Welcome to Carbon Brief’s China Briefing.
China Briefing handpicks and explains the most important climate and energy stories from China over the past fortnight. Subscribe for free here.
Key developments
‘Third Plenum’ called for unleashing tech innovation
FULL STEAM AHEAD: The “Third Plenum”, an important five-yearly political meeting traditionally associated with major economic reforms, concluded in Beijing on 18 July with a call to “make ‘high-quality development’ the guiding force” of the nation’s economy, Bloomberg reported. Policymakers resolved to foster “new quality productive forces” to “promote revolutionary breakthroughs in technology” and “in-depth industrial transformation and upgrading”, with a particular focus on strategic industries such as new energy, Reuters said. (See this issue’s spotlight or the full article on the Carbon Brief website for more on what this means for China’s industrial, energy and climate policy.)
SPECIFIC POLICIES: The full text of the resolutions adopted at the meeting includes several other policy prescriptions related to the energy sector, industry newspaper BJX News reported. These include calls to “deepen reform of the energy management system”, build a “unified national electricity market”, promote “price reforms” in the energy sector, and advancing “market-oriented reform” of the energy sector, it added. Specific policies related to these aims are expected to be released soon.
CLIMATE FOCUS: State news agency Xinhua said that policy goals also include to “improve ecological conservation systems”, take a “coordinated approach” to “carbon emissions reduction” and “actively respond to climate change”. On Twitter, Belinda Schäpe noted that this was the first time carbon emissions reduction has been mentioned in a Third Plenum communique. In an “explanation” of the plenum’s outcome published on the party-affiliated People’s Daily, President Xi Jinping said that China will “improve the mechanism of green and low-carbon development”, adding that “ecological and environmental protection still has shortcomings”.
PROVIDING ‘MIRACLES’: The state-run Science and Technology Daily reported that, in an “important barometer” of economic growth, electricity consumption by solar manufacturing rose 76% year-on-year, while that of new energy vehicle manufacturing grew 39% year-on-year. A commentary published in the People’s Daily by Zhong Yin – a nom de plume indicating that an article represents the view of party leadership – said that innovation and reform will allow China to create “miracles that will impress the world”.
Roadmap for ‘low-carbon transformation’ of coal
‘CLEAN COAL’: China’s National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), the nation’s primary economic planning body, and the National Energy Administration (NEA), issued an action plan for the “low carbon transformation” of coal-fired power plants, Bloomberg reported. It added that the government will increase “financial support for projects to reduce emissions at coal power plants” through methods such as burning biomass and green ammonia or using carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS). The plan, the outlet explained, aims to halve the “emissions intensity” – the emissions per unit of electricity generation – of an unspecified number of plants by 2027 compared to 2023 levels. If the 2027 target is achieved, these coal power plants’ emissions intensity will be “close to that of natural gas power generating units”, energy news outlet BJX News said. State news agency Xinhua, which described the plan as a “roadmap”, said it will “create a stronger leading role for the clean and low-carbon transformation of coal power”.
UNCERTAIN IMPACT: Asia Society Policy Institute senior fellow Lauri Myllyvirta noted on LinkedIn that the policy does not state how many plants will be retrofitted or how the state plans on incentivising industry players to do so, which will “determine the direct impact of this policy”. Analysis in the Shuang Tan newsletter argued that the policy is “unlikely to drive industry-wide transformation or attract large-scale investment”, stating that its true purpose may be to “test the selected technologies [CCUS, biomass and green ammonia] at a few carefully chosen coal power units”.
CARBON MARKET: One China-based power analyst told S&P Global that efforts to tackle coal emissions to date had largely been driven by the Ministry of Ecology and Environment’s (MEE) national carbon market (ETS), adding that the new “clean coal” policy “may be a call-out” by the NDRC that the MEE’s ETS targets are “too nice” and the mechanism is “too slow [in financing] these frontier decarbonisation technologies”. London Stock Exchange Group senior carbon analyst Luyue Tan argued on LinkedIn, however, that the ETS, which has been operating for three years as of 16 July, has encouraged greater uptake of emissions reduction technology. She added that its coverage will grow from 5.1bn tonnes of CO2 in 2022 to 8bn tonnes of CO2 in 2025, once the scheme is expanded to also cover the aluminium, cement and iron and steel sectors.
Tech and aluminium get ‘green and low carbon’ targets
DATA CENTRE TARGETS: The Chinese government released a new action plan for the “green and low carbon development” of data centres, Xinhua reported. The plan stated that by 2025, China’s data centres will achieve a power usage effectiveness (PUE) – a ratio that describes how much energy is used by the computing equipment – of below 1.5, and will “increase the utilisation rate of renewable energy in data centres by 10% annually”, it added. Energy news outlet International Energy Net said that the plan also includes goals for the centres’ “average PUE and energy carbon efficiency per unit [of computing power]” to reach “internationally advanced levels”.
COORDINATED DEVELOPMENT: In an interview shared by BJX News, an NDRC representative said that data centres, “as an important infrastructure for development of new quality productive forces”’ will be a sector where energy use is expected to grow by 15% per year. The official explained that China will encourage the “coordinated construction of large-scale wind and solar power bases and national [data centre] hubs”, with more data centres to be built in western regions to satisfy computing power demand in eastern China.
ALUMINIUM TRANSITION: China also released an action plan for energy efficiency and reducing emissions in the aluminium industry for 2024 and 2025, International Energy Net reported. The plan, which is linked to the overarching industry plan launched in May, states that construction of new “captive” coal-fired power plants will no longer be permitted and that existing coal-fired plants should be replaced by renewable energy sources, such as “renewable energy-based microgrids”, the energy news outlet said. It added that, according to the plan, the industry will save 2.5m tonnes of standard coal and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 6.5m tonnes by 2025.
Wind turbines and EV software in the subsidies spotlight
SUBSIDIES: An investigation into Chinese wind turbine companies in Spain, Greece, France, Romania and Bulgaria has been expanded to include those operating in Germany, the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post reported, amid concerns in the EU around China’s subsidisation of its low-carbon technologies sector. Meanwhile, the US may “impose limits on some software made in China” for vehicles, including electric vehicles (EVs), according to Reuters. Separately, E&E News said that China has called on the World Trade Organization (WTO) panel to resolve a dispute over US subsidies for domestically-manufactured EVs under the Inflation Reduction Act, which China argues “artificially sets trade barriers” and pushes “up the cost of green energy transformation”. The WTO said that China has a “lack of transparency” on industrial subsidies in its economy, citing this as a possible cause for the international concerns around “perceived” overcapacity, Bloomberg reported.
BUSINESS AS USUAL: US-based solar manufacturing plants built by Chinese companies will have at least 20 gigawatts of annual production capacity within the next year, enough to serve about half the US market, according to Reuters. By contrast, non-Chinese companies “have found it hard to compete”, with as many as half of their planned US factories possibly failing to come online, the newswire added. Meanwhile, Chinese wind turbine manufacturer Envision may soon sign a deal to build a wind turbine manufacturing plant in Saudi Arabia, “as part of the kingdom’s efforts to localise supply chains”, Bloomberg reported. Another Bloomberg article said that two Chinese solar giants will build manufacturing plants in Saudi Arabia worth $3bn, adding that Chinese vice-premier He Lifeng had previously said the two countries “should expand cooperation in emerging sectors such as renewable energy”.
Spotlight
Q&A: What China’s push for ‘new quality productive forces’ means for climate action
China’s Third Plenum, an eagerly awaited five-yearly meeting traditionally associated with major economic reforms, concluded on 18 July in Beijing.
The official readout calls on policymakers to pursue “high-quality economic development”, in part through “developing new quality productive forces” (NQPF).
NQPF was also listed as a policy priority in the ‘resolution’ released after the plenum. This, the resolution says, includes “pursuing innovation” in the new energy industry, “green” industrial upgrading and improving “environmental protection”.
However, there is significant debate as to whether this push will result in concrete policy outcomes.
In this issue, Carbon Brief unpacks what China’s NQPF drive means for its climate, energy and industrial policy. This analysis is published in full on the Carbon Brief website.
What does NQPF mean?
In January 2024, President Xi Jinping defined NQPF as innovation-led development that creates “a break with traditional economic growth models and development pathways”, resulting in a “high level of technology, efficiency and quality” as well as an “in-depth transformation and upgrading of industry”.
This has led to a “ubiquitous” focus on innovation across official discussions about NQPF, according to the University of Cambridge-affiliated thinktank Cambridge Industrial Innovation Policy.
But NQPF is about more than innovation and advanced technology alone. Analysis by the Council on Geostrategy says “while scientific and technological innovation is essential, [China recognises there] needs also to be deeper [economic] reforms”.
Low-carbon development is one of the few named priorities of the otherwise high-level theory. NQPF will provide an “important support for green development”, according to a commentary in the Communist party-affiliated People’s Daily.
“Protecting the ecological environment is to protect productivity and improving the ecological environment is to develop productivity,” it adds.
Why is the concept important?
NQPF represents a holistic approach “designed to address complex, interrelated challenges faced by China and to create a more resilient and dynamic economy”, Dr Muyi Yang, senior electricity policy analyst for China from the thinktank Ember, tells Carbon Brief.
Arthur Kroeber, founding partner and head of research at research firm Gavekal Dragonomics, tells Carbon Brief that NQPF is “the latest iteration of a long-running trend towards industrial policy, technology and intensive growth”.
This is “essentially a new bottle for old wine”, Kroeber adds. “I think what it does do is emphasise the point that there is a national mission” to build China into a technological superpower.
The idea addresses specific anxieties facing China’s leadership. As well as supporting economic growth, strengthening the country’s ability to innovate is part of a broader security drive.
Xi said in his January 2024 speech that he believes China is “still reliant on others for some core technologies…our industry is still not strong enough in spite of its size and falls short of excellence”.
What does this mean for China’s ‘green development’?
A primary aim of NQPF is to expand “strategic emerging industries” and “nurture future industries”, a commentary in the state-run newspaper China Daily argues.
These include a range of low carbon technologies, from electric vehicles (EV) to nuclear fusion. Recent analysis for Carbon Brief found that “clean energy” sectors contributed 11.4tn yuan ($1.6tn) to China’s economy in 2023.
Much of this will be driven by state-coordinated efforts. China Daily says that efforts to cultivate NQPF will “encourage” state-owned enterprises (SOEs) to deploy resources towards target industries.
These efforts are inspired particularly by the success of the EV industry, with several commentaries and articles highlighting its growth in analysis of NQPF.
Using innovation to foster leading expertise across different industries, China hopes, will allow the country to replicate this growth in other industries.
For example, a blog post on CCTV-affiliated WeChat account Yuyuan Tantian draws a link between China’s experience in manufacturing LCD televisions and its later success in developing solar technologies.
But China’s use of state resources to support strategically important industries has recently fuelled anxieties about “overcapacity” in some countries.
There are also concerns around overcapacity domestically. Han Wenxiu, executive deputy director of the Office of the Central Financial and Economic Affairs Commission, cautioned officials against “blind conformity and bubbles”.
But given current tensions with the US, Kroeber tells Carbon Brief, China “can’t rely on imports of technology in the same way…It must have an all-of-nation effort to develop its own alternatives.”
In his view, efforts to foster NQPF “could” lead to creation of more capacity, but this may be “unintentional” as “the Europeans and Chinese are actually starting discussions on [resolving concerns around] EVs”.
At the same time, Chinese ministries are highlighting the concept in more concrete policies. The Ministry of Ecology and Environment (MEE) announced that it will release a “1+N” policy on NQPF, while the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) will establish a centre promoting the concept.
Analysis has said this could signal the MEE “leveraging” the concept to “push through reforms that might otherwise be stymied” by other stakeholders, or improve MOST’s “autonomy” in making innovation policy.
Kroeber says that every policy document “now has to have some reference to NQPF”.
However, he adds, one area to watch is power market reform, as “coordination and the state playing a more leading role” will be crucial to progress.
Yang tells Carbon Brief that NQPF “is far from being purely conceptual”. He says: “I believe more actions in various sectors will come soon to translate it into concrete initiatives and programs.”
Watch, read, listen
BIG IDEAS: The European Council on Foreign Relations published a book explaining key theoretical concepts in Chinese policy discussions, such as “green industrialism” and “ecological civilisation”.
MARKET REFORM: Caixin carried a transcript of a recent speech by former central bank governor Zhou Xiaochuan, in which he argued for a “more responsive pricing system” in China’s power market to boost decarbonisation of the electricity system.
HYDROGEN PIVOT: China News published a video feature of how Lüliang city in coal-rich Shanxi province is betting on hydrogen to power its energy transition.
SPURRING STEEL: A new paper published by the Oxford Institute of Energy Studies explored the challenges of decarbonising China’s steel industry and the domestic and global climate policies that can incentivise a quicker energy transition.
20.8 million
The number of people in China affected by flooding between 1 January and 12 July, according to the Ministry of Emergency Management (MEM). The MEM also announced that, in the first half of this year, heavy rainfall, flooding and landslides caused 21,000 homes to collapse, affected 13.3m hectares of crops and caused 59bn yuan (£6.4bn) in direct economic losses.
New science
Substantial increase in perfluorocarbons CF4 (PFC-14) and C2F6 (PFC-116) emissions in China
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Chinese emissions of the greenhouse gases tetrafluoromethane and hexafluoroethane increased by 78% between 2011 and 2021, according to new research. The authors analysed “atmospheric observations” from nine sites in China, and found that the country’s combined emissions of the two gases reached 78m tonnes of CO2 equivalent in 2021. The study found “substantial” emissions from the less-populated western regions of China, likely because they are byproducts from the expanding aluminium industry.
The increasing water stress projected for China could shift the agriculture and manufacturing industry geographically
Communications Earth & Environment
A new study found that water stress will increase in China between 2020 and 2099 under both high and low emission scenarios, mainly due to “decreased water supplies like surface runoff and snow water content”. The authors developed a “water stress prediction index”, which revealed that changes in water stress will mainly be driven by changes in spring and autumn. They added that water stress is likely to be higher in north-western provinces than south-eastern ones. These changes in water stress “could lead to the north-to-south migration of the agriculture sector, manufacturing sector and human population”, the authors warned.
Prioritising forestation in China through incorporating biogeochemical and local biogeophysical effects
Earth’s Future
A new study highlighted the importance of considering the biogeophysical (BGP) effects of forestation – via modification of land surface temperature – as well as the biogeochemical (BGC) effects of carbon sequestration. The authors noted that current forestation policies in China only consider the BGC effect. However, by considering both BGC and BGP effects, the study identified an extra 167.2m hectares (Mha) of potentially suitable area for forestation in China. The paper added that “considering both effects will displace 17.7% (15.3 Mha) of forestation areas determined by considering only the BGC effect under the 2060 forestation target”. The study found that in China, the BGC and BGP effects of forestation “mostly work in synergy” to increase the “overall climate benefits”.
China Briefing is compiled by Wanyuan Song, Anika Patel and Ada Carpenter. It is edited by Wanyuan Song and Dr Simon Evans. Please send tips and feedback to china@carbonbrief.org
The post China Briefing 25 July: ‘Third plenum’ outcomes; ‘Low-carbon’ coal plants; EU probes wind subsidies appeared first on Carbon Brief.
China Briefing 25 July: ‘Third plenum’ outcomes; ‘Low-carbon’ coal plants; EU probes wind subsidies
New Zealand’s parliament has adopted a controversial new law blocking a whole avenue of climate litigation and shutting down its most advanced corporate lawsuit, which has been blamed by the government for shaking business confidence and investment.
The Climate Change Response (Tort Liability) Amendment Bill, expected to take effect in the coming days after it is formally signed by the Governor-General, prevents all current and future civil claims for climate loss or harm under tort law.
Justice minister Paul Goldsmith said last week that the aim was to give businesses “certainty around their climate change obligations”, noting it would not alter the government’s responsibilities under the Climate Change Response Act 2002 nor business obligations under the Emissions Trading Scheme.
“Our response to climate change is best managed by the Government at a national level and not through piece-meal litigation in the courts,” he added in a statement.
Such litigation, he said, “risks developing a new regime that contradicts the framework Parliament has already enacted” to tackle climate change.
South Africa’s top court blocks Shell’s offshore oil exploration right
Constitutional Court rules that Shell and its partners failed to consult affected communities and did not properly consider environmental risksPeruvian farmer loses climate case against RWE – but paves way for future action
Experts say that despite dismissing the lawsuit, the ruling sets a precedent by confirming that climate science can establish legal liability for the damage caused by emissions
Goldsmith singled out a key domestic climate lawsuit brought by Northland iwi leader and activist Mike Smith against six big companies: dairy firms Fonterra and Dairy Holdings, energy firms Genesis Energy and Z Energy, New Zealand Steel and coal mining firm BT Mining. A seventh original defendant, Channel Infrastructure, was dropped after it permanently decommissioned its Marsden Point oil refinery.
Smith argued that these companies had caused him harm under public nuisance and negligence law, as well as a third breach of a duty to cease contributing to climate change that has yet to be tested domestically. He did not seek financial compensation, instead asking for the companies to immediately stop emitting or contributing to net greenhouse gas emissions.
In one of the most advanced corporate climate accountability lawsuits in the world, a trial had been scheduled for April 2027 after the Supreme Court unanimously allowed the case to continue.
Corporate lobbying in the shadows
Smith described the passing of the bill as “deeply concerning”, particularly as it coincided with the Supreme Court hearing another of his climate lawsuits. In that case, Smith v Attorney-General, he argues that the government’s response to climate change and its impacts on Māori communities in particular breaches rights to life and culture.
“That timing raises profound questions about the separation of powers and the rule of law,” said Smith. “Whatever one’s view of the merits of these cases, it is deeply troubling when parliament intervenes to remove a legal pathway while the courts are actively considering fundamental questions about climate responsibility, rights and the crown’s obligations.”
The bill – which says that no person (including the government) can be found liable in tort for emissions-related climate change effects – followed major lobbying efforts by the companies defending themselves in Smith’s lawsuit. They outlined a proposed legal amendment in a briefing note to the government in 2024.
The centre-right government has been fiercely criticised over its lack of transparency in relation to this lobbying activity. The national ombudsman recently found that the Prime Minister’s Office effectively withheld information requested by the Environmental Law Initiative about meetings, discussions and conversations regarding Smith’s case.
Green groups fail to stop bill
The bill sparked huge concern among environmental campaigners in New Zealand and elsewhere. Greenpeace Aotearoa called it a “shocking abuse of executive power” and the vast majority of submissions to a parliamentary inquiry said it should be rejected.
But in the end, it was adopted with little resistance, moving relatively smoothly through parliament, passing its third reading by 67 votes to 53. Sam Bookman, climate law lecturer at Melbourne Law School, told Climate Home News he was not surprised by this, given that the coalition government has a secure majority.
A complaint has been made to the UN special rapporteur on climate change and human rights by Smith, the National Iwi Chairs Forum Pou Tikanga and youth coalition Climate Clinic Aotearoa over what they see as the government’s heavy-handed approach. Smith is also challenging the new law in yet another lawsuit.
“Pathetic”: New Zealand plans to barely cut emissions between 2030 and 2035
Bookman thinks it “very unlikely” that such a challenge will succeed, noting that New Zealand’s constitution is firmly anchored in parliamentary sovereignty.
But the expert in climate law does not see the bill as the end of legal action in the country, noting that New Zealand has a “sophisticated climate litigation landscape with a growing number of specialist and experienced lawyers and NGOs”.
The country is also approaching its next general election in November, and some opposition parties have pledged to restore access to the courts if elected.
Amanda Larsson, global project lead on agriculture for Greenpeace International, said: “This law deserves to be tested, and I strongly encourage the international climate litigation community to unite and help defend New Zealanders’ fundamental right to hold polluters accountable before this becomes a global blueprint.”
Copycat legislation on the rise
New Zealand’s move is part of a small but growing legislative effort to shut down climate litigation around the world.
In the US, Republican politicians introduced legislation in the House and Senate in April that would shield fossil fuel firms from climate liability lawsuits. Similar laws have already been passed at state level in Tennessee, Utah, Iowa and Louisiana.
The German state of Bavaria has put forward a similar proposal to the Federal Council, aiming to block private climate claims as well as the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments imposing such liability. There are also proposals to limit available remedies and actions in the Netherlands and Belgium.
UN General Assembly backs “climate obligations” set by world’s top court
Bookman said he expects more efforts to counter climate damages litigation and advised plaintiffs to think about how to respond, including drawing on broader support in opposing them.
“Even though it’s very hard for plaintiffs to win these types of cases, companies are very eager to avoid the expense, embarrassment and political accountability that come even with unsuccessful lawsuits,” he said.
The post New Zealand moves to protect business with law curtailing climate litigation appeared first on Climate Home News.
New Zealand moves to protect business with law curtailing climate litigation
Bhima Yudhistira Adhinegara is the Executive Director of the Center of Economic and Law Studies (CELIOS), an Indonesia-based economic think tank. Muhammad Zulfikar Rakhmat is the Director of the China-Indonesia desk at CELIOS.
Indonesia produces around 60% of the world’s nickel, a metal used to manufacture batteries for electric vehicles (EVs) – more than any other country in the world. But in 2026, the government sharply reduced how much of its nickel can be extracted from the ground.
Production quotas were reduced by around 40% this year compared to 2025. Weda Bay, the largest nickel mine on Earth, had its allowance cut by more than 70% and exhausted its full-year quota by the end of May, halting mining entirely; it cannot resume large-scale extraction until next year unless regulators grant an extension.
The policy has sparked a vivid debate in Indonesian policy circles: how can the country shift its strategy from a decade of mining vast quantities of cheap nickel to producing a high-value and low-carbon material that the rest of the world wants for EV batteries.
The cuts aren’t a silver bullet to clean up Indonesia’s nickel industry, whose smelters are powered by coal – the most polluting fossil fuels. But alongside stricter enforcement of environmental rules, it is one side of efforts to produce more sustainable nickel for a premium.
Restricting Indonesia’s nickel output
Production quotas were introduced to stop the collapse of nickel prices because of oversupply in the market. Prices had fallen more than 40% in 2023 alone and kept sliding as Indonesian supply kept growing, hitting a four-year low of around $13,900 a ton in late 2025.
Critics called the recent tightening of production quotas proof that Indonesia’s nickel strategy has failed, arguing that the industry shouldn’t need to throttle its own output to survive. But when assessed against what the policy was supposed to do – push up nickel prices – it has worked. Prices jumped to $20,000 a ton in May, the highest since 2024.
-
Big banks’ lending to coal backers undermines Indonesia’s green plans
Foreign banks involved in Indonesia’s $20-billion Just Energy Transition Partnership have also funded companies working on coal power expansion, a TBIJ and Climate Home News investigation reveals -
Southeast Asia’s fragile grids threaten billions in clean energy investment
Renewables developers need reliable electricity infrastructure and stable policies to help the region meet climate goals and surging demand for power
Chinese industry groups representing companies that have invested billions to mine and refine the country’s nickel were furious, warning Indonesia’s president Prabowo Subianto that the cuts put $50 billion worth of investment at risk. But much of that Chinese capital is sunk into smelters and processing plants built specifically to run on Indonesian ore, and cannot simply be moved elsewhere. That gives Jakarta more room to hold its ground than the warning suggests.
Stronger environmental enforcement
Since the start of the year, Indonesia’s forestry task force has seized more than four million hectares of land from mines and plantations operating illegally in protected forests, collecting over two trillion rupiah ($113 million) in fines.
This included 148 hectares seized from Weda Bay for lacking a forestry permit. The share of nickel produced from illegal small-scale mining also fell from about a quarter in 2022 to roughly 10% by 2024.
The crackdown responds to serious environmental damages in the nickel industry. On Obi Island, a waste pond collapsed after heavy rain in June 2025, flooding three villages and killing a resident. Internal company tests found chromium-6 – a carcinogen – in the water, in quantities far above the legal limit. The footprint of another mine near Raja Ampat, which is home to some of the world’s richest coral reefs, grew 60-fold in just eight years.
The market is responding to early cleanup efforts. Low-carbon nickel now sells for a real premium, roughly $18,800 to $19,300 a ton compared with $17,900 to $18,300 otherwise, as carmakers seek to source cleaner materials to comply with the European Union’s new emissions rules for imports.
In turn, this is incentivising the industry to do more to green its operations. Vale Indonesia’s smelter in South Sulawesi now runs almost entirely on hydropower, for example.
None of this addresses coal use, however. Major Indonesian nickel producers still emitted an estimated 15 million metric tons of greenhouse gases in 2023. Indonesia may be cracking down on illegal mining and rewarding cleaner producers but it is still running its mines on the dirtiest fuel available.
Unequal benefits
For Indonesia to truly benefit from producing cleaner and high-value nickel, it needs to reap the economic benefits too. Although the industry has boosted the country’s economic growth, the reality on the ground tells a different story.
Konawe in Southeast Sulawesi is home to a major smelting complex. Growth in the district jumped from 6% to 22% between 2015 and 2023, driven almost entirely by the nickel industry, according to a study by the Lowy Institute study. At the same time, poverty levels increased slightly and unemployment remained unchanged.
-
Nickel mining for electric vehicles is destroying lives in Indonesia
Indonesia’s abundant nickel reserves are crucial for a low carbon world. But extracting them is ruining local peoples’ lives and causing rampant deforestation -
Indonesia turns traditional Indigenous land into nickel industrial zone
Indonesia supplies the EV industry with critical battery materials but the sector’s rapid expansion is infringing the rights of Indigenous peoples -
Indonesia’s failing Just Energy Transition Partnership is a cautionary tale
The government has abandoned its plan to shut down a major coal plant, which was a key part of the deal, raising doubts about the donor-backed approach
In Halmahera, another epicentre of the nickel industry, spending by the poorest fifth grew just 5% between 2019 and 2022, compared with 28% for the wealthiest fifth, according to a separate study.
Part of the reason for this inequality is the system for transferring mining royalties to district authorities where the mines are located. In theory, they are entitled to the largest share. But in practice, payments are delayed, companies routinely dispute what they owe and royalties are pooled and distributed across a larger area.
The Natural Resource Governance Institute has found that decentralisation handed local governments power to approve new mines faster than they could build their capacity to manage them. Higher output raises national income on paper, but local governments remain constrained by fiscal rules and infrastructure costs that scale with mining.
None of this makes the 2026 quota cuts a mistake. Indonesia has every right to defend its pricing power over a resource it controls. But limiting extraction isn’t going to fix underlying issues around environmental enforcement and revenue-sharing. That requires rules that are consistently enforced, royalties that reach communities living by the mines, and a plan to wean smelters off coal.
The post Indonesia’s nickel production cuts are not enough to create a sustainable industry appeared first on Climate Home News.
Indonesia’s nickel production cuts are not enough to create a sustainable industry
Climate Change
Risk of “catastrophic” oil spill reaching Kimberley coast found in Woodside’s Scott Reef gas drilling plans
SYDNEY, Monday 24 August 2026 – New analysis of Woodside modelling released by Greenpeace Australia Pacific and Environs Kimberley has revealed the oil and gas corporation’s plans to drill at Scott Reef could cause an oil spill up to 30 times bigger than the 2009 Montara disaster, impacting the Kimberley coastline and reaching as far as Indonesia.
The new analysis details the “catastrophic” oil spill risk put to environmental regulators for approval by Woodside in its Browse to North West Shelf Project (Browse) plans, the worst-case scenario being a blowout directly below Scott Reef, polluting whale migratory pathways and covering isolated turtle nesting ground with oil condensate.
An FOI application (F348) revealed the federal environment department (DCCEEW) asked offshore oil and gas regulator NOPSEMA to look into the oil spill risk in 2025. NOPSEMA’s response to the application refused access to its report, and one document shows DCCEEW sought further advice this year.
Greenpeace and Environs Kimberley are calling on the Federal Government to publicly release the NOPSEMA report given the risk of an uncontrolled release of oil condensate from directly below Scott Reef.
Hannah Schuch, Senior Campaigner at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “Woodside is aware that drilling at Scott Reef risks a massive oil spill that would have severe, far-reaching consequences. It appears environmental regulators are aware too.
“The state and federal governments need to take this risk from Woodside’s drilling plans seriously, as they could end up allowing the worst oil spill in Australian history.
“The pygmy blue whales that migrate up and down the WA coast with their newborns each year could be swimming and feeding in toxic, oil-slicked water. Woodside’s proposal to drill at Scott Reef is an environmental disaster waiting to happen, and the WA and federal governments have one surefire way to prevent catastrophe — reject Browse.”
Martin Prichard, Executive Director at Environs Kimberley, said: “A catastrophic oil spill by Woodside would be disastrous not just for marine life in the area but also for the Kimberley’s $500 million tourism industry.
“The state and federal governments will see five marine parks on the Kimberley coast included in the risk area of a catastrophic Woodside oil spill.
“The Montara oil spill was disastrous for West Timor with the toxic oil destroying seaweed farmers’ livelihoods. The Kimberley dodged a bullet with Montara, we were lucky the spill didn’t head our way. Myself and a crew flew over the Montara oil spill and followed it as far as we could. It was like a scene from a disaster movie.”
After the WA Environmental Protection Authority deemed Browse “unacceptable” due, in part, to oil spill risk, Woodside submitted a mitigation plan based on technology that has never been used “in anger”, a weakness stated in an independent expert review of the plan.
Professor Richard Steiner, independent oil spill expert, said: “A large offshore spill is impossible to effectively contain or recover. Historically, only 2-6% of total spill volume is recovered and the ecological injury from the release of toxic hydrocarbons in the sea can be severe, extensive, and long-term.
“Here in Alaska, government research concludes that several marine populations injured by the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill, including whales, fish, and seabirds, are still not recovering today, 37 years later. We should expect similar long-term ecological impacts in Western Australia if there were to be a major oil spill. The only sure way to avoid the risk of a catastrophic marine oil spill is to not develop oil and gas projects in marine environments.”
-ENDS-
Media contact
Emma Sangalli on emma.sangalli@greenpeace.org or 0431 513 465
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year 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
-
Renewable Energy10 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits