A lack of money is hampering the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and a substantial funding boost is needed to ensure its scientists can complete their next set of flagship reports, the chair of the UN body has warned.

Funding from governments fell in 2024 and 2025 and the organisation could run out of money by 2028 unless it receives fresh funds or implements spending cuts, chair Jim Skea told an official meeting of IPCC scientists in Bangkok last week, according to the Earth Negotiations Bulletin (ENB), which provides coverage of UN negotiations.

Skea told the IPCC’s 64th session that without a substantial increase in contributions, the completion of the next set of reports, known as AR7, would be jeopardised.

To deal with this crisis, the IPCC is now considering cutting costs by holding meetings virtually, reducing staff travel, media training, recruitment, pay and website upgrades and cutting down on the editing, translating and printing of its reports, according to scenarios prepared by the IPCC secretariat.

Nepal’s representative Manjeet Dhakal told Climate Home News he was concerned about the situation, while the ENB report said Japan’s government had called the funding crunch alarming.

While South Korea and Sweden announced increased funding, the European Union – a major funder – cautioned against assuming past contributors will continue to give the same amounts, ENB reported.

No end to row over reports’ timing

The five AR7 reports, which will assess how the climate is changing, how to adapt, how to cut emissions, a synthesis report and a special report on climate change and cities – are further threatened by a long-running disagreement over when they should be completed.

While some countries want them finished by 2028, so they can feed into the UN climate process’s five-yearly global stocktake, others say this is too rushed and want to stick to the IPCC’s usual seven-year cycle, meaning reports would be finished by 2030.

Despite not being on the initial agenda, this issue dominated much of the scientists’ time in Bangkok. With time running out as delegates flew home, the meeting was unable to agree even on a plan to reach agreement by the next meeting in October 2026, ENB said.

Delegates also failed to agree to approve reports of previous meetings, after arguing over transparency, and were divided on how to respond to a scientific conference on climate tipping points.

Funding cuts

To fund its work, the IPCC relies on voluntary funding from governments. Most of the money is spent funding the participation of scientists from developing countries, the IPCC says.

But a report prepared by the IPCC secretariat for the Bangkok meeting said that “in recent years, the IPCC’s financial situation has come under strain, including amid current geopolitical challenges”.

It did not mention any governments, but reduced US funding has had a major impact, the IPCC’s financial documents show.

During Joe Biden’s presidency, the US gave the IPCC an average of $1.7 million a year, but President Donald Trump announced he would end US support and the latest data shows the US contributed no money in the first half of 2025.

The IPCC spent more money than it received in 2024 and the shortfall grew in 2025, prompting the raft of cost-cutting proposals – from switching to online meetings to cutting budgets for translating reports.

Further cost savings could be achieved, the IPCC said, by suspending IPCC travel to outreach events, freezing non-essential updates to the IPCC’s website, not creating any new staff positions until at least 2029 and no longer providing media training for the IPCC’s scientists.

Richard Klein, a scientist who has been involved in the IPCC since 1994, told Climate Home News there was “a growing discrepancy between the ambition of the IPCC and what is feasible given the budget”.

“In the end it means more pressure on authors who are already volunteering their time, and quite possibly less inclusivity of experts from developing countries,” he said.

Nepal’s Dhakal, who advises the Least Developed Countries group, called on governments to give more money to the IPCC and for the IPCC secretariat to “explore options to reduce costs without compromising inclusivity, particularly for small delegations and those with limited capacity to engage”.

Bitter divides on timeline

Since January 2024, delegates to IPCC meetings have been arguing over when the deadline for the AR7 reports should be. Delegations including Saudi Arabia and India have opposed attempts to ensure that the reports are published by 2028, in time to inform the second global stocktake.

The issue was not included on the Bangkok meeting’s formal draft agenda, with ENB reporting that Skea said this was because he did not think delegations had shown enough flexibility to be able to resolve it.

After pressure from Saudi Arabia, India and several others, the issue was added to the agenda despite delegations complaining that their governments had not authorised them to discuss it and that many countries were not represented at the meeting.

But, after four days, delegates were unable to even agree on a plan on how to reach agreement by the next meeting in October. Nepal’s Dhakal said he was “concerned with the lack of agreement on delivering the full AR7 package by 2028 to inform the second global stocktake”.

France’s Environment Ministry said in a statement that it had “deep concern at attempts to slow down and arbitrarily delay the publication schedule for the reports”.

Klein said that, while scientists are continuing their work on these reports, the likelihood of them being finalised before the second global stocktake “diminishes with every delay in making a decision”.

Transparency and tipping points

Delegates were also divided on the usually-routine issue of approving the summaries, prepared by the IPCC secretariat, of previous meetings.

According to ENB, France, Germany and Belgium wanted reports to specify speakers’ names. While France said reports should include everything that has been said by all delegates, Saudi Arabia responded that this would be unacceptable. The issue was deferred to the next meeting in October.

Saudi Arabia and India also objected to a reference in a report to a workshop that took place at Paris’s Sorbonne University in November on “tipping points and their consequences”. They argued that the concept of tipping points, which are thresholds beyond which the Earth’s climate changes suddenly, was contentious at the IPCC, ENB reported.

While journalists are not allowed to observe IPCC sessions, staff from ENB – which is an arm of the IISD think tank – are allowed to watch sessions and report on what is said.

The post Funding gap threatens next round of IPCC climate science reports, chair warns appeared first on Climate Home News.

Funding gap threatens next round of IPCC climate science reports, chair warns

Business has never been as brisk for Nigerian solar panel retailer Samuel Okechukwu and his team of installation technicians, who are struggling to keep up with orders since the Iran war caused local fuel prices to double.

“There’s too much work, I’m even having to outsource some services to keep up with the work rate,” Okechukwu told Climate Home News, as he installed solar panels on the roof of an apartment building in the southern city of Port Harcourt.

Before the war, he had installations once or twice a week, but is now busy almost every day.

Okechukwu’s surge in orders in recent weeks suggests that more Nigerians are buying solar systems due to soaring fuel prices caused by the conflict in the Middle East, which has effectively blocked the Strait of Hormuz through which a fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas previously flowed.

Plagued by frequent failures on Nigeria’s national grid, many homes and businesses buy diesel and petrol to supply generators to keep the lights on and equipment operating.

Even before the latest fuel price shock, solar installations had been increasing in Nigeria in recent years as an alternative to generators among those able to afford the initial outlay.

It costs about 600,000 naira ($450) to buy just one inverter battery and two 300-watt solar panels to charge it – roughly 10 times the minimum monthly wage – and eyebrows were raised when the government announced last year that the presidential villa was being kitted out with a $6 million solar mini-grid.

Power plants hit by gas shortages

Nigeria’s erratic power supplies have become even more unreliable in recent weeks as gas shortages constrain already fragile power generation. Most of Nigeria’s electricity supply comes from gas-fired plants.

Last month, the Nigerian Independent System Operator said several of the oil- and gas-producing nation’s thermal power plants were being affected by “persistent gas supply constraints” that were causing a decline in electricity generation.

While Nigeria has abundant gas reserves, the shortages are largely driven by structural issues, including mounting government debts owed to gas suppliers and pipeline constraints. Power Minister Adebayo Adelabu said last week that gas suppliers are prioritising export markets which have become more attractive and offer better returns over domestic markets.

This week, the Nigerian government increased gas prices for power generation companies, a move likely to deepen cost pressures in the electricity sector already struggling with debt and supply shortages.

At the same time, Okechukwu said rising temperatures in recent years were also increasing demand for an affordable source of electricity to power air conditioners.

Global oil shock makes case for renewables

Installations of solar power in Africa jumped 54% in 2025, according to a report by the Global Solar Council (GSC), marking the fastest annual growth on record.

The continent’s solar power capacity still represents only about 1% of the world’s total, though industry experts say the continent may have significantly more than official data reflects, with many rooftop installations going uncounted.

Precarious power supplies are already a key driver of solar adoption in many African nations, propelling fast growth rates in countries including Nigeria, which was Africa’s second-largest solar installer last year, installing more than 800 MW of capacity, according to the GSC, a nonprofit trade body.

Surging energy costs due to the Iran war could give further momentum to growth, the GSC’s CEO Sonia Dunlop told Climate Home News.

“It’s clear the people of Nigeria saw the writing on the wall … and have gone all in on rooftop solar as a result,” Dunlop said.

The increase in energy prices since the conflict began have cost consumers and businesses around the world more than $100 billion, according to a March 2026 analysis by 350.org, a non-profit organisation.

It said that would be enough to build sufficient solar capacity to supply about 150 million people in lower-consumption countries, for example in Africa, adding that investing in renewables was the best way to stabilise prices and strengthen energy security.

Anne Jellema, 350.org’s CEO, urged governments meeting in Colombia next month to discuss the transition away from oil and gas to “seize this moment to adopt binding targets to phase out fossil fuels and ramp up investment in a clean, safe energy future”.

Africa records fastest-ever solar growth, as installations jump in 2025

The global energy shock unleashed by the U.S.-Israeli war “definitely supports the case for longer-term mitigation, not being reliant on imported oil”, said Karl Boyce, CEO of ARC Power, a mini-grid developer operating in Africa, adding that securing sufficient investment would be crucial to realising Africa’s renewables potential.

“It’s so reliant on really heavy investment,” Boyce said. “So globally, there should be a focus on seeing how more investment can go into that sector just to give more stability in the longer term.”

“Forget about buying petrol”

In Port Harcourt, another solar trader, Sunday Onuchukwu, said his business has been “moving faster than before” as people get tired of power cuts and rising fuel costs that make investing in panels seem a better bet.

Located in a solar panels retail market, Onuchukwu’s shop was busy with customers, but the market itself was unusually quiet – without the usual whirr of generators thanks to the solar panels on the roof.

“Most of my customers complain that the fuel issue is one reason why they have decided to go solar. I have clients who transition both their offices and homes at the same time and move away from the bad power supply,” Onuchukwu told Climate Home News.

He said many businesses spend more than 20,000 naira ($15) per day on petrol to power generators.

Green Climate Fund picks locations for five developing country hubs

“With that money, calculated over a one-year period, you can install solar and forget about ever buying petrol,” he said, adding that some lower-cost solar products were now becoming available such as a 50,000-naira ($36) kit that provides enough power to light a single bulb and charge a mobile phone.

Lifting two heavy panels onto his head in Onuchukwu’s shop, one customer said ensuring a steady supply of power – after months without mains supplies – was vital for his barber shop and would also help his wife’s small business.

“This is what I am using to run my business and ensure electricity,” the man said, giving his family name as Amadi.

“With these two panels, I can also power my wife’s inverter freezer for her to be selling frozen foods.”

The post Nigerians bet on solar as global oil shock hits wallets and power supplies appeared first on Climate Home News.

Nigerians bet on solar as global oil shock hits wallets and power supplies

As public opposition to AI data center development ratchets up in Pennsylvania, politicians are promising to protect local communities. Whether the state’s fractious politics can deliver is another question.

By Kyle Bagenstose

Ask Gemini, Google’s AI chatbot, whether Pennsylvania politicians are doing anything about the swelling public concern over data center development in the commonwealth, and it answers confidently.

Pennsylvania Lawmakers Are Talking the Talk on Data Center Regulations. But Will They Walk?