Connect with us

Published

on

The German government has used its financial power over climate activists in the Global South to try to stop them publicly criticising Israel’s attacks on Gaza in recent months, according to sources interviewed by Climate Home. 

Many climate and development organisations based in developing countries rely directly or indirectly for funding on the German government, which is among Israel’s strongest political supporters.

The Gaza war began when Hamas militants stormed Israel on October 7, killing and abducting hundreds of people and drawing an Israeli offensive in the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, which has led to more than 30,000 Palestinian deaths and a worsening humanitarian crisis.

Three sources Climate Home spoke to said that, after criticising Israel’s actions for humanitarian reasons, they were either pressured by their German-funded employers to resign, had contracts put on hold, or were warned they would lose funding if they made further comments on the issue.

Tensions between German and international climate campaigners were evident at December’s Cop28 climate summit in Dubai, with several German campaign groups distancing themselves from criticism of Israel by Climate Action Network International. One accused the civil-society umbrella group of antisemitism.

Funding threat

Twelve climate activists – all of whom asked to remain anonymous because of the sensitive nature of the subject – told Climate Home many climate organisations fear that speaking out about Israel’s military actions in Gaza will cost them German funding.

The German development ministry BMZ says on its website that it checks whether organisations it funds have been involved in “statements or actions” that “make it undesirable to provide support to that organisation”.

As examples, it lists incitement to hatred and violence, denial of Israel’s right to exist, antisemitism and support for the global movement for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel. It urges partner organisations to “sanction” staff who “violate these principles”.

A spokesperson for the German state development organisation GIZ told Climate Home the organisations it funds are “bound to comply” with its principles on non-discrimination.

The spokesperson added that, in line with the German government and parliament, GIZ uses the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism.

The IHRA provides examples of what it considers antisemitic, which include arguing that the state of Israel is a racist endeavour or comparing Israeli policy to the Nazis.

Clean, cheap or fair – which countries should pump the last oil and gas?

One consultant to climate campaign groups told Climate Home they had an individual contract with a German foundation postponed after accusing Israel of genocide on social media. “It was going to be my main source of income,” they said, “I’m financially screwed.”

An activist from the Global South said their organisation’s German funder had told them not to criticise Israel. To keep the money, the organisation heeded this warning but “the relationship with the funder has become extremely tense”, the activist added.

“I completely get feeling guilt as Germans for an atrocity that occurred, but that should not trickle down into activist organisations and NGOs and civil society organisations trying to make a change on the ground,” they said.

Difficult position

Another activist from the Global South told Climate Home the German-funded climate and feminist campaign group they work for had issued guidelines advising staff on how to talk about the Israel-Gaza conflict.

The activist resigned after declining to follow the guidelines. “I’m not going to allow anyone to censor me,” they told Climate Home, adding they were now unemployed and their mental health had suffered.

Revealed: UK civil servants’ secret doubts over climate techno-fixes

Another foreign employee of a German climate campaign group told Climate Home their bosses were “pretty pro-Israel”, while many of the organisation’s staff were not.

But even the group’s leadership is in a “very difficult position”, they said, because the German government funds the organisation and has discussed removing funding from groups that support the Palestinian cause or work with others that do.

Cancellations

Climate scientist Julia Steinberger, who specialises in ecological economics and is the daughter of a Holocaust survivor, told Climate Home she was uninvited from an event in Austria after she said she would speak about Israel’s “genocide”.

Another climate scientist, based in Germany, told Climate Home they had been warned by colleagues that support for Palestine would “cancel” them in Germany. 

It is not just climate activists who are running into problems over expressing their opinions on the Israel-Gaza conflict. In December, the chair of an Egyptian women’s rights charity told Egyptian news website Mada Masr that the German government had cut funding after she signed an open letter calling for an end to the war and support for the global boycott movement against Israel.

Asked about the case, the German embassy cited the government’s funding criteria that recipient organisations cannot call for boycotts against Israel. In 2019, the German parliament – with support from the Green Party – passed a non-binding motion calling for German funding to be cut to groups that support such boycotts.

Another NGO, the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, ended its cooperation with the German government over the defunding of the feminist group and organised a petition, signed by nearly 1,000 people, calling for a boycott of the German-Egyptian cultural week.

Greta’s German critics

In Germany, support for Israel is more widespread than in most of the rest of Europe and goes beyond the far right to include liberals and leftists, who comprise much of the climate movement. 

This has led to conflict between German climate groups and their international counterparts, both online and in person at Cop28 in Dubai.

As a result, several German climate organisations have split from, or threatened to quit international networks like Fridays for Future and Climate Action Network International

On October 20 – two weeks after Hamas militants killed about 1,140 Israeli and foreign civilians and took more than 240 hostages, and with Israel’s military response ramping up – Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg posted on X “in solidarity with Palestine and Gaza”.


She had previously posted similar messages “in solidarity with Ukrainians”, but this one proved more controversial, not just with the Israeli government and her traditional critics on the far-right but with the German branch of Fridays for Future (FFF), the student-led climate movement Thunberg inspired.

Two days later, FFF Germany’s most high-profile activist Luisa Neubauer spoke at a rally in Berlin on a podium showing the message “against terror and antisemitism, solidarity with Israel”.

In a statement, she sought to strike a balance, saying that FFF Germany had “unlimited solidarity” with the Jewish people as well as being concerned about anti-Muslim racism and civilians in Gaza.

Dubai divisions

In late November, the international climate movement gathered in person at Cop28 in Dubai. The Israeli army had by then invaded the Gaza Strip, killing 17,000 people, bombing a refugee camp and an ambulance convoy, and raiding a hospital.

Many climate activists felt those were actions they could not ignore. In solidarity, many wore keffiyehs and lanyards in the colours of the Palestinian flag, given out by the Palestinian pavilion at Cop28. 

At their big climate march in the venue, activists carried banners saying “ceasefire now, end occupation”, and chanting “no climate justice without human rights”.

At Cop28 in Dubai, protesters march behind a “ceasefire now” banner (Photos: Kiara Worth/UNFCCC)

The next day, the umbrella group Climate Action Network (CAN) International gave its “Fossil of the Day” award to Israel, accusing the Israeli government of genocide and colonialism. That decision went down badly with CAN International’s German members.

The acting CEO of the Oeko-Institut, Anke Herold – which gets much of its funding from the German government – said that CAN used “antisemitic phrases” in its presentation of the award.

She told Climate Home: “The two antisemitic phrases in the statement are the references to ‘Israeli colonialism’ and the reference to ‘the intent of genocide’.” She declined to comment further on why she considers those phrases antisemitic.

At Cop28, she added that the institute would consider terminating its CAN membership if “universal values such as solidarity with all those affected, human rights for all and international humanitarian law” were not upheld.

Christoph Bals, policy director of environmental advocacy group Germanwatch, told the Deutsche Press Association: “Despite Israel’s very problematic actions in the Gaza Strip, we neither adopt nor support the justification for the Fossil of the Day to Israel.”

He said Germanwatch had voted against the decision, “and – when it was actually carried out – communicated our red lines for the reasons. Unfortunately, this input was not taken into account this time.”

As a result, Germanwatch stopped going to the CAN political coordination group, a daily meeting of around 50 people during Cop28 to discuss strategy. Germanwatch got  €2.7m ($2.9m) from the German government in 2022 – about €1m of which was from BMZ.

The German branches of Greenpeace and Oxfam also distanced themselves from Israel’s Fossil of the Day award.

Humanitarian crisis

Five months after Hamas’ attack on Israeli citizens, Israel’s military action in the Gaza Strip continues, amid growing international calls for a ceasefire.

The United Nation says about a quarter of Gaza’s population is on the brink of starvation, after attacks on aid convoys, and infectious diseases are spreading fast with little access to medical care.

With Germany’s position on the conflict unchanged, British climate justice activist Asad Rehman said many in the climate movement are questioning their partnerships with the German government and German climate campaign groups.

“How can we ally and work together with German organisations that are not prepared to stand up against their own government?” he asked.

The post Germany uses funding to pressure climate groups on Israel-Gaza war appeared first on Climate Home News.

Germany uses funding to pressure climate groups on Israel-Gaza war

Continue Reading

Climate Change

What Is the Economic Impact of Data Centers? It’s a Secret.

Published

on

N.C. Gov. Josh Stein wants state lawmakers to rethink tax breaks for data centers. The industry’s opacity makes it difficult to evaluate costs and benefits.

Tax breaks for data centers in North Carolina keep as much as $57 million each year into from state and local government coffers, state figures show, an amount that could balloon to billions of dollars if all the proposed projects are built.

What Is the Economic Impact of Data Centers? It’s a Secret.

Continue Reading

Climate Change

GEF raises $3.9bn ahead of funding deadline, $1bn below previous budget

Published

on

The Global Environment Facility (GEF), a multilateral fund that provides climate and nature finance to developing countries, has raised $3.9 billion from donor governments in its last pledging session ahead of a key fundraising deadline at the end of May.

The amount, which is meant to cover the fund’s activities for the next four years (July 2026-June 2030), falls significantly short of the previous four-year cycle for which the GEF managed to raise $5.3bn from governments. Since then, military and other political priorities have squeezed rich nations’ budgets for climate and development aid.

The facility said in a statement that it expects more pledges ahead of the final replenishment package, which is set for approval at the next GEF Council meeting from May 31 to June 3.

Claude Gascon, interim CEO of the GEF, said that “donor countries have risen to the challenge and made bold commitments towards a more positive future for the planet”. He added that the pledges send a message that “the world is not giving up on nature even in a time of competing priorities”.

    Donors under pressure

    But Brian O’Donnell, director of the environmental non-profit Campaign for Nature, said the announcement shows “an alarming trend” of donor governments cutting public finance for climate and nature.

    “Wealthy nations pledged to increase international nature finance, and yet we are seeing cuts and lower contributions. Investing in nature prevents extinctions and supports livelihoods, security, health, food, clean water and climate,” he said. “Failing to safeguard nature now will result in much larger costs later.”

    At COP29 in Baku, developed countries pledged to mobilise $300bn a year in public climate finance by 2035, while at UN biodiversity talks they have also pledged to raise $30bn per year by 2030. Yet several wealthy governments have announced cuts to green finance to increase defense spending, among them most recently the UK.

    As for the US, despite Trump’s cuts to international climate finance, Congress approved a $150 million increase in its contribution to the GEF after what was described as the organisation’s “refocus on non-climate priorities like biodiversity, plastics and ocean ecosystems, per US Treasury guidance”.

    The facility will only reveal how much each country has pledged when its assembly of 186 member countries meets in early June. The last period’s largest donors were Germany ($575 million), Japan ($451 million), and the US ($425 million).

    The GEF has also gone through a change in leadership halfway through its fundraising cycle. Last December, the GEF Council asked former CEO Carlos Manuel Rodriguez to step down effective immediately and appointed Gascon as interim CEO.

    Santa Marta conference: fossil fuel transition in an unstable world

    New guidelines

    As part of the upcoming funding cycle, the GEF has approved a set of guidelines for spending the $3.9bn raised so far, which include allocating 35% of resources for least developed countries and small island states, as well as 20% of the money going to Indigenous people and communities.

    Its programs will help countries shift five key systems – nature, food, urban, energy and health – from models that drive degradation to alternatives that protect the planet and support human well-being by integrating the value of nature into production and consumption systems.

    The new priorities also include a target to allocate 25% of the GEF’s budget for mobilising private funds through blended finance. This aligns with efforts by wealthy countries to increase contributions from the private sector to international climate finance.

    Niels Annen, Germany’s State Secretary for Economic Cooperation and Development, said in a statement that the country’s priorities are “very well reflected” in the GEF’s new spending guidelines, including on “innovative finance for nature and people, better cooperation with the private sector, and stable resources for the most vulnerable countries”.

    Aliou Mustafa, of the GEF Indigenous Peoples Advisory Group (IPAG), also welcomed the announcement, adding that “the GEF is strengthening trust and meaningful partnerships with Indigenous Peoples and local communities” by placing them at the “centre of decision-making”.

    The post GEF raises $3.9bn ahead of funding deadline, $1bn below previous budget appeared first on Climate Home News.

    GEF raises $3.9bn ahead of funding deadline, $1bn below previous budget

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Marine heatwaves ‘nearly double’ the economic damage caused by tropical cyclones

    Published

    on

    Tropical cyclones that rapidly intensify when passing over marine heatwaves can become “supercharged”, increasing the likelihood of high economic losses, a new study finds.

    Such storms also have higher rates of rainfall and higher maximum windspeeds, according to the research.

    The study, published in Science Advances, looks at the economic damages caused by nearly 800 tropical cyclones that occurred around the world between 1981 and 2023.

    It finds that rapidly intensifying tropical cyclones that pass near abnormally warm parts of the ocean produce nearly double – 93% – the economic damages as storms that do not, even when levels of coastal development are taken into account.

    One researcher, who was not involved in the study, tells Carbon Brief that the new analysis is a “step forward in understanding how we can better refine our predictions of what might happen in the future” in an increasingly warm world.

    As marine heatwaves are projected to become more frequent under future climate change, the authors say that the interactions between storms and these heatwaves “should be given greater consideration in future strategies for climate adaptation and climate preparedness”.

    ‘Rapid intensification’

    Tropical cyclones are rapidly rotating storm systems that form over warm ocean waters, characterised by low pressure at their cores and sustained winds that can reach more than 120 kilometres per hour.

    The term “tropical cyclones” encompasses hurricanes, cyclones and typhoons, which are named as such depending on which ocean basin they occur in.

    When they make landfall, these storms can cause major damage. They accounted for six of the top 10 disasters between 1900 and 2024 in terms of economic loss, according to the insurance company Aon’s 2025 climate catastrophe insight report.

    These economic losses are largely caused by high wind speeds, large amounts of rainfall and damaging storm surges.

    Storms can become particularly dangerous through a process called “rapid intensification”.

    Rapid intensification is when a storm strengthens considerably in a short period of time. It is defined as an increase in sustained wind speed of at least 30 knots (around 55 kilometres per hour) in a 24-hour period.

    There are several factors that can lead to rapid intensification, including warm ocean temperatures, high humidity and low vertical “wind shear” – meaning that the wind speeds higher up in the atmosphere are very similar to the wind speeds near the surface.

    Rapid intensification has become more common since the 1980s and is projected to become even more frequent in the future with continued warming. (Although there is uncertainty as to how climate change will impact the frequency of tropical cyclones, the increase in strength and intensification is more clear.)

    Marine heatwaves are another type of extreme event that are becoming more frequent due to recent warming. Like their atmospheric counterparts, marine heatwaves are periods of abnormally high ocean temperatures.

    Previous research has shown that these marine heatwaves can contribute to a cyclone undergoing rapid intensification. This is because the warm ocean water acts as a “fuel” for a storm, says Dr Hamed Moftakhari, an associate professor of civil engineering at the University of Alabama who was one of the authors of the new study. He explains:

    “The entire strength of the tropical cyclone [depends on] how hot the [ocean] surface is. Marine heatwave means we have an abundance of hot water that is like a gas [petrol] station. As you move over that, it’s going to supercharge you.”

    However, the authors say, there is no global assessment of how rapid intensification and marine heatwaves interact – or how they contribute to economic damages.

    Using the International Best Track Archive for Climate Stewardship (IBTrACS) – a database of tropical cyclone paths and intensities – the researchers identify 1,600 storms that made landfall during the 1981-2023 period, out of a total of 3,464 events.

    Of these 1,600 storms, they were able to match 789 individual, land-falling cyclones with economic loss data from the Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT) and other official sources.

    Then, using the IBTrACS storm data and ocean-temperature data from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, the researchers classify each cyclone by whether or not it underwent rapid intensification and if it passed near a recent marine heatwave event before making landfall.

    The researchers find that there is a “modest” rise in the number of marine heatwave-influenced tropical cyclones globally since 1981, but with significant regional variations. In particular, they say, there are “clear” upward trends in the north Atlantic Ocean, the north Indian Ocean and the northern hemisphere basin of the eastern Pacific Ocean.

    ‘Storm characteristics’

    The researchers find substantial differences in the characteristics of tropical cyclones that experience rapid intensification and those that do not, as well as between rapidly intensifying storms that occur with marine heatwaves and those that occur without them.

    For example, tropical cyclones that do not experience rapid intensification have, on average, maximum wind speeds of around 40 knots (74km/hr), whereas storms that rapidly intensify have an average maximum wind speed of nearly 80 knots (148km/hr).

    Of the rapidly intensifying storms, those that are influenced by marine heatwaves maintain higher wind speeds during the days leading up to landfall.

    Although the wind speeds are very similar between the two groups once the storms make landfall, the pre-landfall difference still has an impact on a storm’s destructiveness, says Dr Soheil Radfar, a hurricane-hazard modeller at Princeton University. Radfar, who is the lead author of the new study, tells Carbon Brief:

    “Hurricane damage starts days before the landfall…Four or five days before a hurricane making landfall, we expect to have high wind speeds and, because of that high wind speed, we expect to have storm surges that impact coastal communities.”

    They also find that rapidly intensifying storms have higher peak rainfall than non-rapidly intensifying storms, with marine heatwave-influenced, rapidly intensifying storms exhibiting the highest average rainfall at landfall.

    The charts below show the mean sustained wind speed in knots (top) and the mean rainfall in millimetres per hour (bottom) for the tropical cyclones analysed in the study in the five days leading up to and two days following a storm making landfall.

    The four lines show storms that: rapidly intensified with the influence of marine heatwaves (red); those that rapidly intensified without marine heatwaves (purple); those that experienced marine heatwaves, but did not rapidly intensify (orange); and those that neither rapidly intensified nor experienced a marine heatwave (blue).

    Average maximum sustained wind speed (top) and rate of rainfall (bottom) for tropical cyclones in the period leading up to and following landfall. Storms are categorised as: rapidly intensifying with marine heatwaves (red); rapidly intensifying without marine heatwaves (purple); not rapidly intensifying with marine heatwaves (orange); and not rapidly intensifying, without marine heatwaves (blue). Source: Radfar et al. (2026)
    Average maximum sustained wind speed (top) and rate of rainfall (bottom) for tropical cyclones in the period leading up to and following landfall. Storms are categorised as: rapidly intensifying with marine heatwaves (red); rapidly intensifying without marine heatwaves (purple); not rapidly intensifying with marine heatwaves (orange); and not rapidly intensifying, without marine heatwaves (blue). Source: Radfar et al. (2026)

    Dr Daneeja Mawren, an ocean and climate consultant at the Mauritius-based Mascarene Environmental Consulting who was not involved in the study, tells Carbon Brief that the new study “helps clarify how marine heatwaves amplify storm characteristics”, such as stronger winds and heavier rainfall. She notes that this “has not been done on a global scale before”.

    However, Mawren adds that other factors not considered in the analysis can “make a huge difference” in the rapid intensification of tropical cyclones, including subsurface marine heatwaves and eddies – circular, spinning ocean currents that can trap warm water.

    Dr Jonathan Lin, an atmospheric scientist at Cornell University who was also not involved in the study, tells Carbon Brief that, while the intensification found by the study “makes physical sense”, it is inherently limited by the relatively small number of storms that occur. He adds:

    “There’s not that many storms, to tease out the physical mechanisms and observational data. So being able to reproduce this kind of work in a physical model would be really important.”

    Economic costs

    Storm intensity is not the only factor that determines how destructive a given cyclone can be – the economic damages also depend strongly on the population density and the amount of infrastructure development where a storm hits. The study explains:

    “A high storm surge in a sparsely populated area may cause less economic damage than a smaller surge in a densely populated, economically important region.”

    To account for the differences in development, the researchers use a type of data called “built-up volume”, from the Global Human Settlement Layer. Built-up volume is a quantity derived from satellite data and other high-resolution imagery that combines measurements of building area and average building height in a given area. This can be used as a proxy for the level of development, the authors explain.

    By comparing different cyclones that impacted areas with similar built-up volumes, the researchers can analyse how rapid intensification and marine heatwaves contribute to the overall economic damages of a storm.

    They find that, even when controlling for levels of coastal development, storms that pass through a marine heatwave during their rapid intensification cause 93% higher economic damages than storms that do not.

    They identify 71 marine heatwave-influenced storms that cause more than $1bn (inflation-adjusted across the dataset) in damages, compared to 45 storms that cause those levels of damage without the influence of marine heatwaves.

    This quantification of the cyclones’ economic impact is one of the study’s most “important contributions”, says Mawren.

    The authors also note that the continued development in coastal regions may increase the likelihood of tropical cyclone damages over time.

    Towards forecasting

    The study notes that the increased damages caused by marine heatwave-influenced tropical cyclones, along with the projected increases in marine heatwaves, means such storms “should be given greater consideration” in planning for future climate change.

    For Radfar and Moftakhari, the new study emphasises the importance of understanding the interactions between extreme events, such as tropical cyclones and marine heatwaves.

    Moftakhari notes that extreme events in the future are expected to become both more intense and more complex. This becomes a problem for climate resilience because “we basically design in the future based on what we’ve observed in the past”, he says. This may lead to underestimating potential hazards, he adds.

    Mawren agrees, telling Carbon Brief that, in order to “fully capture the intensification potential”, future forecasts and risk assessments must account for marine heatwaves and other ocean phenomena, such as subsurface heat.

    Lin adds that the actions needed to reduce storm damages “take on the order of decades to do right”. He tells Carbon Brief:

    “All these [planning] decisions have to come by understanding the future uncertainty and so this research is a step forward in understanding how we can better refine our predictions of what might happen in the future.”

    The post Marine heatwaves ‘nearly double’ the economic damage caused by tropical cyclones appeared first on Carbon Brief.

    Marine heatwaves ‘nearly double’ the economic damage caused by tropical cyclones

    Continue Reading

    Trending

    Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com