Connect with us

Published

on

We handpick and explain the most important stories at the intersection of climate, land, food and nature over the past fortnight.

This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s fortnightly Cropped email newsletter.
Subscribe for free here.

Key developments

Heatwave scorches European agriculture

‘PUSHED TO THEIR LIMITS’: The record-breaking heatwave that swept through much of western and central Europe in recent weeks had myriad impacts across the continent, reported Carbon Brief. Martin Lines, chief executive of the Nature Friendly Farming Network, explained: “Prolonged high temperatures place huge stress on livestock, dry out soils and reduce crop resilience, all while putting more pressure on nature.” The Times noted that “refrigerated warehouses were pushed to their limits” by the high temperatures.

POULTRY PROBLEMS: “At least several hundred thousand poultry” perished in France due to the extreme temperatures, the head of a French poultry-industry group told Reuters. A separate Reuters article said that “cows and pigs were suffering from heat stress” in Belgium, “which has raised concerns about milk and meat production”. Meanwhile, UK government data obtained by Carbon Brief showed that “twice as many animals died due to heat stress en route to slaughterhouses” amid record heat in 2025, compared to 2024.

FIRE AND ICE: The heatwave also had widespread impacts on the natural world. A wildfire scorched 200 hectares of moorland in Derbyshire, reported the Times. Derbyshire’s fire service said: “The ground is tinder dry and the slightest spark…could soon escalate to a major incident.” Agence France-Presse reported that “Swiss glaciers are set to lose an enormous amount of ice”, noting that this is the “second-earliest arrival on record of the tipping point known as ‘glacier-loss day’”.

UK 2050 farm plan

FARM CHANGES: The UK government launched a 2050 “farming roadmap” for England, setting out aims to make agriculture more resilient to climate change, increase domestic food production and boost nature recovery. The plan is “full of ambition”, but “falls short” on action and delivery, said National Farmers’ Union president Tom Bradshaw in a statement. Meanwhile, the government also announced £47m in funding for peatland protection and restoration schemes.

FOREST LOSS: UK companies may soon be required to “check that their supply chains are free from products linked to illegal land clearances”, reported the Times. The government revived plans for anti-deforestation rules for products such as soya, palm oil, cocoa and rubber, said the newspaper. The rules will initially target goods linked to illegal deforestation, but later move to a “blanket ‘deforestation-free’ standard”, it noted, adding that similar plans in the EU have been repeatedly delayed.

FRAUGHT FUND: UK energy secretary Ed Miliband was “poised to announce” a £400m commitment to the Tropical Forest Forever Facility, but the plan was “shelved over ‘optics concerns’” amid a “bitter row over defence spending”, said the Times. Meanwhile, one of Europe’s oldest and largest trees died after “becoming stressed by a series of hot, dry summers”, reported the Guardian. The Major Oak, which has grown in England’s Sherwood Forest “for at least 1,000 years”, did not produce leaves this year, said the newspaper.

News and views

  • OCEAN ACTION: The Our Ocean Conference concluded in Mombasa, Kenya, with more than 300 voluntary commitments from governments, civil-society groups, non-governmental organisations and others, said Carbon Brief. Observers told the outlet that “these pledges must now be backed up by action”. 
  • HOT SEAS: Record-high global ocean temperatures in June could lead the world to “uncharted territory”, said the Financial Times. Meanwhile, the Independent reported that a species of sea star thought to be extinct was found off the coast of California. 
  • EU PLANS: The European parliament approved rules to allow the use of gene-edited plants, marking a “major shift” in the EU’s approach to modified crops, reported Bloomberg. Meanwhile, Grilled, a new investigative newsletter, said the EU is “considering an overhaul of how it measures methane emissions from livestock”. 
  • BRAZIL BLAZES: Last year, fires caused a “significant spike in forest loss” across three areas in Brazil home to Indigenous peoples living in “voluntary isolation”, according to Mongabay. Indigenous leaders told the outlet that fire “affects their productive practices and destroys the biodiversity and vegetation they depend on”.
  • DISCLOSURE DISPARITY: The Biodiversity Footprint Company analysed the climate- and biodiversity-related disclosures of “120 of the world’s largest listed companies”. It found that “companies disclose roughly two-thirds of assessed climate information, yet less than one-20th of the equivalent biodiversity information”.
  • FRUITLESS: Fruit growers across the US south-western state of Utah “are reporting near-total harvest losses”, reported High Country News. It noted that a warm, dry winter, followed by a “record-breaking spring heatwave”, led orchards to bloom early, but the crop was then “devasta[ed]” by a “series of April freezes”.

Spotlight

‘Up and running immediately’: what’s next for the High Seas Treaty

Rebecca Hubbard

This week, Carbon Brief speaks to Rebecca Hubbard, director of the High Seas Alliance, about the High Seas Treaty (also known as the agreement on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, or BBNJ). This interview was conducted at the Our Ocean Conference in Mombasa, Kenya.

This interview has been lightly edited for clarity and length.

Carbon Brief: What connects BBNJ and climate change?

Rebecca Hubbard: The high seas cover half of the planet, or two-thirds of the global ocean. The ocean is essential for many things, including producing oxygen, absorbing carbon and absorbing the enormous amount of excessive heat we’ve produced as a result of burning fossil fuels. The ocean, including the high seas, cannot perform its critical climate-regulating role without healthy populations, without being healthy, and – at the moment – the high seas are not protected.

In fact, only around 1% of the high seas are protected and they’re under immense pressure from shipping, fishing, pollution [and] climate change – both heating and acidification. The High Seas Treaty, for the first time ever, gives us the legal framework to be able to protect the high seas. By being able to protect and better manage the high seas, we are assuring its critical role in protecting us from the worst of climate change.

CB: What were your hopes or expectations coming into this conference?

RH: My hopes were that we would get strong engagement and leadership from African states in the High Seas Treaty and we have seen that, which is really fantastic. There’s been a lot of support, a lot of leadership from African governments on the treaty and on their ambitions to not just complete their ratification processes, but to also start looking at creating marine protected areas. They want to be engaged and involved in leading and delivering those processes and I think that’s really exciting. It’s a great opportunity for the whole world. We can really get some exciting collaborations.

CB: What has been missing from the conversation here?

RH: I actually don’t think much has been missing, because I think there’s been a lot of different conversations. There’s been conversations around the need for finance to implement the treaty and this is something that’s common across all multilateral environmental agreements – certainly no stranger to the climate process. We’re going to need this huge amount of resources to implement the treaty. Where is that money coming from?

CB: We’ve got almost exactly six months until COP1 [the first Conference of the Parties for the High Seas Treaty scheduled for January 2027]. What needs to happen between now and then?

RH: We need as many more countries to ratify as possible. We hope that well over 100 countries will be party to the agreement by COP1, so that they can be at the decision-making table. We need countries to really prepare for that COP, so that they’re ready to really efficiently make the decisions founded off all of the work that we’re done through the PrepCom [preparatory commission] meetings [and] so that we can get the rules of procedure and the subsidiary bodies that are going to be essential to an effective implementation up and running immediately.

There is so much to do and we do not have time to waste with circular negotiations, rehashing resolved issues. We also need countries to continue to prepare for implementation, particularly back in their capitals – establishing inter-ministerial committees, so that you have a cohesive and united approach from governments that reflects a whole-of-government approach. That’s what’s going to be essential for effective implementation.

Watch, read, listen

‘ELEPHANT MARSH’: Mongabay delved into the knock-on effects of a 2023 cyclone on farming households living in Malawi wetlands.

REEF RESILIENCE: In bioGraphic, journalist Claudia Geib explored the unexpected resilience of a coral reef in Miami that is home to some critically endangered species.

TRUMP VS ALGAE: The Guardian Science Weekly podcast discussed the causes of algal blooms, in light of the green algae saga at the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool in Washington DC.

FRAUGHT FARMING: A century-old state law protects the water rights of just a handful of users on the Deschutes River at the expense of the region’s farmers, said Oregon Public Broadcasting.

New science

  • Growing oil crops, such as oil palm and coconuts, potentially caused the long-term loss of 1.5% of global plant and animal species between 1995 and 2020, with largest impacts in the tropics | Nature Food 
  • “Climate-smart agriculture” is improving household resilience in Ethiopia, but scaling its benefits requires addressing “local realities and inequalities” | Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change
  • Drought has been linked to “abundance declines” and range shifts in 40% of 37 birds species living in the deserts of the western US | Conservation Letters

In the diary

  • 1-3 July: UN Food and Agriculture Organization global conference on “smart farming” | Rome (webcast available)
  • 13-31 July: Meeting of the International Seabed Authority assembly and council | Kingston, Jamaica
  • 14 July: Launch of the “state of food security and nutrition in the world” report | New York City
  • 27 July-1 August: Scientific and technical subsidiary body meeting of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity | Nairobi, Kenya

The post Cropped 1 July 2026: Heatwave scorches Europe | UK 2050 farm plan | What’s next for the High Seas Treaty appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Cropped 1 July 2026: Heatwave scorches Europe | UK 2050 farm plan | What’s next for the High Seas Treaty

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Marine Parks Explained

Published

on

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

© Greenpeace / Harriet Spark

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

Marine parks on the east coast that allow bottom trawling. 10 marine parks across the whole network allow bottom trawling totalling almost 13 million hectares of ocean habitat for precious wildlife.

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.

Marine Parks Explained

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Report: Trawling the Bottom Line

Published

on

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.

Australia’s waters are some of the most unique and abundant places on earth, and are a global hotspot of biodiversity. Vibrant coral reefs and wondrous wildlife like endangered turtles, dolphins, and whales, some found nowhere else on earth, call Australia’s waters home. 

Australia’s network of marine parks is the biggest in the world. It covers 52 per cent of Australia’s domestic waters, but more than half of the network allows destructive, extractive industries like seismic blasting, industrial fishing and oil and gas mining. Longliners and bottom trawlers frequent these marine parks, looking for fish but catching everything in their path. 

In May 2026, Greenpeace Australia Pacific’s campaigning vessel Oceania traveled to Jervis Bay Marine Park and Hunter Marine Park to document their beauty, the wildlife under threat and aim to expose the industrial fishing activities in these so called protected waters.

Greenpeace is calling on the federal government to ban industrial activities from the marine parks network, create more fully protected ocean sanctuaries and connect the network to new high seas ocean sanctuaries.

Report: Trawling the Bottom Line

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Sewing and Painting the Future

Published

on

The iconic Greenpeace ship hosts community and family activities over the weekend from 27-30 April, including banner-making workshops and tours of the ship, culminating in a community paddle out for the climate and ocean at South Beach.
© 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.

Sewing and Painting the Future

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com