wonky.
So back in 2017, the last time Republicans had full control of Congress, they passed a bunch of tax cuts.
Those tax cuts are starting to expire—they last for a little bit under a decade.
So they’re nearing expiration now.
Now that Republicans are back in charge, they want to extend those tax cuts.
Doing so is going to cost a lot of money—something north of $4.5 trillion over the next decade, depending on exactly what they decide to do.
And a lot of people are also worried about the size of our national debt, which is getting close to $37 trillion now.
So if you add another $4.5 trillion to it, that’s more than a 10% increase in our already very large national debt.
They would prefer not to just do the spending without paying for it.
So they’re looking for “pay-fors,” as we call them.
The Inflation Reduction Act is one place to get some money to pay for those tax cut extensions, because we invested something like a trillion dollars over the coming decade in the IRA, largely in those tax credits.
That’s why they’re on the chopping block—with a big target on their back—to be used as a “pay-for” to extend those expiring tax cuts.
Elissa Tennant:
Do you ever watch Schoolhouse Rock where the national debt is an animated Tyrannosaurus rex that wanders through the nation’s capital and eats things?
Dana Nuccitelli:
I don’t think I saw that.
I saw the one like “Here’s how a bill becomes a law,” but I don’t think I saw the T-Rex.
Elissa Tennant:
This is a deep cut, okay?
Only the real ones know about the Tyrannosaurus debt, apparently.
But whenever we talk about the national debt, that’s all I think about—is this Schoolhouse Rock animated T-Rex.
That being said, so—we need to pay to extend the tax credits.
I’m repeating it back to you—this is an active listening technique—to make sure I understand.
We need to pay for the extension of tax credits—
Dana Nuccitelli:
Tax cuts.
Elissa Tennant:
—Tax cuts.
We need to pay for the extension of tax cuts.
And in order to do that, we need to find ways to cut our spending as a federal government.
There are a lot of other things on the chopping block, but we at Citizens’ Climate Lobby are focused on the IRA and the clean energy tax credits.
Dana Nuccitelli:
That’s right. You got it.
Elissa Tennant:
We are a climate org.
Okay. That makes sense to me.
We can move on.
Elissa Tennant:
So let’s talk about budget reconciliation.
This is something that has come up quite a bit in recent years.
I don’t think it was really a big topic a decade or so ago.
It sounds like something from a government finance class—and I fear it a little bit.
So what does it mean in practice?
And why is it such a big deal for climate?
How does budget reconciliation fit into all this?
Dana Nuccitelli:
Yeah, so the issue here is that the Senate has the 60-vote filibuster that makes it hard for the Senate to do very much.
Forty percent of the Senate can just block progress on a particular piece of legislation if they so desire.
Congress decided that getting a budget done each year is a really important thing to do.
So they carved out an exemption from the Senate filibuster for budgetary negotiations—and that’s what budget reconciliation is.
The Senate can do it once or twice per year.
Anything that goes into a budget reconciliation package has to be specifically focused on the budget.
They can’t, for example, change regulations that don’t have any budgetary cost and stick that into budget reconciliation—that’s not allowed.
Things like tax cut extensions, tax credit additions or repeals—those can all get put into a budget reconciliation package that then only needs 50 votes to pass in the Senate, along with a majority in the House.
Elissa Tennant:
I have many questions, and the first one is a question I’ve wanted to ask for so long but I’m too scared because it’s been too long:
Why is it called a filibuster?
That sounds more like a candy bar.
Dana Nuccitelli:
I have no idea why it’s called the filibuster.
Elissa Tennant:
At least you also don’t know.
Filibuster—anybody listening, if you know why it’s called a filibuster, please write in, because our Research Manager doesn’t know.
We stumped him on this one.
Dana Nuccitelli:
I failed.
I failed.
Sorry.
Elissa Tennant:
Oh my God.
So the budget reconciliation process does not require the filibuster candy bar as part of it.
How do they decide what is budgetary and what isn’t?
How is it decided what is allowed in budget reconciliation and what isn’t?
Like, if you tried to do something that was stepping over the line?
Dana Nuccitelli:
Generally speaking, it just has to have some kind of component that generates revenue for the government or costs the government some money.
That’s the focus.
They can ask the Senate Parliamentarian whether it is budgetary in nature.
The Senate Parliamentarian will make a ruling and say, “Yes, you can include it in budget reconciliation,” or “No, you can’t.”
The Parliamentarian is kind of like the cop of Congress—and the Senate actually listens to the Parliamentarian and does what they say.
Elissa Tennant:
Who’s the Parliamentarian?
I feel like we should all know who this person is.
Dana Nuccitelli:
I forget what her name is, but she’s been the Parliamentarian for quite a while.
She’s the Senate rules expert.
Elissa Tennant:
Good for her.
Dana Nuccitelli:
Yeah.
Elissa Tennant:
Fantastic.
Elissa Tennant:
Alright, so this simple process that lets Congress pass a budget with just a simple majority—budget reconciliation.
Where are we in this process right now?
What’s the timeline?
And again, how do those IRA clean energy tax credits fit into all of this?
Lay the land.
Dana Nuccitelli:
Yeah, so each relevant committee in the Senate and the House is given a broad outline of, “Here’s how much money you can spend,” or, “Here’s how much you have to cut.”
Then they work on the details of how they’re going to meet that broad outline.
That’s what they’re doing now—one at a time—coming up with their committee’s specifics.
Once those are all released into the wild, all the members of the House and the Senate look at them and decide if they can vote on it or say,
“I can’t vote for something that’s got this provision, so you need to change it.”
Then they have negotiations.
Ultimately, they come up with one big package that supposedly can get a majority of votes in both the House and Senate.
The House and Senate will each release their packages, and they have to agree to a reconciled version—so that one package can get a majority in both chambers.
Because the House and Senate might have different priorities and disagree.
Elissa Tennant:
It’s a reconciled package!
Budget reconciliation.
Okay.
I was about to ask where the reconciliation term came from too, so you were way ahead of me there.
They come out with two versions of it.
We at CCL always refer to budget reconciliation as largely a partisan process.
I feel like now’s a good time to dive into why it is largely a partisan process and why we call it that.
Dana Nuccitelli:
It wasn’t always a partisan process.
In the past, when there was more bipartisan negotiation that tended to be more successful—when there was less partisanship in Congress—then the budget reconciliation process was just to make sure they could get something passed with a majority of votes.
It didn’t necessarily have to be all Republicans or all Democrats.
It was just 50 votes in the Senate.
But over time, Congress became more partisan, more divided, and so it became a partisan process—whichever party was in the majority could get what they needed done in the Senate.
That’s why it’s become a partisan process.
It wasn’t always one—and it doesn’t have to be one.
It just is right now.
Elissa Tennant:
And there is a large, vast future ahead of us.
But for this exact moment, that’s why it’s largely a Republican process—as they hold a majority in the House and the Senate.
Elissa Tennant:
Okay, back to the lay of the land.
So where are we in the budget reconciliation process?
Dana Nuccitelli:
Yeah, so each committee is in the process of releasing their plans for how they’re going to meet their broad budgetary rules.
In terms of the Inflation Reduction Act tax credits:
- In the House, it’s the Ways and Means Committee that’s in charge.
- In the Senate, it’s the Senate Finance Committee that oversees the IRA tax credits and other important tax-related provisions.
So we are going to see what they have planned—and we’ll hope they preserve some stuff from the IRA.
And we’ll try to convince them to preserve the important stuff.
Elissa Tennant:
Side note: I think “Ways and Means” is an excellent committee name.
It’s just vague enough that I have no idea what they actually do—but they seem very prestigious and important.
In terms of marketing, they really nailed that one.
Dana Nuccitelli:
They have the ways.
They have the means.
Elissa Tennant:
They do.
Whatever—the Things and Stuff Committee.
Mysterious and important.
Dana Nuccitelli:
Yes, that’s what they should call it. The Mysterious and Important Committee.
Elissa Tennant:
The work is mysterious and important.
Shout out Severance.
What’s your favorite IRA tax credit? If you had to pick one…
Elissa Tennant:
So what’s your favorite IRA tax credit?
If you had to pick one—you have to pick one, actually. It’s not an “if.”
Dana Nuccitelli:
That’s a good question.
I think I have to say the clean electricity tax credits, because they’re so important and they’re going to do so many things:
- Help us deploy a lot more clean electricity.
- Help us meet rising energy demand.
- Reduce home electricity bills.
- Create a lot of construction jobs.
They’re also the most important provision for reducing climate pollution.
According to modeling, they’re responsible for about half of the Inflation Reduction Act’s climate pollution reductions.
So for all those reasons—because they’re so important—clean electricity would have to be my favorite.
Although, if I were being more biased and selfish, I would say the home weatherization tax credits—because I recently upgraded my 70-year-old windows on my house just last year.
And I was able this year to take the tax credit for that and reduce the amount of taxes that I owed.
So I really appreciate that tax credit for selfish reasons too.
Elissa Tennant:
That’s how I feel about the induction stove tax credit.
When I got my induction stove last year—just because our old electric stove (this house is 105 years old)—when it finally gave out, I got the induction stove.
And I invited people over to watch me boil water.
I was like, “Do you want to come over and have like a spaghetti party? It’s so fast—you’ll love it.”
So I agree. That was a big one.
I thought you were going to say—I don’t even know why I know about these—but the USDA REAP credits, the agriculture ones.
Because you’re a big silvopasture fan.
Dana Nuccitelli:
Well, the REAP program’s not a tax credit. It’s more of a grant program.
That’s a good program—and I do love silvopasture (planting trees on pasture land)—but not technically a tax credit.
Elissa Tennant:
Yes. That’s right.
We’ll save that one for a silvopasture episode.
Dana Nuccitelli:
Yeah. Ooh, I like that.
That’s a good idea.
Elissa Tennant:
We’ve established these tax credits are important.
The Inflation Reduction Act is important.
We really need to leave it intact throughout the budget reconciliation process.
So let’s talk about why this really matters.
What would we lose if these tax credits go away?
What’s at stake?
Dana Nuccitelli:
There’s a lot at stake.
We would lose a big chunk of climate pollution cuts.
We would lose—uh, I hate this—a whole bunch of domestic manufacturing facilities and jobs, local revenue that goes to communities where those facilities are located.
Our electricity bills would go up, because we’d get less of this cheap, clean electricity.
So there’s all kinds of bad stuff that would happen that I don’t think anybody wants to see.
We’re going to try very hard to convince our members of Congress to keep these important tax credits in place.
Elissa Tennant:
Yeah.
Can we get a “vibe check” on aisle America?
How are people feeling about the tax credits in general?
Do we have a general public opinion on the Inflation Reduction Act’s clean energy tax credits?
Dana Nuccitelli:
Yes.
There was just recently a survey released by the University of Maryland that asked specifically about a bunch of these tax credits.
They found that all of them they asked about were very popular—across the political spectrum.
Actually, the least popular one they asked about was the tax credit for new electric vehicles, which is a $7,500 credit if you qualify and are purchasing a new EV.
Even that one—among Republican voters—had 71% support, with 29% wanting to repeal it.
So even the least popular tax credit among Republicans was still roughly 2.5 to 1 in favor.
They’re all very, very popular, because they do so much good stuff.
And who doesn’t like to get a tax credit?
Elissa Tennant:
I can’t imagine people wouldn’t want to get a tax credit for their clean energy purchases. That makes sense to me.
Yeah, so these are important. We want to keep them intact.
What can listeners do right now to help protect these tax credits?
Dana Nuccitelli:
Well, we at CCL have been doing stuff to help protect them since, like, last December.
We’ve had our volunteers—whose members of Congress are on the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee—contact those representatives and tell them about the importance of the tax credits.
We’ve had lots of actions where our members have contacted their members of Congress, especially Republican members, asking them to support and preserve the IRA tax credits.
We had a conservative conference where our conservative volunteers went to Washington, D.C., had training, and lobbied almost 50 Republican members of Congress about the IRA tax credits and a few other things.
So we’ve been doing a lot.
Of course, we have our Summer Conference, as you mentioned, between July 20th and 22nd—where we will again, most likely (assuming this question hasn’t been settled yet, which it probably won’t be), be lobbying on the Inflation Reduction Act again.
We’ve also got a database that I put together of all the different facilities and projects the IRA has helped incentivize all across the country—like the number of jobs created, local revenue—and we’re using that to inform our lobbying.
We’re doing a whole lot.
So one thing people can do is join their local Citizens’ Climate Lobby chapter to help us with these lobbying efforts—or just contact their member of Congress directly and tell their story, to help convince Congress to keep these tax credits in place.
Elissa Tennant:
Dana, you just named so many things.
So I’m going to give people one thing.
Dana Nuccitelli:
Okay, one thing’s good.
Elissa Tennant:
That was so many things.
Dana Nuccitelli:
What’s the one thing?
Elissa Tennant:
The one thing I would say is:
If you are represented by a Republican member of Congress, you can write their office right now asking them to protect the Inflation Reduction Act’s clean energy tax credits.
We have a tool that makes it super easy: cclusa.org/IRAdefense
That’s cclusa.org/IRAdefense
Now a lot of people will say, “Well, I’m not represented by a Republican, but I still want to help.”
And you totally can.
You can share that link on your social media accounts.
Send it directly to your friends and family who are represented by Republican members of Congress. Spread the word.
Budget reconciliation is a really long process—like you said, this question probably will not be answered by the time our conference rolls around in July.
So we need to keep the conversation going.
The more we keep it going, the more important these tax credits are to the general public.
So bring it up at parties.
Talk about it at your next open mic night.
Take out a billboard.
Or just share this episode with anybody you think might be interested in learning more about the Inflation Reduction Act’s tax credits.
And once again—please join us July 20th through 22nd in Washington, D.C., at the Citizens’ Climate Lobby Summer Conference.
You can learn more and sign up at cclusa.org/conference
It’s the perfect opportunity to get up to speed on climate policy, build community, and meet directly with lawmakers to defend these tax credits and more.
And you don’t have to be a policy expert—because I clearly am not.
I am just someone who cares.
Again: cclusa.org/conference
Elissa Tennant:
I have one last question for you, Dana.
What gives you hope that we can keep these programs alive?
Why are we still going at this?
Dana Nuccitelli:
The good news is that a lot of Republican members of Congress have already expressed that they want to preserve at least some of these important tax credits.
There have been a number of letters from groups of Republicans to their leadership saying,
“Hey, let’s be careful about what we’re getting rid of here.”
Because there are a lot of great benefits—especially in Republican districts—
battery manufacturing, EV manufacturing facilities, big solar and wind farms…
These things generate local jobs and local revenue.
It doesn’t look good if you vote to repeal a policy that’s creating a bunch of jobs and economic growth in your district.
So it’s in their interest to preserve a lot of these tax credits.
I’m hopeful we’ll be successful in preserving at least some of the more important provisions from the Inflation Reduction Act.
Elissa Tennant:
Hear, hear.
Peterson, myself, and hopefully the listener agree with you.
Thank you, Dana!
The next episode, I think, might be about the Foreign Pollution Fee Act, which was just introduced in Congress a short time ago.
We’re doing a training on that for our volunteers coming up, so I think we have a lot to talk about—
unless we decide to skip it and just…
Dana Nuccitelli:
Go straight to silvopasture!
Elissa Tennant:
Who knows—both good topics.
Thank you for listening.
We’ll give it back to Peterson to close things out.
Dana Nuccitelli:
Thanks, Elissa.
Peterson Toscano:
Elissa, Dana—I need to thank you for that amazing overview.
I understand this so much more clearly than I did before.
I mean, I thought I knew about the Inflation Reduction Act, but I really lost the thread at some point.
You brought it all back for me. Thank you.
Dana Nuccitelli:
Thank you.
Elissa Tennant:
I thought it was just you doing the outro—I was sitting back.
Peterson Toscano:
Just sit back. You don’t have to do anything—you did all your hard work.
Elissa Tennant:
Yeah.
Peterson Toscano:
You can talk to me!
Elissa Tennant:
That’s alright.
Peterson Toscano:
You’re allowed.
Yeah, I just—I learned so much. So thank you very much.
Elissa Tennant:
Thank you, Dana.
I am happy to help facilitate a conversation about the Inflation Reduction Act at any party.
Peterson Toscano:
I have one request.
Whenever you talk about having created a database, can I call it a “Danabase”?
Elissa Tennant:
A…
Dana Nuccitelli:
The Danabase! That’s a good name. I like it.
Peterson Toscano:
Yeah, come back and talk more, because we need to know about this policy.
And I have to say—it’s one of the areas I’m weakest in.
As people who do climate work, it’s easy to lean into the places where we have strength because it’s comfortable.
But we all have to learn new tricks and adapt all the time—to climate change, and to climate policy.
So thank you so much. I’m looking forward to much more.
Elissa Tennant:
Thank you, Peterson.
Dana Nuccitelli:
We’re all going to learn and grow together.
Peterson Toscano:
Yay. And thank you for listening to Citizens Climate Radio.
If you are ready to take action to protect clean energy tax credits, visit cclusa.org/IRAdefense.
And don’t forget—you can join us in person.
And when I say “join us,” I mean Elissa, Dana, and I will all be at Citizens’ Climate Lobby’s Summer Conference.
It’s happening from July 20th to 22nd in Washington, D.C.
Learn more and sign up at cclusa.org/conference
In fact, I think you should just type in cclusa.org/[whatever you like] and see if it comes up as an actual page on the website.
Elissa Tennant:
Hey…
Peterson Toscano:
Do you have a story or a question you’d like to share?
Call or text our listener line: (619) 512-9646.
That’s (619) 512-9646.
You’ll find show notes and links to our hosts—all of us are hosts today, it feels like—at cclusa.org/radio.
Be sure to follow us on Instagram, X, Facebook, LinkedIn, and yes, TikTok.
Just search for Citizens Climate Radio.
This episode was written by Elissa Tennant, Dana Nuccitelli, Lesley Beatty, Elise Silvestri, and me—Peterson Toscano.
Production by Elise Silvestri and me.
Music comes from Epidemic Sound.
Citizens Climate Radio is a project of Citizens Climate Education.
I’ll see you next time—but in the meantime, stay strong, determined, and creative in your work on climate change.
The post Episode 104: Saving Clean Energy Tax Credits: Inside the Inflation Reduction Act Fight appeared first on Citizens' Climate Lobby.
Episode 104: Saving Clean Energy Tax Credits: Inside the Inflation Reduction Act Fight
Greenhouse Gases
DeBriefed 27 February 2026: Trump’s fossil-fuel talk | Modi-Lula rare-earth pact | Is there a UK ‘greenlash’?
Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.
This week
Absolute State of the Union
‘DRILL, BABY’: US president Donald Trump “doubled down on his ‘drill, baby, drill’ agenda” in his State of the Union (SOTU) address, said the Los Angeles Times. He “tout[ed] his support of the fossil-fuel industry and renew[ed] his focus on electricity affordability”, reported the Financial Times. Trump also attacked the “green new scam”, noted Carbon Brief’s SOTU tracker.
COAL REPRIEVE: Earlier in the week, the Trump administration had watered down limits on mercury pollution from coal-fired power plants, reported the Financial Times. It remains “unclear” if this will be enough to prevent the decline of coal power, said Bloomberg, in the face of lower-cost gas and renewables. Reuters noted that US coal plants are “ageing”.
OIL STAY: The US Supreme Court agreed to hear arguments brought by the oil industry in a “major lawsuit”, reported the New York Times. The newspaper said the firms are attempting to head off dozens of other lawsuits at state level, relating to their role in global warming.
SHIP-SHILLING: The Trump administration is working to “kill” a global carbon levy on shipping “permanently”, reported Politico, after succeeding in delaying the measure late last year. The Guardian said US “bullying” could be “paying off”, after Panama signalled it was reversing its support for the levy in a proposal submitted to the UN shipping body.
Around the world
- RARE EARTHS: The governments of Brazil and India signed a deal on rare earths, said the Times of India, as well as agreeing to collaborate on renewable energy.
- HEAT ROLLBACK: German homes will be allowed to continue installing gas and oil heating, under watered-down government plans covered by Clean Energy Wire.
- BRAZIL FLOODS: At least 53 people died in floods in the state of Minas Gerais, after some areas saw 170mm of rain in a few hours, reported CNN Brasil.
- ITALY’S ATTACK: Italy is calling for the EU to “suspend” its emissions trading system (ETS) ahead of a review later this year, said Politico.
- COOKSTOVE CREDITS: The first-ever carbon credits under the Paris Agreement have been issued to a cookstove project in Myanmar, said Climate Home News.
- SAUDI SOLAR: Turkey has signed a “major” solar deal that will see Saudi firm ACWA building 2 gigawatts in the country, according to Agence France-Presse.
$467 billion
The profits made by five major oil firms since prices spiked following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine four years ago, according to a report by Global Witness covered by BusinessGreen.
Latest climate research
- Claims about the “fingerprint” of human-caused climate change, made in a recent US Department of Energy report, are “factually incorrect” | AGU Advances
- Large lakes in the Congo Basin are releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere from “immense ancient stores” | Nature Geoscience
- Shared Socioeconomic Pathways – scenarios used regularly in climate modelling – underrepresent “narratives explicitly centring on democratic principles such as participation, accountability and justice” | npj Climate Action
(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)
Captured

The constituency of Richard Tice MP, the climate-sceptic deputy leader of Reform UK, is the second-largest recipient of flood defence spending in England, according to new Carbon Brief analysis. Overall, the funding is disproportionately targeted at coastal and urban areas, many of which have Conservative or Liberal Democrat MPs.
Spotlight
Is there really a UK ‘greenlash’?
This week, after a historic Green Party byelection win, Carbon Brief looks at whether there really is a “greenlash” against climate policy in the UK.
Over the past year, the UK’s political consensus on climate change has been shattered.
Yet despite a sharp turn against climate action among right-wing politicians and right-leaning media outlets, UK public support for climate action remains strong.
Prof Federica Genovese, who studies climate politics at the University of Oxford, told Carbon Brief:
“The current ‘war’ on green policy is mostly driven by media and political elites, not by the public.”
Indeed, there is still a greater than two-to-one majority among the UK public in favour of the country’s legally binding target to reach net-zero emissions by 2050, as shown below.

Steve Akehurst, director of public-opinion research initiative Persuasion UK, also noted the growing divide between the public and “elites”. He told Carbon Brief:
“The biggest movement is, without doubt, in media and elite opinion. There is a bit more polarisation and opposition [to climate action] among voters, but it’s typically no more than 20-25% and mostly confined within core Reform voters.”
Conservative gear shift
For decades, the UK had enjoyed strong, cross-party political support for climate action.
Lord Deben, the Conservative peer and former chair of the Climate Change Committee, told Carbon Brief that the UK’s landmark 2008 Climate Change Act had been born of this cross-party consensus, saying “all parties supported it”.
Since their landslide loss at the 2024 election, however, the Conservatives have turned against the UK’s target of net-zero emissions by 2050, which they legislated for in 2019.
Curiously, while opposition to net-zero has surged among Conservative MPs, there is majority support for the target among those that plan to vote for the party, as shown below.

Dr Adam Corner, advisor to the Climate Barometer initiative that tracks public opinion on climate change, told Carbon Brief that those who currently plan to vote Reform are the only segment who “tend to be more opposed to net-zero goals”. He said:
“Despite the rise in hostile media coverage and the collapse of the political consensus, we find that public support for the net-zero by 2050 target is plateauing – not plummeting.”
Reform, which rejects the scientific evidence on global warming and campaigns against net-zero, has been leading the polls for a year. (However, it was comfortably beaten by the Greens in yesterday’s Gorton and Denton byelection.)
Corner acknowledged that “some of the anti-net zero noise…[is] showing up in our data”, adding:
“We see rising concerns about the near-term costs of policies and an uptick in people [falsely] attributing high energy bills to climate initiatives.”
But Akehurst said that, rather than a big fall in public support, there had been a drop in the “salience” of climate action:
“So many other issues [are] competing for their attention.”
UK newspapers published more editorials opposing climate action than supporting it for the first time on record in 2025, according to Carbon Brief analysis.
Global ‘greenlash’?
All of this sits against a challenging global backdrop, in which US president Donald Trump has been repeating climate-sceptic talking points and rolling back related policy.
At the same time, prominent figures have been calling for a change in climate strategy, sold variously as a “reset”, a “pivot”, as “realism”, or as “pragmatism”.
Genovese said that “far-right leaders have succeeded in the past 10 years in capturing net-zero as a poster child of things they are ‘fighting against’”.
She added that “much of this is fodder for conservative media and this whole ecosystem is essentially driving what we call the ‘greenlash’”.
Corner said the “disconnect” between elite views and the wider public “can create problems” – for example, “MPs consistently underestimate support for renewables”. He added:
“There is clearly a risk that the public starts to disengage too, if not enough positive voices are countering the negative ones.”
Watch, read, listen
TRUMP’S ‘PETROSTATE’: The US is becoming a “petrostate” that will be “sicker and poorer”, wrote Financial Times associate editor Rana Forohaar.
RHETORIC VS REALITY: Despite a “political mood [that] has darkened”, there is “more green stuff being installed than ever”, said New York Times columnist David Wallace-Wells.
CHINA’S ‘REVOLUTION’: The BBC’s Climate Question podcast reported from China on the “green energy revolution” taking place in the country.
Coming up
- 2-6 March: UN Food and Agriculture Organization regional conference for Latin America and Caribbean, Brasília
- 3 March: UK spring statement
- 4-11 March: China’s “two sessions”
- 5 March: Nepal elections
Pick of the jobs
- The Guardian, senior reporter, climate justice | Salary: $123,000-$135,000. Location: New York or Washington DC
- China-Global South Project, non-resident fellow, climate change | Salary: Up to $1,000 a month. Location: Remote
- University of East Anglia, PhD in mobilising community-based climate action through co-designed sports and wellbeing interventions | Salary: Stipend (unknown amount). Location: Norwich, UK
- TABLE and the University of São Paulo, Brazil, postdoctoral researcher in food system narratives | Salary: Unknown. Location: Pirassununga, Brazil
DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
The post DeBriefed 27 February 2026: Trump’s fossil-fuel talk | Modi-Lula rare-earth pact | Is there a UK ‘greenlash’? appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Greenhouse Gases
Analysis: Constituency of Reform’s climate-sceptic Richard Tice gets £55m flood funding
The Lincolnshire constituency held by Richard Tice, the climate-sceptic deputy leader of the hard-right Reform party, has been pledged at least £55m in government funding for flood defences since 2024.
This investment in Boston and Skegness is the second-largest sum for a single constituency from a £1.4bn flood-defence fund for England, Carbon Brief analysis shows.
Flooding is becoming more likely and more extreme in the UK due to climate change.
Yet, for years, governments have failed to spend enough on flood defences to protect people, properties and infrastructure.
The £1.4bn fund is part of the current Labour government’s wider pledge to invest a “record” £7.9bn over a decade on protecting hundreds of thousands of homes and businesses from flooding.
As MP for one of England’s most flood-prone regions, Tice has called for more investment in flood defences, stating that “we cannot afford to ‘surrender the fens’ to the sea”.
He is also one of Reform’s most vocal opponents of climate action and what he calls “net stupid zero”. He denies the scientific consensus on climate change and has claimed, falsely and without evidence, that scientists are “lying”.
Flood defences
Last year, the government said it would invest £2.65bn on flood and coastal erosion risk management (FCERM) schemes in England between April 2024 and March 2026.
This money was intended to protect 66,500 properties from flooding. It is part of a decade-long Labour government plan to spend more than £7.9bn on flood defences.
There has been a consistent shortfall in maintaining England’s flood defences, with the Environment Agency expecting to protect fewer properties by 2027 than it had initially planned.
The Climate Change Committee (CCC) has attributed this to rising costs, backlogs from previous governments and a lack of capacity. It also points to the strain from “more frequent and severe” weather events, such as storms in recent years that have been amplified by climate change.
However, the CCC also said last year that, if the 2024-26 spending programme is delivered, it would be “slightly closer to the track” of the Environment Agency targets out to 2027.
The government has released constituency-level data on which schemes in England it plans to fund, covering £1.4bn of the 2024-26 investment. The other half of the FCERM spending covers additional measures, from repairing existing defences to advising local authorities.
The map below shows the distribution of spending on FCERM schemes in England over the past two years, highlighting the constituency of Richard Tice.

By far the largest sum of money – £85.6m in total – has been committed to a tidal barrier and various other defences in the Somerset constituency of Bridgwater, the seat of Conservative MP Ashley Fox.
Over the first months of 2026, the south-west region has faced significant flooding and Fox has called for more support from the government, citing “climate patterns shifting and rainfall intensifying”.
He has also backed his party’s position that “the 2050 net-zero target is impossible” and called for more fossil-fuel extraction in the North Sea.
Tice’s east-coast constituency of Boston and Skegness, which is highly vulnerable to flooding from both rivers and the sea, is set to receive £55m. Among the supported projects are beach defences from Saltfleet to Gibraltar Point and upgrades to pumping stations.
Overall, Boston and Skegness has the second-largest portion of flood-defence funding, as the chart below shows. Constituencies with Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs occupied the other top positions.

Overall, despite Labour MPs occupying 347 out of England’s 543 constituencies – nearly two-thirds of the total – more than half of the flood-defence funding was distributed to constituencies with non-Labour MPs. This reflects the flood risk in coastal and rural areas that are not traditional Labour strongholds.
Reform funding
While Reform has just eight MPs, representing 1% of the population, its constituencies have been assigned 4% of the flood-defence funding for England.
Nearly all of this money was for Tice’s constituency, although party leader Nigel Farage’s coastal Clacton seat in Kent received £2m.
Reform UK is committed to “scrapping net-zero” and its leadership has expressed firmly climate-sceptic views.
Much has been made of the disconnect between the party’s climate policies and the threat climate change poses to its voters. Various analyses have shown the flood risk in Reform-dominated areas, particularly Lincolnshire.
Tice has rejected climate science, advocated for fossil-fuel production and criticised Environment Agency flood-defence activities. Yet, he has also called for more investment in flood defences, stating that “we cannot afford to ‘surrender the fens’ to the sea”.
This may reflect Tice’s broader approach to climate change. In a 2024 interview with LBC, he said:
“Where you’ve got concerns about sea level defences and sea level rise, guess what? A bit of steel, a bit of cement, some aggregate…and you build some concrete sea level defences. That’s how you deal with rising sea levels.”
While climate adaptation is viewed as vital in a warming world, there are limits on how much societies can adapt and adaptation costs will continue to increase as emissions rise.
The post Analysis: Constituency of Reform’s climate-sceptic Richard Tice gets £55m flood funding appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Analysis: Constituency of Reform’s climate-sceptic Richard Tice gets £55m flood funding
Greenhouse Gases
Cropped 25 February 2026: Food inflation strikes | El Niño looms | Biodiversity talks stagnate
We handpick and explain the most important stories at the intersection of climate, land, food and nature over the past fortnight.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s fortnightly Cropped email newsletter.
Subscribe for free here.
Key developments
Food inflation on the rise
DELUGE STRIKES FOOD: Extreme rainfall and flooding across the Mediterranean and north Africa has “battered the winter growing regions that feed Europe…threatening food price rises”, reported the Financial Times. Western France has “endured more than 36 days of continuous rain”, while farmers’ associations in Spain’s Andalusia estimate that “20% of all production has been lost”, it added. Policy expert David Barmes told the paper that the “latest storms were part of a wider pattern of climate shocks feeding into food price inflation”.
-
Sign up to Carbon Brief’s free “Cropped” email newsletter. A fortnightly digest of food, land and nature news and views. Sent to your inbox every other Wednesday.
NO BEEF: The UK’s beef farmers, meanwhile, “face a double blow” from climate change as “relentless rain forces them to keep cows indoors”, while last summer’s drought hit hay supplies, said another Financial Times article. At the same time, indoor growers in south England described a 60% increase in electricity standing charges as a “ticking timebomb” that could “force them to raise their prices or stop production, which will further fuel food price inflation”, wrote the Guardian.
‘TINDERBOX’ AND TARIFFS: A study, covered by the Guardian, warned that major extreme weather and other “shocks” could “spark social unrest and even food riots in the UK”. Experts cited “chronic” vulnerabilities, including climate change, low incomes, poor farming policy and “fragile” supply chains that have made the UK’s food system a “tinderbox”. A New York Times explainer noted that while trade could once guard against food supply shocks, barriers such as tariffs and export controls – which are being “increasingly” used by politicians – “can shut off that safety valve”.
El Niño looms
NEW ENSO INDEX: Researchers have developed a new index for calculating El Niño, the large-scale climate pattern that influences global weather and causes “billions in damages by bringing floods to some regions and drought to others”, reported CNN. It added that climate change is making it more difficult for scientists to observe El Niño patterns by warming up the entire ocean. The outlet said that with the new metric, “scientists can now see it earlier and our long-range weather forecasts will be improved for it.”
WARMING WARNING: Meanwhile, the US Climate Prediction Center announced that there is a 60% chance of the current La Niña conditions shifting towards a neutral state over the next few months, with an El Niño likely to follow in late spring, according to Reuters. The Vibes, a Malaysian news outlet, quoted a climate scientist saying: “If the El Niño does materialise, it could possibly push 2026 or 2027 as the warmest year on record, replacing 2024.”
CROP IMPACTS: Reuters noted that neutral conditions lead to “more stable weather and potentially better crop yields”. However, the newswire added, an El Niño state would mean “worsening drought conditions and issues for the next growing season” to Australia. El Niño also “typically brings a poor south-west monsoon to India, including droughts”, reported the Hindu’s Business Line. A 2024 guest post for Carbon Brief explained that El Niño is linked to crop failure in south-eastern Africa and south-east Asia.
News and views
- DAM-AG-ES: Several South Korean farmers filed a lawsuit against the country’s state-owned utility company, “seek[ing] financial compensation for climate-related agricultural damages”, reported United Press International. Meanwhile, a national climate change assessment for the Philippines found that the country “lost up to $219bn in agricultural damages from typhoons, floods and droughts” over 2000-10, according to Eco-Business.
- SCORCHED GRASS: South Africa’s Western Cape province is experiencing “one of the worst droughts in living memory”, which is “scorching grass and killing livestock”, said Reuters. The newswire wrote: “In 2015, a drought almost dried up the taps in the city; farmers say this one has been even more brutal than a decade ago.”
- NOUVELLE VEG: New guidelines published under France’s national food, nutrition and climate strategy “urged” citizens to “limit” their meat consumption, reported Euronews. The delayed strategy comes a month after the US government “upended decades of recommendations by touting consumption of red meat and full-fat dairy”, it noted.
- COURTING DISASTER: India’s top green court accepted the findings of a committee that “found no flaws” in greenlighting the Great Nicobar project that “will lead to the felling of a million trees” and translocating corals, reported Mongabay. The court found “no good ground to interfere”, despite “threats to a globally unique biodiversity hotspot” and Indigenous tribes at risk of displacement by the project, wrote Frontline.
- FISH FALLING: A new study found that fish biomass is “falling by 7.2% from as little as 0.1C of warming per decade”, noted the Guardian. While experts also pointed to the role of overfishing in marine life loss, marine ecologist and study lead author Dr Shahar Chaikin told the outlet: “Our research proves exactly what that biological cost [of warming] looks like underwater.”
- TOO HOT FOR COFFEE: According to new analysis by Climate Central, countries where coffee beans are grown “are becoming too hot to cultivate them”, reported the Guardian. The world’s top five coffee-growing countries faced “57 additional days of coffee-harming heat” annually because of climate change, it added.
Spotlight
Nature talks inch forward
This week, Carbon Brief covers the latest round of negotiations under the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), which occurred in Rome over 16-19 February.
The penultimate set of biodiversity negotiations before October’s Conference of the Parties ended in Rome last week, leaving plenty of unfinished business.
The CBD’s subsidiary body on implementation (SBI) met in the Italian capital for four days to discuss a range of issues, including biodiversity finance and reviewing progress towards the nature targets agreed under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF).
However, many of the major sticking points – particularly around finance – will have to wait until later this summer, leaving some observers worried about the capacity for delegates to get through a packed agenda at COP17.
The SBI, along with the subsidiary body on scientific, technical and technological advice (SBSTTA) will both meet in Nairobi, Kenya, later this summer for a final round of talks before COP17 kicks off in Yerevan, Armenia, on 19 October.
Money talks
Finance for nature has long been a sticking point at negotiations under the CBD.
Discussions on a new fund for biodiversity derailed biodiversity talks in Cali, Colombia, in autumn 2024, requiring resumed talks a few months later.
Despite this, finance was barely on the agenda at the SBI meetings in Rome. Delegates discussed three studies on the relationship between debt sustainability and implementation of nature plans, but the more substantive talks are set to take place at the next SBI meeting in Nairobi.
Several parties “highlighted concerns with the imbalance of work” on finance between these SBI talks and the next ones, reported Earth Negotiations Bulletin (ENB).
Lim Li Ching, senior researcher at Third World Network, noted that tensions around finance permeated every aspect of the talks. She told Carbon Brief:
“If you’re talking about the gender plan of action – if there’s little or no financial resources provided to actually put it into practice and implement it, then it’s [just] paper, right? Same with the reporting requirements and obligations.”
Monitoring and reporting
Closely linked to the issue of finance is the obligations of parties to report on their progress towards the goals and targets of the GBF.
Parties do so through the submission of national reports.
Several parties at the talks pointed to a lack of timely funding for driving delays in their reporting, according to ENB.
A note released by the CBD Secretariat in December said that no parties had submitted their national reports yet; by the time of the SBI meetings, only the EU had. It further noted that just 58 parties had submitted their national biodiversity plans, which were initially meant to be published by COP16, in October 2024.
Linda Krueger, director of biodiversity and infrastructure policy at the environmental not-for-profit Nature Conservancy, told Carbon Brief that despite the sparse submissions, parties are “very focused on the national report preparation”. She added:
“Everybody wants to be able to show that we’re on the path and that there still is a pathway to getting to 2030 that’s positive and largely in the right direction.”
Watch, read, listen
NET LOSS: Nigeria’s marine life is being “threatened” by “ghost gear” – nets and other fishing equipment discarded in the ocean – said Dialogue Earth.
COMEBACK CAUSALITY: A Vox long-read looked at whether Costa Rica’s “payments for ecosystem services” programme helped the country turn a corner on deforestation.
HOMEGROWN GOALS: A Straits Times podcast discussed whether import-dependent Singapore can afford to shelve its goal to produce 30% of its food locally by 2030.
‘RUSTING’ RIVERS: The Financial Times took a closer look at a “strange new force blighting the [Arctic] landscape”: rivers turning rust-orange due to global warming.
New science
- Lakes in the Congo Basin’s peatlands are releasing carbon that is thousands of years old | Nature Geoscience
- Natural non-forest ecosystems – such as grasslands and marshlands – were converted for agriculture at four times the rate of land with tree cover between 2005 and 2020 | Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Around one-quarter of global tree-cover loss over 2001-22 was driven by cropland expansion, pastures and forest plantations for commodity production | Nature Food
In the diary
- 2-6 March: UN Food and Agriculture Organization regional conference for Latin America and Caribbean | Brasília
- 5 March: Nepal general elections
- 9-20 March: First part of the thirty-first session of the International Seabed Authority (ISA) | Kingston, Jamaica
Cropped is researched and written by Dr Giuliana Viglione, Aruna Chandrasekhar, Daisy Dunne, Orla Dwyer and Yanine Quiroz.
Please send tips and feedback to cropped@carbonbrief.org
The post Cropped 25 February 2026: Food inflation strikes | El Niño looms | Biodiversity talks stagnate appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Cropped 25 February 2026: Food inflation strikes | El Niño looms | Biodiversity talks stagnate
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits







