A court in the Netherlands has ruled that the government’s emissions-cutting and adaptation policies discriminated against and failed to protect citizens of the Dutch Caribbean island of Bonaire from climate change, in violation of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR).
In a case brought by Greenpeace, the Hague District Court ruled the government breached Bonaire islanders’ right to a private and family life and discrimininated against them by drawing up policies to adapt Bonaire to climate change later and less systematically than they did for the European part of the Netherlands, despite the islands being more vulnerable to climate change.
Onnie Emerenciana, a farmer plaintiff in the case and one of the 26,000 residents in the Caribbean island, celebrated the decision, saying that the Dutch government can no longer ignore Bonaire’s islanders.
“The court is drawing a line in the sand,” he said, “our lives, our culture, and our country are being taken seriously. The State can no longer look the other way. The next step is to free up funding and expertise for concrete action plans to protect our island. We truly have to do this together; Bonaire cannot solve this alone.”
The Dutch island is located off the Venezuelan coast in the Southern Caribbean, an area that is highly prone to hurricanes, extreme heat and sea level rise. The World Bank estimates that Bonaire could lose up to 12% of its GDP to tropical storms.
ClientEarth fundamental rights lawyer Vesselina Newman said the judgement was “totally groundbreaking” as “it’s the first successful national adaptation case of this scale. The ruling, based on discrimination against the inhabitants of Bonaire, is significant, and will surely open doors for a host of comparable cases around the world – in particular other Global North countries with overseas territories.”
To comply with the convention and the Paris Agreement, the court said the government must submit a new binding emissions-cutting target, which includes international aviation and shipping, for 2030 and other interim targets on the way to net zero by 2050. The current 55% on 2019 levels target is non-binding and, as the court noted, the government accepts it is “highly unlikely” to meet it.
Rebuke to rich nations
Wealthy nations have argued that their climate targets are compatible with the Paris Agreement goal to limit global warming to 1.5C because they plan to reduce emissions faster than the necessary global average. But the court in The Hague ruled Dutch climate policy “does not make an equitable contribution” to meeting this goal.
The panel of three judges ruled that the Netherlands has emitted more than its fair share carbon through its historic emissions, and has not explained how it is “equitable” that the country’s climate plan allows for higher emissions per person than the global average.
The ruling added that, by not including international aviation and shipping, the Dutch and EU emissions reduction targets are “lower than the UN minimum standards” for developed countries.
Most countries’ climate targets do not include international aviation and shipping, arguing that they should be dealt with globally under the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and International Maritime Organisation (IMO).

The judges also criticised the government’s adaptation policies as “there is still no climate adaptation plan or integrated climate adaptation policy for Bonaire, even though it has been known for three decades that the island is particularly vulnerable to the negative effects of climate change”. But it said there was still time for adaptation goals under the UN climate regime, which are mostly for 2030, to be met.
Judges order review of climate plan
The ruling gives 18 months to the Dutch government to establish binding targets, enshrined in national legislation, that reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the whole economy. It also ordered the government to develop an adaptation plan for Bonaire that can be implemented by 2030.
Dutch climate minister Sophie Hermans said in a statement that the court delivered a “ruling of significance” and that the government would carefully review it. The ruling could still be appealed.
The Netherlands has long positioned itself as a climate leader on the global stage and is currently leading a global coalition to phase out fossil fuel subsidies and co-chairing an upcoming conference on phasing out fossil fuels in the Colombian city of Santa Marta.
After elections in October 2025, the government which will respond to the ruling is likely to be liberal Rob Jetten. He was environment minister in the previous government and personally promoted the launch of the coalition against fossil fuel subsidies at COP28 in 2023. “My message to Rob Jetten : bring this ruling to the cabinet’s negotiating table tonight,” said Greenpeace Netherlands managing director Marieke Vellekoop.
The court case builds upon the 2024 ruling of the ECHR that the Swiss government breached older Swiss women’s right to a private and family life by not doing enough to cut emissions. Other ECHR members – most of which have similar or less ambitious climate targets and policies to the Netherlands – include most European nations inside and outside of the EU and Turkiye.
The post Court rules Netherlands is not doing enough to meet 1.5C goal and protect Bonaire appeared first on Climate Home News.
Court rules Netherlands is not doing enough to meet 1.5C goal and protect Bonaire
Climate Change
Nigerians bet on solar as global oil shock hits wallets and power supplies
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
Climate Change
Pennsylvania Lawmakers Are Talking the Talk on Data Center Regulations. But Will They Walk?
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.
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?
Climate Change
Greenpeace will not rest until justice is served
Greenpeace International and Greenpeace organisations in the US filed on 27 March 2026 a motion for a new trial in North Dakota District Court. This demand for justice follows the absurd and flawed US$ 345 million judgment issued by the same court in Energy Transfer’s SLAPP lawsuit against the Greenpeace parties returned on 27 February 2026. Energy Transfer’s back-to-back SLAPP lawsuits are attempts to erase Indigenous leadership of the Standing Rock Movement, punish solidarity with the ongoing resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline, and intimidate environmental activists from speaking out against Big Oil companies.
The motion for a new trial should be granted to prevent one of the largest miscarriages of justice in North Dakota’s history. We are demanding the court right the wrongs committed at trial and to ensure the rights and freedoms promised under the US constitution are protected.
Greenpeace will not rest until justice is served and Big Oil can no longer use and abuse the legal system in North Dakota or anywhere else.
Greenpeace International General Counsel Kristin Casper
There is no question the Greenpeace defendants were denied a fair trial — even a concise summary of the errors and injustices that marred the trial runs to over 100 pages.
Among the numerous egregious flaws documented in the motion for a new trial are:
- The Greenpeace defendants could not receive a fair and impartial trial in Morton County.
- Seven out of nine jurors that decided the case had clear biases due to fossil fuel industry ties, experiences with the Standing Rock protests, and/or preexisting negative views of the Greenpeace defendants.
- Despite the fact that thousands of individuals and hundreds of organisations were involved in actions at Standing Rock and speaking out against DAPL, and North Dakota law clearly requiring damages to be split among everyone who contributed to alleged harms, the jury and the court assigned 100% of the claimed damages to the Greenpeace defendants.
- The jury’s verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence on each and every count.
- The jury verdict was tainted by the inclusion of inadmissible, prejudicial information.
- The jury was improperly prevented from hearing relevant, admissible evidence that was favorable to the Greenpeace defendants.
- The jury was provided erroneous and incomplete instructions and a flawed verdict form.
-
Climate Change8 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases8 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
-
Renewable Energy5 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits




