Connect with us

Published

on

Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.

This week

Deadly extremes

FLOODING: Up to 700 people are believed to have been killed by flash floods in Nigeria, reported BBC News. Northern Nigeria has faced “prolonged dry spells worsened by climate change”, followed by “excessive rainfall”, which can cause flash flooding, reported the Associated Press.

FIRES: In Canada, continuing wildfires forced the evacuation of more than 26,000 people, “with heavy smoke choking millions of Canadians and Americans and reaching as far away as Europe”, reported Le Monde. CBC News reported that authorities in the Canadian state of Saskatchewan have been “battling the worst wildfire [the state has] seen in decades”. Scientist Prof Colin Laroque told the broadcaster: “This is classic climate change…This is our new normal.”

DEVASTATION: In northeastern India, at least 48 people have been killed in flash floods, Al Jazeera reported. Meanwhile, in China’s southwestern Yunnan province, heavy rainfall over the weekend triggered “flash floods and mudslides”, damaging roads and disrupting power supplies to around 5,000 people, reported Reuters

Trumping at the bit

DRILL, BABY, DRILL: The Trump administration in the US announced plans to eliminate Biden-era protections across millions of acres of the Alaskan Arctic, opening the area up for drilling and mining “in some of the last remaining pristine wilderness in the country”, the New York Times reported. According to US energy secretary, Chris Wright, Trump wants to “double the amount of oil coursing through Alaska’s vast pipeline system” and build a “massive natural gas project as its ‘big beautiful twin’”, reported the Associated Press.

‘GOLD STANDARD’: Elsewhere, more than 6,000 scientists and academics signed an open letter opposing a new push by Trump to impose what he called a restoration of “gold standard science” across federal agencies and national laboratories, reported the the New York Times. It explained: “The executive order puts his political appointees in charge of vetting scientific research and gives them the authority to ‘correct scientific information’, control the way it is communicated to the public and the power to ‘discipline’ anyone who violates the way the administration views science.” Meanwhile, CNN reported that “NASA scientists describe ‘absolute sh*tshow’ at agency as Trump budget seeks to dismantle top US climate lab”.

Around the world

  • BIG TECH: Meta signed a 20-year deal with an Illinois nuclear plant for energy to power its AI and data centres, reported the Financial Times
  • BIG SOLAR: Builders will be required to fit solar panels to the “vast majority” of new-build homes in England under changes to be published this year, according to energy secretary Ed Miliband, said BBC News.
  • BIG TARGET: The EU’s climate science adviser warned the bloc against watering down climate targets, a day after it was reported that EU climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra “successfully lobbied Germany’s coalition government to endorse a controversial measure that weakens the EU’s next climate target”, said Politico.
  • BIG PROBELÉM: Civil society groups raised the alarm on how the “exorbitant price of accommodation” and “high cost of flights” will undermine Brazil’s civil society participation at COP30 in Belém, reported Dialogue Earth.

$2.2 trillion

How much global investment in clean-energy technologies, including renewables, nuclear and energy storage, is expected in 2025, according to the International Energy Agency. This is “twice the amount expected for fossil fuels”, reported Reuters


Latest climate research

  • A study in Communications Earth & Environment warned that the world has “likely” already reached a tipping point in the West Antarctic ice sheet and that its collapse would result in four metres of sea level rise over a timescale that “could be millennia”. 
  • Nature Communications published research which found that poor air quality in Europe could lead to 282,000 premature deaths a year by 2100 under a low-ambition climate scenario – but drop to 67,000 if ambitious action is taken to cut emissions. 
  • Climate change-driven atmospheric evaporative demand – sometimes known as “atmospheric thirst” – caused around 40% of increased drought severity globally from 1981-2022, according to new research in Nature.

(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)

Captured

The UK’s sunniest spring generated a record amount of solar power, according to new Carbon Brief analysis. The data revealed that the nation’s solar sites generated a record 7.6 terawatt hours (TWh) of electricity from January to May 2025. This is 42% higher than the 5.4TWh generated in the same period last year, as well as marking a much larger 160% increase over the past decade, the analysis said. It added: “The solar electricity generated in 2025 to date has avoided the need to import gas costing around £600m, which would have released 6m tonnes of carbon dioxide (MtCO2) when burned.” The Times and BBC News covered the analysis.

Spotlight

Lessons from 20 years of Japanese ‘Cool Biz’

This week, Carbon Brief examines a “casual dress” policy that has been “surprisingly effective” at driving emissions savings in Japan.

For many people, the thought of Japan conjures up images of thronging cities, bright lights and smartly dressed “salary-men” unwinding in an “izakaya” (Japanese pub) after a gruelling day at the office.

Every morning, in cities around Japan, some 38 million office workers put on a uniform of suits and ties and make their way to work.

Come summer, however, and the morning commute adopts a laid-back Friday feel. Men’s suit jackets and neckties are replaced by open collars and short sleeves. Venture to the southern island of Okinawa and you might spot a salary-man in a Hawaiian-style “kariyushi” shirt.

This was not always the case. Twenty years ago this month, then-environment minister Yuriko Koike introduced Japan – and the world – to the term “Cool Biz”.

“Cool Biz” – literally Cool Business – is an enduring campaign aimed at reducing energy consumption from air conditioning in the hot summer months when temperatures routinely exceed 30C.

‘No necktie’

Introduced in 2005, the same year the Kyoto protocol finally “entered into force”, Cool Biz mandated that government office buildings turn down the air conditioning to 28C and encourage employees to cool off by wearing less formal clothing. The campaign was characterised by the pithy slogan: “No jacket, no necktie.”

The impact was near immediate. By official estimates, nearly half a million tonnes of CO2 were saved in the first year of Cool Biz. The following year the savings tripled.
In 2012, the policy was estimated to have saved Japan 2.2 MtCO2 of emissions. (This is equivalent to the emissions of Montenegro that year.)

Japanese prime minister Fumio Kishida (centre) and other ministers in 2023 wearing "kariyushi" summer shirts to promote the annual "Cool Biz" light clothing campaign.
Japanese prime minister Fumio Kishida (centre) and other ministers in 2023 wearing “kariyushi” summer shirts to promote the annual “Cool Biz” light clothing campaign. Credit: Newscom / Alamy Stock Photo

While temperature regulations were only mandated in government buildings, the impacts of the campaign extended far wider.

Thanks to a widespread publicity campaign – which included a Cool Biz fashion show of Japanese public figures and business leaders – name recognition reached 96% in its first year, according to a survey by the Ministry of Environment.

Uniqlo, Japan’s largest clothes retailer, recorded a 14% sales bump – which it attributed to its range of Cool Biz-appropriate casual workwear. And the Federation of Japanese Necktie Unions petitioned the government, after it forecast a 30% sales slump worth approximately £1bn.

‘Accidental steering’

Twenty years on, working in relaxed attire in summer has become “firmly established in Japanese society”, Atsushi Watabe, programme director of sustainable consumption and production at Japan’s Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, told Carbon Brief.

But research into its popularity revealed that concerns about climate change are unlikely to have played a major role in the uptake.

Surveys with members of the public found that Cool Biz had little or no impact on peoples’ reported environmental awareness or commitment, according to Prof Elizabeth Shove, an emeritus professor of sociology at Lancaster University,

Cool Biz’s actual success was a case of “accidental steering” through a combination of social, material and historical factors, said Shove.

Government officials led by example, she said. Japan’s then prime minister Junchiro Koizumi insisted that Cool Biz be worn for cabinet meetings and appeared in interviews in open-collar shirts.

“If the ministers are wearing a tie, their subordinates would feel uneasy about not wearing it,” prime minister Koizumi said at the time. “So the ministers should not wear a tie.”

Turning down the air conditioning in government buildings, likewise, set a standard for other businesses to follow.

Timing also played a role, according to Watabe. Women working in Japanese offices were some of the earliest to support Cool Biz, having been subjected to cooling conventions adapted for male workers, he said, adding:

“Gradually, men who had always considered wearing suits outside as the norm also accepted the change and began to feel its benefits.”

A key lesson is that the success of Cool Biz came from shifting societal norms rather than targeting the behaviour of individuals, said Shove:

“Norms and values don’t just exist – they come from histories of standards, regulations and building research… [Cool Biz] was surprisingly effective by not changing individual behavior, but by just setting a new standard in the government’s own buildings and in industry.”

Watch, read, listen

DRILLED: A new podcast series explored how ”Greenpeace, which was only tangentially involved in the Standing Rock [oil pipeline] protests, has been slapped with a $666m bill for damages”.

REPUBLICANS ‘SCARED’: The Guardian interviewed former Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders on a wide range of issues, including his thoughts on why some Republicans are “scared” to speak about the reality of climate change.
SELLING NEGATIVE EMISSIONS: A feature in the Financial Times examined the “battle to create a carbon trading market for negative emissions” in the UK.

Coming up

Pick of the jobs

DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.

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

The post DeBriefed 6 June 2025: Nigeria’s deadly flash floods; UK’s record spring drives solar surge; Lessons from Japan’s ‘Cool Biz’ appeared first on Carbon Brief.

DeBriefed 6 June 2025: Nigeria’s deadly flash floods; UK’s record spring drives solar surge; Lessons from Japan’s ‘Cool Biz’

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