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
‘Tricks’ and ‘cover-ups’
LIVESTOCK EMISSIONS: Climate scientists speaking to the Financial Times accused the governments of New Zealand and Ireland of using an “accounting trick” to “cover up” methane emissions from their livestock sectors. An open letter from 26 climate scientists and covered by the newspaper said that New Zealand’s “proposed new methane targets risk setting a dangerous precedent”. The title added that scientists have separately raised concerns about Ireland’s approach.
POTENTIAL PROBLEMS: The controversy hinges on a way for measuring the impact of methane emissions on climate change, called “global warming potential star” (GWP*), the FT said. This method “estimates [methane’s] contribution to warming based on how emissions are changing relative to a baseline”. By contrast, the “long-established approach” used by most countries “compares the total warming impact of a given mass of methane to the same mass of [carbon dioxide] over a 100-year period”, the newspaper said.
‘MISAPPLICATION’: The scientists told the FT that some governments are “misapplying” GWP* to justify setting “no additional warming” targets, which allow methane emissions to remain flat rather than decline. The governments of Ireland and New Zealand did not respond to the newspaper’s requests for comment. But the newspaper added that “proponents” of the GWP* typically argue that it “better reflects methane’s short-lived nature in the atmosphere compared to the long-lasting effects of CO2”. One of the scientists behind the letter explained more of his thoughts in a LinkedIn post. A scientist not involved in the letter also posted a response.
SOMETHING FISHY: Elsewhere, an investigation by DeSmog and the Guardian has alleged that several UK supermarkets have sold seabass linked to “devastating overfishing” in Senegal. The two publications said that the retailers are accused of selling fish from Turkish farms that import large quantities of “fishmeal” – ground up fish used as feed – sourced from the African nation. Overfishing for fishmeal in Senegal is linked to “unemployment” and “food insecurity”, according to the Guardian. Responding to the claims, several of the supermarkets said they do not currently source from the implicated farms, but declined to say whether they had in the past.
Wild weather worldwide
EARLY MONSOON MAYHEM: An “unprecedented” early monsoon caught India’s farmers off guard, with “massive crop losses in states such as Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Telangana and Gujarat”, IndiaSpend reported. Climate scientists attributed the pre-monsoon thunderstorms to “unusual sea surface temperature patterns in the Pacific since 2023” and a higher frequency of “western disturbances” – extratropical storms originating over the Mediterranean. In the past week, north-eastern India has been battered by flash floods and landslides, with “at least 32 people killed and tens of thousands displaced”, the Independent reported. The newspaper noted that “studies show the monsoon in south Asia is getting worse due to the climate crisis”.
DELUGE AND DROUGHT: BBC News reported that more than 700 people are believed to be dead after “devastating” floods hit Nigeria, with the farming region of Mokwa witnessing “the worst [floods] in the area for 60 years”. Separately, Reuters reported that China’s south-western Yunnan province was hit by “flash floods and mudslides”, triggered by heavy rainfall. In unconnected reporting, Bloomberg said that China had stepped up cloud seeding to “bolster rainfall across parched wheat-growing areas” in the north, adding that the country had ramped up “weather modification” investments as “climate change heightens food security risks.”
CANADA BURNS: Canada’s prairie provinces continued to reel from “record-breaking” early-season wildfires, the Guardian reported. It pointed out that in Manitoba alone, wildfires have burned “about 200,000 hectares already this year” – three times “the recent full-year average”. Manitoba premier Wab Kinew said that simultaneous fires “in every region” were a “sign of a changing climate that we are going to have to adapt to”. The Guardian added that First Nations peoples in Saskatchewan – one of three recognised Indigenous peoples in Canada – “have been particularly affected, with some entire communities evacuated”.
Spotlight
UK’s former lead negotiator on UN nature talks
In this Spotlight, Carbon Brief speaks to the UK’s former lead UN negotiator about the successes and challenges of international nature talks.
Will Lockhart OBE represented the UK in UN nature negotiations from 2021 until the end of COP16 talks in Rome in February of this year.
In 2022, he helped to negotiate the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), a landmark deal which has a headline “mission” to “halt and reverse” nature loss by 2030.
Following his departure from government, he spoke to Carbon Brief about his highs and lows, whether the world is making progress towards meeting its biodiversity goals and the role of UN summits – called COPs – in tackling environmental issues.
Carbon Brief: When you look back at your time heading up biodiversity negotiations, what are your highlights?
Will Lockhart: It’s all still emotionally raw. From a global perspective, the agreement of the GBF was a huge personal highlight. That was a really, really complicated negotiation. The notion that you could have frontpage news that was about an international agreement on nature, that was immensely exciting.
CB: In your view, is it possible to achieve the GBF’s mission to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030?
WL: The trajectory right now would suggest, no, it’s looking incredibly hard to achieve. But, even then, with exactly the right interventions at exactly the right scale, it might still be possible. A fair question might be was it ever possible?…There has always been a contested evidence base about whether it could ever have been achieved.
The important thing is that people spent a lot of time thinking about why we were setting certain kinds of targets…We wanted them to be specific, measurable and achieveable. What does achievable mean? What does ambitious mean? What message are we trying to send? This is politics, this isn’t necessarily science.
If the answer is that it was never possible in the first place, then the question is: ‘Why did the world agree to it?’ And the answer to that is: ‘Because it matters that we try.’
CB: Could there be a better way for countries to address biodiversity loss than the current system?
WL: It’s a very complicated question. A question that everyone has to bear in mind is: ‘What [is the] value [of] the COPs?’ You pour a huge amount of time and resource into a global dialogue, which results in a very, very carefully negotiated outcome. It’s extremely important, in my view, that you have a space where the whole world can come together in a room and agree that it wants to do something. The question is, where does the world locate that process?
I worry that the world is simultaneously asking too much and too little of COPs. It’s asking too much in the sense that there’s so much coverage and intense scrutiny of ‘this person’s arrived’, ‘this comma has moved’…There’s an extraordinary media circus. [There is] extreme expectation on each individual meeting.
And, at the same time, it’s simultaneously asking too little of them. It’s like: ‘Great, this word was in so it was a good COP’ or ‘this word was out so it was a bad COP’. And of course COPs are just one tiny part of this huge global process that needs to happen if we’re going to tackle these problems. I rather worry – and I know that colleagues feel the same – they’re just viewed as ends in themselves.
This interview has been edited for clarity and length. A longer article has been published on Carbon Brief’s website.
News and views
RECORD FOREST LOSS: Tropical forest loss hit its highest level in a two-decade record in 2024 – double the level of 2023 – according to satellite data from Global Forest Watch covered by New Scientist. The report authors “attributed the surge in forest loss to the El Niño weather phenomenon and the warming global climate, which made the rainforest a tinderbox”, the magazine said. Climate Home News added that the rate of forest loss was the equivalent of losing 18 football pitches every minute.
RATIFY THIS: The EU ratified the UN “High Seas Treaty” last Wednesday, “joining a global effort to protect the ocean, curb environmental damage, tackle climate change and preserve biodiversity”, Jurist News reported. The EU’s ratification of the landmark treaty was joined by six of its member states: Cyprus, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Portugal and Slovenia. The EU also pledged €40m as part of a Global Ocean Programme to support African, Caribbean and Pacific countries, according to an EU Commission press release.
THOUSAND CUTS: A “cornerstone” ecological research programme could potentially be culled by the Trump administration, the New York Times reported. Abolishing the Ecosystems Mission Area (EMA) “was an explicit goal of Project 2025, the blueprint for shrinking the federal government”, the story added. However, the budget cut “still needs to be approved by Congress”, with scientists rallying to save the EMA, the paper wrote. On Monday, the Trump administration announced plans to “eliminate federal protections across millions of acres of Alaskan wilderness” that could open the region to drilling and mining, according to another New York Times story.
NET NATURE LOSS?: In the UK, the Guardian reported that the “nature-friendly farming budget is set to be slashed” for “all but a few farms” in an upcoming spending review. Meanwhile, legal analysis of the Labour government’s new planning and infrastructure bill showed that “more than 5,000 of England’s most sensitive, rare and protected natural habitats are at high risk of being destroyed by development”, per another Guardian story. A key concern for green groups, it added, is a “cash for trash” clause that allows developers to “inflict adverse effects on the integrity of a protected site” if they pay into a fund to restore nature elsewhere.
MIRAGE CITY: Reuters reported on Egypt’s plans to build a new desert city, 42km west of Cairo, that could reroute “about 7% of [its] annual Nile River quota” from fertile delta land. According to the story, an estimated 10m cubic metres of Nile water will flow daily to Jirian city to “pass by upscale glass-fronted housing units and eventually” irrigate a 2.28m acre “New Delta” agricultural project. Jirian city will include luxury housing, a free economic zone and even a “yacht marina”, the newswire added, noting that the country is facing “mounting water shortages, power constraints and deepening economic crisis”.
FOREST-FRIENDLY BATTERIES: Electric car batteries made using iron and phosphorus “that pose less of a threat to forests” are “rapidly replacing batteries reliant on cobalt and nickel”, according to an International Energy Agency (IEA) report covered by Climate Home News. From 2020 to 2024, the market share of lithium nickel manganese cobalt batteries has risen from one-tenth to almost half, according to the IEA data. Both cobalt and nickel are “mainly mined in rainforest countries”, such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Indonesia, the publication added.
Watch, read, listen
REFORESTED SCHOOLS: Mongabay explored how “urban forests” in schools in Niger are helping to build “climate resilience and education”.
SO LONG, SALGADO: The New Yorker examined the visual legacy of photojournalist Sebastião Salgado, who died last week. Salgado’s Genesis series is celebrated as a “paean to natural landscapes and Indigenous ways of living”.
SECOND ACT: In an Atlantic long-read, writer Emma Marris looked at the debate calling for a law to protect ecosystems along with endangered species in the US.
PROUD, NATURALLY: CBC News reviewed Animal Pride, a new documentary about queer animal behaviour that filmmaker Connel Bradwell described as “nature’s coming-out story”.
New science
- Greater fish biodiversity can help improve nutrition and make fisheries more resilient, according to new research published in Nature Sustainability. The study found that fishing waters with complementary species could provide more than 60% in additional nutrients than a similar-sized catch of the most nutrient-rich species.
- A new study in Nature Climate Change found that “natural climate solutions” in croplands offer only “modest” mitigation benefits if reductions in crop yields are to be avoided. According to the authors, this indicates that “cropland soil will constitute a fraction of food system decarbonisation”.
- New research in Communications Earth and Environment found that global agricultural labour productivity could decrease by 18% by 2100 under a scenario of high heat-stress and labour sensitivity.
In the diary
- 2-6 June: 69th Meeting of the Global Environment Facility Council | Washington DC
- 5 June: World Environment Day
- 7 June: Ocean Rise and Coastal Resilience Summit | Nice, France
- 9-13 June: 2025 UN Ocean Conference | Nice, France
- 16-26 June: UN Framework Convention on Climate Change intersessional meetings | Bonn, Germany
Cropped is researched and written by Dr Giuliana Viglione, Aruna Chandrasekhar, Daisy Dunne, Orla Dwyer and Yanine Quiroz. Please send tips and feedback to cropped@carbonbrief.org
The post Cropped 4 June 2025: ‘Tricks’ and ‘cover-ups’; Wild weather; Former UN nature negotiator interviewed appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Cropped 4 June 2025: ‘Tricks’ and ‘cover-ups’; Wild weather; Former UN nature negotiator interviewed
Climate Change
‘This is a fossil fuel crisis’, Greenpeace tells Senate gas tax Inquiry, citing homegrown renewables as path to energy security
CANBERRA, Tuesday 21 April 2026 — Greenpeace Australia Pacific has slammed gas corporation war profiteering and environmental damage in a scathing Senate hearing today as part of the Select Committee on the Taxation of Gas Resources, urging fair taxation of gas corporations and the transition to secure, homegrown renewable energy to protect Australian households and the economy from future energy shocks.
Speaking at the hearing, Greenpeace said the US and Israel’s illegal war on Iran has laid bare the fundamental flaws of an energy system built on fossil fuel extraction, geopolitical power plays and corporate greed, and will be a defining moment for how the world thinks about energy security.
Greenpeace’s submission and full opening remarks can be found here.
Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:
“This is not an energy crisis, it’s a fossil fuel crisis. The crisis we’re all facing lays bare the dangers of fossil fuel dependence, for our energy security, our communities, and for global peace and stability.
“Gas corporations like Woodside, Santos, Shell and Chevron — the same companies whose CEOs refused to front this Inquiry — are making obscene war profits, using the illegal war on Iran to price gouge, profiteer and push for more gas we don’t need — while people and our environment pay the price.
“Australians are getting smashed by soaring bills and the impacts of climate disasters — gas corporations should be paying their fair share to help this country, instead of sending billions offshore, tax-free.
“But we’re at a turning point — while gas corporations cynically push to open up more of our oceans and land to drilling for fossil fuels, our allies like the UK are doubling down on renewables in response to the fossil fuel crisis. Our trading partners in Asia are making the same reassessment of fossil fuels.
“Which is why the hearing today is crucial: an effective and well-designed tax on the gas industry’s obscene war time profits is a chance to channel funds to people and communities, fast-track the rollout of clean, secure homegrown wind and solar energy, while holding polluters accountable.
“Our dependence on fossil fuels leave us overexposed to the whims of tyrants like Trump — it’s in Australia’s national interest to end the fossil fuel chokehold for good and usher in the era of clean energy security.”
-ENDS-
Media contact
Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
HOW WOODSIDE’S BROWSE GAS PROPOSAL THREATENS SCOTT REEF’S GREEN TURTLES AND PYGMY BLUE WHALES
Woodside’s Browse to NWS gas project is under assessment by the WA and Federal Governments right now. This is a project that involved drilling up to 50 gas wells around Scott Reef off the coast of WA. Gas would be extracted directly underneath Scott Reef and Sandy Islet and pumped through a 900-kilometre subsea pipeline to the NWS gas processing facility.
Woodside’s Browse gas project’s impact on Scott Reef’s marine habitats?
Scott Reef is one of Australia’s most ecologically significant marine environments, where green turtles breed, pygmy blue whales feed, and an array of at-risk species, including sharks, dolphins, whale sharks, rays, sawfish and sea snakes thrive. It is home to many threatened species, including some found nowhere else on Earth or in genetically isolated groups, magnifying its importance from a conservation perspective.
This delicate reef’s ecosystem faces multiple threats if Woodside’s Proposed Project goes ahead, including seismic blasting, gas flaring, noise pollution, artificial lighting, pipe laying and fast-moving vessels. The reef also faces the risk of a gas well blowout, which could have catastrophic and irreversible consequences for the region’s reefs and marine parks.
Woodside’s woeful marine impacts management plan
To secure their approvals, Woodside had to develop a plan for how they would manage the significant risks to threatened green turtles and endangered pygmy blue whales if the project proceeds. We’ve had two independent scientists provide a technical assessment of Woodsides management plan for whales and turtles and their findings are gobsmacking.
Their assessment found that Woodsides management plans for these species misrepresents or does not assess the risks the Browse project poses to Scott Reef’s pygmy blue whales and green turtles. They’ve also surmised that if the project goes ahead the impacts contradict the Australian government’s own recovery plan for turtles and Conservation Management Plan (CMP) for Blue Whales.
The State and Federal Governments now have the opportunity to define their legacies on nature protection and save Scott Reef from Woodside’s dirty gas.
Technical Assessment of Woodside’s Browse Pygmy Blue Whale Management Plan
Prepared for Greenpeace Australia Pacific by Dr Ben Fitzpatrick of Oceanwise Australia with Dr Olaf Meynecke of Griffith University.
The full technical assessment is available HERE
Scott Reef is a vital feeding, foraging and resting habitat for pygmy blue whales.
Pygmy blue whales feed, forage and rest in the Scott Reef region every year. Scott Reef is recognised as a Biologically Important Area for the pygmy blue whale and is an important stop-over on their annual migration.
Woodside’s Browse gas project could delay or prevent the population recovery of the endangered pygmy blue whales that rely on Scott Reef, heightening their extinction risk.
- Woodside’s management plan claims of “no credible threat of significant impacts” are not supported by scientific evidence.
- The management plan relies on outdated whale population information.
- Woodside has claimed it is unclear whether Scott Reef is a foraging habitat for pygmy blue whales, despite the presence of pygmy blue whales and significant concentrations of krill being documented in the area.
- The PBWMP ignores the impacts of industrial noise on whale-to-whale communication. This is especially concerning as mother-calf pairs migrate through the Scott Reef Biologically Important Area shortly after calves are born. Mother-calf pairs rely on continuous, uninterrupted communications to maintain their connection.
Woodside’s Browse gas project could delay or prevent the population recovery of the endangered pygmy blue whales that rely on Scott Reef, heightening their extinction risk.
Technical Assessment of Woodside’s Browse Turtle Management Plan
Prepared for Greenpeace Australia Pacific by Dr Ben Fitzpatrick of Oceanwise Australia.
The full technical assessment is available HERE
Scott Reef is a vital nesting ground for unique green turtles.
The green turtles that nest at Scott Reef’s low-lying Sandy Islet sand cay and nearby Browse Island are genetically unique and are classified as ‘Extremely Vulnerable’ in Australia’s Recovery Plan for Marine Turtles.
Woodside’s Browse gas project could make Scott Reef’s unique green turtles extinct.
- The Browse project would operate within 20 kilometres of nesting habitat that’s critical to the survival of Scott Reef’s genetically unique and vulnerable green turtle population.
- Woodside’s Browse Turtle Management Plan (TMP) misrepresents the risks the Browse project poses to Scott Reef’s green turtles.
- Claims in Woodside’s TMP about Scott Reef’s green turtle population size, nesting success and hatchling numbers are not backed by scientific evidence.
- The TMP proposes gathering updated data after the Browse project is approved.
- Woodside’s TMP proposes adding sand sourced elsewhere to Sandy Islet to counter subsidence and erosion, but fails to properly assess the associated risks.
To save Scott Reef and protect our oceans and animals, the State and Federal Governments must reject Browse.
Technical Assessment of Woodside’s Browse Pygmy Blue Whale Management Plan
To secure their approvals, Woodside had to develop a plan for how they would manage the significant risks to threatened green turtles if the project proceeds. We’ve had two independent scientists provide a technical assessment of Woodside’s management plan for whales and turtles and their findings are gobsmacking.
Woodside’s Browse gas project could make Scott Reef’s unique green turtles extinct.
Woodside’s Browse gas project could delay or prevent the population recovery of the endangered pygmy blue whales that rely on Scott Reef, heightening their extinction risk.
-
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 Energy6 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits