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
First ministerial China-UK ‘climate dialogue’
UK-CHINA CATCH UP: On 16 June, Huang Runqiu, head of China’s Ministry of Economy and Environment (MEE), met Ed Miliband, the UK’s secretary of state for energy and climate change, as well as Rachel Kyte, UK’s special representative for climate, in London, reported Chinese media outlet Jiemian News. The meeting was the first of a “new annual UK-China climate dialogue” announced during Miliband’s trip to China in March. The meeting has not been widely reported by major Chinese state media or English-language outlets. A short report from the MEE said the ministers discussed multilateral climate governance and “next steps” for climate cooperation. The MEE also said they had agreed to cooperate in areas such as adaptation, carbon markets, climate “investment and [private] financing” (气候投融资) and methane emissions controls.

‘NEW CLIMATE AGREEMENT’: While there was no public announcement on the event from the UK side, a government spokesperson told Carbon Brief via email: “There is no route to energy security for today’s generation without our clean energy mission, and there is no climate security and no route to keeping future generations safe without engaging global climate action. It is negligent not to engage with China on their important role in reducing global emissions.” The government email said that at the meeting, the UK had “secured a new climate agreement with China”, explaining that the two ministers “signed a new climate memorandum of understanding [MoU], setting out where both countries can work together to reduce global emissions, such as climate change mitigation and emissions reduction targets”.
‘FRANK CONVERSATIONS’: According to the UK government email, Miliband had “frank conversations” with his counterpart. It added that the new MoU offered a “forum to encourage greater action from China”, including “more ambitious targets”. It also “allows the UK and China to collaborate on…measuring and controlling methane emissions…[and] climate finance”. The inclusion of methane in the MoU “suggests the UK is looking to work with China in areas that the US previously did”, according to an individual who participated in the talks.
CHINA-EU: A few days earlier on 13 June, Huang had attended the 10th China-EU ministerial dialogue in Belgium, meeting Jessika Roswall, EU commissioner for environment, water resilience and a competitive circular economy, reported China Environment News. Huang said facing “multiple challenges in environmental and climate governance”, there is a “greater need” to strengthen cooperation between EU and China, added the outlet. The Chinese state news agency Xinhua published two articles praising the EU and China’s “green-energy” partnership as well as “green cooperation”. Meanwhile, European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen “accused Beijing of deliberately creating a near-monopoly” in the global rare-earth supply at the G7 summit in Canada on 16 June, adding that “no single country” should control 80-90% of the “raw materials and downstream products like magnets”, reported the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post.
China’s oil demand to ‘peak in 2027’
PEAK IN 2027: Following the ongoing debate on whether China’s oil demand has already peaked, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said that it would “top out in 2027” – two years earlier than previously forecasted – “reinforcing the outlook for a global peak and prolonged supply surplus this decade”, reported Bloomberg. Japanese media outlet Nikkei Asia said “slowing demand” in China, which had accounted for 60% of oil demand growth in the world in the past decade, marked what the IEA called a “fundamental transformation” of the global energy market. However, according to Reuters, the IEA “stuck to its prediction that global [oil] demand will peak by 2029”, despite China’s more rapid transition. The news agency added that the IEA’s view “sharply contrasts with that of producer group OPEC, which says [global oil] consumption will keep growing for much longer”. In its coverage of the IEA report, the Times said China’s early peak was due to the “unexpectedly ‘breakneck’ switch to electric vehicle[s] (EVs)”. The sale of EVs surpassed more than one million in May, up 24% from a year ago, reported Reuters. China’s “trade-in” subsidies that boosted sales of EVs, however, were suspended in some cities as “funds run short and officials scrutinise the prevalence of zero-mileage used cars”, according to Bloomberg.
-
Sign up to Carbon Brief’s free “China Briefing” email newsletter. All you need to know about the latest developments relating to China and climate change. Sent to your inbox every Thursday.
ENERGY TRENDS: China’s demand for imported liquified natural gas (LNG) is expected to fall by 6-11% this year, said Reuters. This “unusual downturn” would be the first fall in three years due to “weak industrial demand and strong domestic and piped gas supply”, added the newswire. Separately, China’s thermal power output – mostly coal – grew 1.2% from a year earlier in May – the first rise since November – reported Bloomberg, attributing the rise to heatwave-induced demand and weak hydro output. Covering heavy rain that also caused floods (see below), Bloomberg reported that the “filling up” of rivers and reservoirs in central and southern China that “feed the country’s mighty dams” posed a “threat to the coal market that competes with hydropower in electricity generation”. Meanwhile, the Chinese government said that China’s overall energy intensity decreased by a cumulative 11.6% over 2021-24, reported state broadcaster CCTV. The outlet added: “This is equivalent to saving 1.4bn tonnes of standard coal and reducing carbon dioxide emissions by about 3bn tonnes.”
‘Worst flood’ and record-breaking rain
FLOODS AND HEATWAVES: The government issued its most severe “red” flood alerts for the first time this year after heavy rains in central and southern China, reported Reuters. State broadcaster CCTV said that floods “exceeding the warning level” occurred in 27 rivers across the country. Huaiji, a county in southern Guangdong province, was “hit with [the] worst flood in a century”, said state broadcaster China Global Television Network (CGTN). Record-breaking rain also fell in Hunan province in central China, affecting more than 400,000 people, reported Xinhua. About 400 ninth-grade students and 30 teachers were evacuated in Guangxi, in the south, the day before the senior high school entrance examination, said Xinhua. Meanwhile, ahead of the arrival of the first typhoon of the year, named Wutip, more than 16,000 people were transferred to safer places from “construction sites, low-lying flood-prone areas and regions at risk of flash floods” in Hainan province in south China, said Xinhua. At the same time, parts of China were hit by a “brutal heatwave”, with Xinjiang province in the northwest experiencing temperatures of up to 46.8C, according to the Guardian.
FLOOD RELIEF: About 60m yuan ($8m) were issued “to bolster flood relief efforts in Guangdong Province”, said Xinhua. In addition, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), “urgently” allocated 100m yuan ($14m) to support “disaster relief work” in Guizhou, with an additional 100m yuan to Guangdong and Hunan, according to China News.
China ‘will cap’ carbon market emissions by 2030
WIDER COVERAGE: China is planning to expand the coverage of its national emissions trading scheme (ETS) to “ALL industry sectors and aviation by 2027”, according to a LinkedIn post by Yan Qin, principal analyst at consultancy firm Clearblue Markets, citing a new “high-level policy (Opinions)” document dated 24 May. The document – not seen by Carbon Brief – has been named publicly and, while its contents have not been put into the public domain, they have been “confirmed…by analysts with access to the draft”, reported Table.Briefings. In his own LinkedIn post, Lauri Myllyvirta, co-founder of the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) said it was not yet clear if the expansion would only cover “main emitting sectors” – likely including the chemicals industry at a minimum, said Myllyvirta – or all industry and aviation, as Qin suggested.
CARBON CAP: According to Qin’s post, the plan would also “introduce absolute [emissions] allowance caps for sectors with stabilised emissions, starting in 2027, and [an] absolute cap for the ETS by 2030”. To date, the ETS has only covered the power sector and has lacked an absolute cap on emissions. New sectoral caps would be conditional, according to Table.Briefings, which described this flexibility as an “escape hatch”. In his post, Myllyvirta said: “The introduction of a national [ETS] cap by 2030 is in line with expectations – that’s when China’s emissions are supposed to have peaked, at the latest, and when the focus shifts from reducing carbon intensity to absolute emission cuts, in the current policy roadmap.” He added that while past slippage on ETS implementation gave “reason to be skeptical about any new timelines”, the document did “imply to me that there is a push from the top to make the ETS…relevant in China’s decarbonisation effort”.
1,084,450,000
The capacity of China’s solar-power installations – some 1.08 terawatts (TW), up 57% year-on-year – as of May 2025, according to China’s National Energy Administration (NEA) and reported by PV magazine. China added 198 gigawatts (GW) of new solar capacity in the first five months of the year, reported the Guardian, including 93GW in May alone.
Spotlight
China and the world’s climate cooperation in dilemma
A group of prominent experts of climate policy from academia, thinktanks and civil society shared their thoughts about China and climate change at the 2025 Bath Conference on China & Global Sustainability Transition earlier this week, organised by the SGAIN project at the University of Bath.
A wide range of topics – including the potential for China to show climate leadership – were discussed under the Chatham House rule. Carbon Brief outlines some of the key messages from the conference.
In an on-the-record opening keynote, Erik Solheim, former minister of climate and the environment of Norway and former executive director of the UN environment programme, said that, while European leaders currently appear to have “no time for long-term environmental problems”, China’s president Xi Jinping has been speaking a “lot more about the environment”.
Xi’s attitude was illustrated by his “two mountains” theory, said Solheim. He added that this theory – showing that “going green is not just for the environment, going green is also good for the economy” – was the “primary driver” of China’s “green transition”.
In a second on-the-record keynote, Kate Logan, director of the China climate hub and climate diplomacy at the Asia Society, said that other than the “new three” – solar panels, EVs and batteries – being a new engine of China’s economic growth, its exports of clean-energy technology have also surpassed that of “traditional energy”.
China has made major overseas climate-related investments, said Max Schmidt, a researcher from the Perspectives Climate Group, who agreed to be named despite the Chatham House rule.
Other speakers said that China’s overseas investments – both from the state and private capital – have largely shifted from infrastructure to renewable energy projects, while largely phasing out money going towards foreign coal plants.
Asked by Carbon Brief about ongoing Chinese investments in overseas coal-fired power, despite its pledge to end such activity, another speaker said that this commitment had been “by [and] large…diplomatic”. They added: “As we understood, it does not apply to what has already been in the pipeline.”
China’s role in the new international climate-finance goal agreed at COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan last year. One speaker said:
“Strategically, we promote cooperation…[and] multilateralism…[But] if [the developed countries] say China needs to provide public [climate] funds, fill[ing] the gap left by the US, these prominent [Chinese climate] negotiators will definitely say no.”
Another speaker said that talks on climate finance between the UK and China have not been “very productive”.
The person said China urged developed countries, including the UK, to increase their climate finance, while the UK urged China to “count their south-south climate support towards the [international] climate finance goal”.
“Neither side wants to budge, so there has been little progress and it is unclear how the gap left by the US will be filled,” added the person.
In answering Carbon Brief’s question on how to move things forward, one speaker said:
“Stop trying to set any formal obligations for China…Instead, set an open-ended opportunity…Keep China happy and you will see…a lot of donations…That’s my understanding of dealing with the government for so many years.”
Addressing recent security concerns over China’s clean-energy exports, a speaker suggested that in an ideal world, the UK would have a “list” of products that it “welcomes” from China.
However, complex clean-energy products containing many components, such as EVs, present “huge grey areas”, which are “in the middle” and are likely to have to be decided on a “case-by-case basis” due to the uncertainty involved, added the speaker.
In the US, meanwhile, “climate conversations” were being “disrupted” by another factor – the supply of critical minerals amid geopolitical concerns – according to a different speaker, who said this was intensified by China “leapfrogg[ing]” in the EV industry.
Another speaker said that critical minerals were being “politicalised”, in part because of the different ways they are used in each country.
The speaker said that critical minerals had a wide range of uses. For the US they were mainly used in semiconductors, petrochemicals and defence, whereas China also used them in EVs and wind turbines, they explained.
Speaking to Carbon Brief on the sidelines of the event, Dr Yixian Sun, who leads the SGAIN project, said that the rest of the world could take “useful lessons” from China’s efforts towards sustainable development. He added:
“To keep the 1.5C goal alive, stronger international cooperation is urgently needed – to help China deepen its own transition and [to] develop inclusive partnerships with the rest of the world.”
Watch, read, listen
EMISSIONS PEAKED?: Bloomberg’s “Zero” podcast interviewed CREA’s Myllyvirta, about whether China’s emissions have “finally peaked”, citing his analysis for Carbon Brief.
‘GREEN DEVELOPMENT’: Prof Bai Quan, from the Academy of Macroeconomic Research (AMR) under China’s National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), who Carbon Brief interviewed last year, published an article about “green development” at state-run media outlet Economic Daily.
INDUSTRY MITIGATION: Prof He Kebin, dean of the Institute for Carbon Neutrality at Tsinghua University, gave a talk about “industrial decarbonisation”, reported China Energy Net.
‘NATIONAL LOW-CARBON DAY’: A short video promoting combating climate change for China’s “national low-carbon day” (25 June) was produced and published by the MEE.
New science
Persistent emissions of ozone-depleting carbon tetrachloride from China during 2011–2021
Nature Geoscience
China was responsible for half of the world’s emissions of the ozone-depleting greenhouse gas carbon tetrachloride over 2011-20, according to new research. The paper used both long-term atmospheric observations from a network of sites from across China and a “top-down approach” to estimate the country’s carbon tetrachloride emissions. The authors noted that “substantial” carbon tetrachloride emissions are permitted for feedstock use in China, but still found thousands of tonnes of “unexplained” carbon tetrachloride emissions from the country per year.
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology
The extreme heatwave and drought in North China in 2022-23 caused more than 80,000 hectares of forest canopy dieback, a new study found. The researchers used remote sensing forest monitoring algorithms and drone-captured images to identify forest canopy dieback during this period. The most severe dieback occurred in May 2023, they found. Areas with high forest cover were hardest hit in the early stages of the extreme weather, which suggests that “afforestation efforts may have inadvertently increased forest vulnerability”, the study authors wrote. They added that this extreme weather event was “highly severe, widespread, and prolonged, causing historically low anomalies in regional greenness and productivity”.
China Briefing is compiled by Wanyuan Song and Anika Patel. It is edited by Wanyuan Song and Dr Simon Evans. Please send tips and feedback to china@carbonbrief.org
The post China Briefing 26 June 2025: First UK-China climate dialogue; China-climate conference summary; Oil peak ‘in 2027’ appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Climate Change
Marine Parks Explained
Australia’s network of marine parks is the largest in the world, covering more than half (52%) of Australia’s Commonwealth waters. You could be forgiven for assuming that a marine park is much like a national park on land: a highly protected place where people can enjoy nature while conservation efforts help habitats recover and wildlife thrive. You wouldn’t expect someone to bulldoze a national park, so why should they be allowed to bottom trawl in a marine park?
The reality is that not all marine parks are equally protected. Australia’s Marine Parks Network is divided into different zoning categories, with each zone determining which activities are permitted and the level of protection provided.
More than half of the Commonwealth Marine Parks Network allows industrial activities like oil and gas mining, and industrial fishing.
Our survival, and the survival of our planet, depends on the ocean. The ocean produces more oxygen than all of our forests combined, sustains communities and regulates the earth’s temperature. It’s home to wondrous wildlife and important ecosystems like coral reefs and kelp forests.
We love our big blue backyard
Australia’s ocean is teeming with life that is found nowhere else on earth. Schools of colourful fish, vibrant coral reefs, endemic shark nurseries, pods of dolphins, families of whales, playful seal pups and threatened Jurassic-era turtles call Australian waters home.
Since time began, from the turquoise waves to the deep blue, the ocean has connected our shorelines and communities, fed us, guided us and grounded us. We are intrinsically connected to our big blue backyard – more than 85% of us live within 50km of the shoreline. For tens of thousands of years, people have lived in harmony with the ocean and the wildlife within it, caring for and being sustained by its rich waters. Australia’s waters are some of the most unique and abundant places on Earth but our Marine Parks Network is falling short to properly protect them.
Australia’s marine parks aren’t living up to their name

The Australian Commonwealth Marine Parks Network covers commonwealth waters 5.5km from the coast. The network is divided into 7 regional management areas, overall the network contains 60 marine parks. Zoning types determine what activities are allowed in each area. Over half of the network allows industrial activities, risking our most precious and threatened ocean wildlife.
Within many of our marine parks, destructive industries are allowed to fish, trawl, dig and mine using barbaric and cruel methods. Here are some of the zones explained:
- Bottom Trawling: Special Purpose (trawl) zones allow bottom trawling. This covers 10 marine parks totalling almost 13 million hectares. Bottom trawlers bulldoze the seafloor with weighted nets, deforesting our underwater forests; a cruel, indiscriminate and inefficient way to fish.
- Other Industrial Fishing: Includes “Habitat Protection Zones, ““Multi Use Zones” and “Special Purpose Zones.” Fishing methods vary from park to park but many marine parks in these zones allow industrial fishing like longlining. Longlining involves setting lines that can be 100km long, bristling with deadly hooks designed to catch a specific fish species. But longlining is not a selective method of fishing – significant numbers of sharks, rays, turtles, dolphins and seabirds can be harmed or killed as bycatch in the process.
- Oil and Gas Mining: Many “Special Purpose” and “Multi Use” zones allow seismic blasting and oil and gas mining. 30 marine parks or 65 million hectares of Australia’s highest conservation value areas for ocean wildlife are open for mining and exploration of oil and gas.
- Ocean Sanctuaries: National Park and Sanctuary zones are fully and highly protected marine parks designed to conserve wildlife and their habitat, where fishing, mining, and other industrial activities are not allowed.
Industrial fishing is one of the biggest threats to the ocean

In May, Greenpeace Australia Pacific sailed our campaigning vessel Oceania through some of Australia’s most beautiful and threatened marine parks. Our crew visited Jervis and Hunter marine parks to document their beauty, showcase what’s at risk and aim to expose the industrial fishing activities in these protected waters. Both of these marine parks allow bottom trawling and longlining methods of industrial fishing.
Industrial fishing is ripping the ocean apart across the planet. Longlining, also known as longline fishing, is an industrial fishing method that involves the use of a fishing line with thousands of baited hooks. These fishing lines can stretch over 100 kilometers in length and are set to capture a fish species, often tuna or billfish species. But it is not a selective method of fishing and often results in significant bycatch. This includes a range of non-target species like sharks, rays, sea turtles, marine mammals, and seabirds which are often injured or killed as bycatch.
Bottom trawling involves dragging heavy weighted nets along the ocean floor. This fishing method is popular with commercial fishing companies, because it makes it easy to catch large quantities of fish in one go. But it also damages the seafloor, releasing carbon and can kill or injure non-target ocean life like coral, fur seals, dolphins and seabirds. You may have watched the reality of bottom trawling (and the benefits of ocean sanctuaries) in Ocean with David Attenborough, if not, add it to your watch list!
Fully protected ocean sanctuaries that ban industrial fishing and mining can protect ocean wildlife and underwater wonderlands for generations to come. Vast, robust sanctuaries create blue havens where ocean wildlife are safe from nets and hooks, and can truly rest, recover, thrive and replenish out into the surrounding waters. Ocean sanctuaries ensure a healthy ocean full of life.
A once-in-a-decade chance to fix what’s falling short
We have a unique opportunity to turn the tide.
The Australian Government is asking for your feedback on how our Commonwealth Marine Parks Network is managed. This is our once-in-a-decade chance to protect ocean wildlife, ban industrial fishing and create more ocean sanctuaries.
As part of the review the Government is asking for submissions from the public to hear from you on what improvements are needed to better protect our vast network of marine parks. Writing a submission is a powerful way to influence government decisions and create real change.
This is the moment to ban industrial activities like bottom trawling and oil and gas mining. But only if they hear from YOU. Add your name!
Greenpeace is calling on the Australian government to:
1. Ban industrial activities from Australia’s Marine Parks Network: Ban industrial activities, such as industrial fishing, seismic blasting and oil and gas mining, from Australia’s marine parks.
2. Create more ocean sanctuaries: Increase fully protected sanctuaries in Australia’s marine parks based on science principles.
3. Connect Australia’s Marine Parks Network to the High Seas: mCreate seascape connectivity by linking Australian marine parks to new high seas ocean sanctuaries.
References
Substantiation that more than half of the Marine Parks Network permits industrial activity comes from a peer-reviewed systematic literature review (Phillips et al. 2025, PLOS One, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307324). The study found that within the Commonwealth Marine Parks Network specifically, “all zones are considered partially protected areas, meaning areas where extractive activities are permitted, except ‘Pink zones’ (Preservation Zones; IUCN Ia) and ‘Green Zones’ (IUCN II).” In other words, every Commonwealth marine park zone type other than the network’s strict no-take sanctuary and national park zones (IUCN Ia and II) permits some form of extractive industrial activity. Since no-take zones are the minority zone type across the network by area, this supports the conclusion that the majority of the network’s area is zoned to permit industrial activity.
DCCEEW Australian Marine Parks spatial dataset (https://fed.dcceew.gov.au/datasets/erin::australian-marine-parks/explore), filtered by zone type. This confirms that 38.43% of the network’s area is zoned as Sanctuary or National Park zones (IUCN Ia and II). These are the no-take categories excluded from the peer-reviewed study’s definition of partially protected/industrial-permitting zones. The remaining 61.57% of the network falls within the zone categories the study classifies as permitting industrial activity (per The MPA Guide definition of “industrial” applied in Phillips et al. 2025), directly corroborating the peer-reviewed finding with current Commonwealth-specific spatial data.
For further information on activities permitted within the Marine Parks Network Zoning, you can refer to the Management Plans zoning and rules for each Marine Parks Network area, for example: Temperate East, Coral Sea, North.
Climate Change
Report: Trawling the Bottom Line
A new report from Greenpeace Australia Pacific advocates for the closure of bottom trawling in Australia’s Commonwealth Marine Parks Network. Bottom trawling continues to be a pervasive threat to ocean life in Australia, with 10 marine parks totalling almost 13 million hectares, allowing bottom trawling.
Australia’s network of marine parks, which is the biggest in the world, covers more than half (52%) of Australia’s Commonwealth domestic waters, but not all parks are created equal. Australia’s Marine Parks Network is divided into different zoning categories, with each zone determining which activities are permitted and the level of protection provided. More than half of the Marine Parks Network allow industrial activities like industrial fishing and oil and gas mining. This includes zoning types that allow destructive fishing by longliners and bottom trawlers, who pillage underwater wonderlands, rip up coral and indiscriminately and violently catch any animal in their path, including turtles, seals and dolphins, all within areas labelled a marine park.
The Federal government has commenced a review into the majority of Australia’s Commonwealth Marine Parks Network management plans. This presents an opportunity to ban industrial activities from our marine parks and create more ocean sanctuaries.

Climate Change
Sewing and Painting the Future

© Harriet Spark / Grumpy Turtle Film / Greenpeace
The banner drop is a distinctive part of the Greenpeace repertoire.
The moment of the unfolding is intrinsically dramatic. It is the reveal; when the moral and scientific truth of a situation is unveiled to the world. The wrong is being labelled—not through a written submission, or a social media post, or a statement in a meeting—but in words emblazoned in real physical space, chosen and occupied with precision, for all to see. There is jeopardy and transgression. And there are consequences—for the activists and for Greenpeace, as well as for the target of the communication. One of the reasons the banner remains such an effective tool in our toolbox is because of its undeniable clarity in cutting through, driving change and accountability in a way that few other tactics can. It is naming the wrong: in giant, clear letters.
We’ve hung these massive messages at environmental crime scenes, corporate headquarters, and iconic landmarks; on government buildings, ships and planes—in locations all around the world, for years.
My own memories unfurl even as I write this, but because the campaign to stop Woodside at Scott Reef is so pressing, what immediately springs to mind are two of our banners in that campaign: one on a crane outside their Perth HQ, and another on some of their corroding industrial junk at sea. What about you? Is there a particular banner that you picture when you think of Greenpeace?
The banners can attract global attention, but they have quiet beginnings. Each one is made by hand, often by volunteers. It is the invisible labour behind each spectacular public moment. One of the key pieces of equipment in our workshop at Rainbow Warrior House is the sewing machine. Sometimes our workshop is full of people and noise; at others it is quiet, the only sound being the gentle, purposeful, whir and buzz of a banner being sewn. It is usually our warehouse manager, Kieran Holmes, on the tools, head over the machine, carefully pouring over the raw canvas or tarp as the banner takes shape. Kieran’s one of those people who seems to be able to turn his hand to almost anything, but you wouldn’t know it because he’s old-school modest. In addition to being incredibly skilled, Kieran’s an all-round beaut human to have in the heart of our headquarters; never too busy to take the time to show a newcomer, or curious visitor, around his domain.
Once the banner is sewn up, the lettering needs to be outlined. This is done on a magnetic wall—a fit-for-purpose feature at Rainbow Warrior House, where the banner is held up with magnets, and the edges of the letters neatly traced from a projection.
Next comes the painting. It usually starts late in the afternoon, sometimes going into evenings and weekends, with volunteers, staff, mates crowded around, brushes in hand. It is a calming meditative feeling of shared purpose, giving each letter its visual heft, the colour building power and presence with each stroke.
Then you stand back, stretch, and look at the message, now ready.
S A V E S C O T T R E E F
Throughout history, every great push for social change has required some form of invisible labour; preparation in the form of quiet things seldom seen, but vital. It is the enabling work of love instantiated in action. And of course, so much of the time it has been women who have done this labour, so that the men could get the chance to make the speeches and stand on the podiums. The inaugural Greenpeace voyage to stop nuclear testing in 1971 had a male-only crew, but wouldn’t have happened without the ideas and work of women behind the scenes.
It is what we do together, after all, that changes the world. Sometimes that work happens on a stage, a ship on the wild seas, or up the side of a building. But mostly, it is the hidden diligence of those who care and contribute to all the enabling work that makes a change once thought impossible, inevitable. It is Kieran at his sewing machine. It was Dorothy Stowe doing the administrative work of the ‘Don’t Make A Wave Committee’ that became Greenpeace.
When we think of social change, it is the sturm and drang that we remember. The drop of the banner, the chant of the crowd, the raising of the new flag. But look behind the curtain, and there’ll be a crew of people who are taking responsibility for the administration, the sewing and the painting, making the food, checking the bus timetables, getting stuff done. And behind them are even more handsinvisibly donating time and trust; the financial, material and expert resources that make it all possible. There’s love, camaraderie and know-how at every stage.
We are social and cooperative creatures by nature. And we human beings have been stitching for millenia, sewing the possibilities of our common future. Political and corporate bullies and algorithmically manipulative platforms would have us forget this, and abandon who we are. But we should be in no doubt that the brighter prospects for ourselves and life on earth continue to be stitched and painted; collaboratively and with love, by the diligent hands of millions of people who care, each day, in every community and city across the world.
With Love,
David
Q & A
I always get great questions when interviewing prospective new team members. One that came up again recently was: “Is Greenpeace actually one organisation?”
Around the world, people know Greenpeace by our one global name, united by a shared mission: securing an Earth capable of nurturing life in all its magnificent diversity, with a particular focus on climate and biodiversity. Behind the scenes, though, we’re organised as a network of 25 legally autonomous national and regional offices, including Greenpeace Australia Pacific, working alongside Greenpeace International.
That structure gives us the best of both worlds: we work together leveraging the power of a global network on the issues that matter most, while each office remains legally independent and deeply connected to the communities, cultures and political realities where we’re embedded. Local knowledge informs global action, and global collaboration strengthens and supports local campaigns.
It’s a model that has enabled Greenpeace to take on some of the world’s biggest challenges for over five decades–while withstanding challenges and attacks from governments and corporations. Global enough to tackle global problems, local enough to understand our communities and the natural places we love.
If you’re curious to learn more, you can read about the Greenpeace Global Network structure here.
-
Climate Change12 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases12 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


