Greenland is closing in on three decades of continuous annual ice loss, with 1995-96 being the last year in which the giant ice sheet grew in size.
With another melt season over, Greenland lost 105bn tonnes of ice in 2024-25.
The past year has seen some notable events, including ongoing ice melt into the month of September – well beyond the end of August when Greenland’s short summer typically draws to a close.
In a hypothetical world not impacted by human-caused climate change, ice melt in Greenland would rarely occur in September – and, if it did, it would generally be confined to the south.
In this article, we explore how Greenland’s ice sheets fared over the 12 months to August 2025, including the evidence that the territory’s summer melting season is lengthening.
(For our previous analyses of Greenland’s ice cover, see coverage in 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016 and 2015.)
Surface mass balance
The seasons in Greenland are overwhelmingly dominated by winter.
The bitterly cold, dark winter lasts up to ten months, depending on where you are. In contrast, the summer period is generally rather short, starting in late May in southern Greenland and in June in the north, before ending in late August.
Greenland’s annual ice cycle is typically measured from 1 September through to the end of August.
This is because the ice sheet largely gains snow on the surface from September, accumulating ice through autumn, winter and into spring.
Then, as temperatures increase, the ice sheet begins to lose more ice through surface melt than it gains from snowfall, generally from mid-June. The melt season usually continues until the middle or end of August.
Over this 12-month period, scientists track the “surface mass balance” (SMB) of the ice sheet. This is the balance between ice gains and losses at the surface.
To calculate ice gain and losses, scientists use data collected by high-resolution regional climate models and Sentinel satellites.
The SMB does not consider all ice losses from Greenland – we will come to that later – but instead provides a gauge of changes at the surface of the ice sheet.
According to our calculations, Greenland ended the year 2024-25 with an overall SMB of about 404bn tonnes. This is the 15th highest SMB in a dataset that goes back 45 years, exceeding the 1981-2010 average by roughly 70bn tonnes.
This year’s SMB is illustrated in the maps and charts below, based on data from the Polar Portal.
The blue line in the upper chart shows the day-to-day SMB. Large snowfall events become visible as “spikes”. The blue line in the lower chart depicts the accumulated SMB since 1 September 2024. In grey, the long-term average and its variability are shown. For comparison, the red line shows the record-low year of 2011-12.
The map shows the geographic spread of SMB gains (blue) and losses (red) for 2024-25, compared to the long-term average.
It illustrates that southern and north-western Greenland had a relatively wet year compared to the long-term average, while there was mass loss along large sections of the coast, in particular in the south-west. The spikes of snow and melt are clearly visible in the graphs on the right.
Lengthening summer
Scientists have traditionally pinned the start of the “mass balance year” in Greenland to 1 September, given that this is when the ice sheet typically starts to gain mass.
However, evidence has started to emerge of a lengthening of the summer season in Greenland – as predicted some time ago by climate models.
The start of the 2024-25 mass balance year in Greenland saw ice melt continuing into September. This included a particularly unusual spike in ice melt in the northern part of the territory in September as well as all down the west coast.
In a world without human-caused climate change, ice melt in September would be very rare – and generally confined to the south.
Greenland also saw an early start to the summer melt season in 2025. The onset of the melting season, defined as the first of at least three days in a row with melting over more than 5% of the ice sheet, was on 14 May. This is 12 days earlier than the 1981-2025 average.
The maps below show the extent of melt (red shading) across the ice sheet on 24 September 2024 (left) and 20 May 2025 (right). The blue lines in charts beneath show the percentage melt in 2024 (left) and 2025 (right), up to these dates, compared to the 1981-2010 average (grey).
The melt season began with a significant spike of melting across the southern part of the ice sheet. This happened in combination with sea ice breaking up particularly early in north-west Greenland, allowing the traditional narwhal hunt to start much earlier than usual.
Surface melt
The ablation season, which covers the period in the year when Greenland is losing ice, started a little late. The onset of the season – defined as the first of at least three days in a row with an SMB below -1bn tonnes – began on 15 June, which is two days later than the 1981-2010 average.
Overall, during the 2025 summer, a remarkably large percentage of the ice sheet was melting at once. This area was larger than the 1981-2010 average for three and a half months (mid-June to end of September).
In mid-July, melting occurred over a record area. For three days in a row, melting was present over more than 80% of the area of the ice sheet – peaking at 81.2%. This is the highest value in our dataset, which started in 1981.
The red shading in the maps below shows the extent of melting across Greenland on 19 July (left) and 30 September (right) 2025. The charts beneath show the daily extent of melting through 2025 (blue line), up to these dates, compared to the 1981-2010 average.
Snowfall
However, the SMB is not just about ice melt.
There was a lack of snowfall in the early winter months (September to January), particularly in south-east Greenland, which is typically the wettest part of the territory. The months that followed then saw abundant snow, which brought snowfall totals up closer to average by the start of summer.
A cold period at the end of May and in June protected the ice sheet from excessive ice loss. Melt then continued rather weakly until mid-July.
This was followed by strong melting rates in the second half of July and again in mid-August.
Overall, with both ice melt and snowfall exceeding their historical averages for the year as a whole, the SMB of the Greenland ice sheet ended above the 1981-2010 average.
These increases in snowfall and melt are in line with what scientists expect in a warming climate. This is because air holds more water vapour as it warms – leading to more snowfall and rain. Warmer temperatures also lead to more ice melt.
Total mass balance
The surface mass balance is just one component of the “total” mass balance (TMB) of the Greenland ice sheet.
The total mass balance of Greenland is the sum of the SMB, the marine mass balance (MMB) and basal mass balance (BMB). In other words, it brings together calculations from the surface, sides and base of the ice sheet.
The MMB measures the impact of the breaking off – or “calving” – of icebergs, as well as the melting of the front of glaciers where they meet the warm sea water. The MMB is always negative and has increased towards more negative values over the last decades.
BMB refers to ice losses from the base of the ice sheet. This makes a small negative contribution to the TMB.
(The only way for the ice sheet to gain mass is through snowfall.)
The continued mass loss observed in Greenland is primarily due to a weakening of the SMB – caused by rising melt combined with insufficient compensation of lost ice through snowfall.
The figure below shows how much ice the Greenland ice sheet has lost (red) going back to 1987, which includes the SMB (dark blue), MMB (mid blue) and BMB (light blue). The analysis, which uses data from three models, is based on 2021 research published in Earth System Science.
Despite a relatively high SMB, high calving rates meant that Greenland lost 105bn tonnes of ice over the 12-month period.
This means that 2024-25 was the 29th year in a row with a Greenland ice sheet overall mass loss. As the chart shows, Greenland last saw an annual net gain of ice in 1996.
Satellite data
The mass balance of the Greenland ice sheet can also be measured by looking at the Earth’s gravitational field, using data captured by the Grace and Grace-FO satellite missions – a joint initiative from NASA and the German Aerospace Center.
The Grace satellites are twin satellites that follow each other closely at a distance of about 220km, which is why they are nicknamed “Tom and Jerry”. The distance between the two depends on gravity – which is, in turn, related to changes in mass on Earth, including ice loss.
Therefore, the distance between the two satellites, which can be measured very precisely, can be used to calculate loss of mass from the Greenland ice sheet.
Overall, the satellite data reveals that Greenland’s ice sheet lost around 55bn tonnes of ice over the 2024-25 season.
There is reasonably good agreement between the Grace satellite data and the model data, which, as noted above, finds that 105bn tonnes of ice was lost in Greenland over the same period.
However, the alignment of the two datasets – which are fully independent of each other – becomes more clear once a longer time period is considered.
In the 22-year period between April 2002 and May 2024, the Grace data shows that Greenland lost 4,911bn tonnes of ice. The modelling approach, on the other hand, calculates that 4,766bn tonnes of ice was lost.
The figure below shows gain and loss in the total mass of ice of the Greenland ice sheet, calculated using Grace satellite measurements. It reveals that, over the past 23 years, there has been mass loss in the order of several metres along the coasts of Greenland, with the most significant losses seen on the western coast. Over the central parts of the ice sheet, there has been a small mass gain.
The lower figure shows the contribution of Greenland mass change to sea level rise over the last 23 years, according to the satellite data. It illustrates that more than 5,000bn tonnes of ice have been lost over the time period – contributing to roughly 1.5cm of sea level rise.
Warm over Europe and North America, cool over Greenland
As always, the weather systems across the northern hemisphere play a key role in the melt and snowfall that Greenland sees each year.
As in previous years, multiple heatwaves were observed in southern Europe and North America over the summer of 2025.
And, just like in 2024, there was only modest heat in northern Europe – with the notable exception of Arctic Scandinavia – with a comparably cool and rainy July followed by a warmer and sunnier August.
The high-pressure weather systems that bring heatwaves have a wide-ranging impact on weather extremes across the northern hemisphere.
Strong blocking patterns over North America and Europe were repeatedly present in the course of the summer of 2025. In such a blocked flow, the jet stream – fast-moving winds that blow from west to east high in the atmosphere – is shaped like the Greek capital letter Omega (Ω).
The jet stream bulged up to the north over Canada and northern Europe. West and east of these ridges, low pressure troughs were found at both “feet” of the Omega. One of these troughs was located over Greenland (top left panel in next figure).
This resulted in widespread heat near the cores of these high-pressure systems, fuelling fires in several countries, including large wildfires in Canada. Smoke from these wildfires reached Greenland and Europe in late May.
Unlike in previous years, no heavy precipitation events were observed near the “feet” of the Omega.
If the Omega pattern is displaced by half a wavelength, the opposite – warm over Greenland, with cool continents – is also possible.
This circulation pattern occurred in August 2025 and is shown in the top right panel of the figure below. The bottom panel depicts the large temperature variability in May 2025.
The post Guest post: How the Greenland ice sheet fared in 2025 appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Britain’s new prime minister announced in his first week that he will cut the cost of public transport and electricity, making lower-emission technologies like bus travel, electric vehicles and heat pumps more affordable for voters. But some of the funding for those policies will come from the budget for international climate finance, the government has said, raising concerns about fairness.
Former Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham took over from Keir Starmer as Labour Party leader and prime minister on Monday, appointing climate advocates Ed Miliband as foreign and development minister and Miatta Fahnbulleh as climate and energy minister.
On Tuesday, Burnham said his government would cut the value added tax (VAT) households and some small businesses pay on their electricity bills from 5% to zero from October 1, saving households £45 ($60) a year.
On Wednesday, he said the maximum fare bus companies in England can charge for a single journey will be reduced from £3 ($4) to £2 ($2.67) from January 1, 2027. The government said the subsidies to achieve this would be mostly funded by switching money set aside for overseas climate finance projects from grants to loans. It did not give further information in its announcement, while the UK’s transport minister told Sky News the plan is still being worked out.
-
Tropical forest protection fund at risk after UK stalls on pledge
The Brazil-led TFFF was launched at COP30 as an innovative financial model to keep rainforests standing, but is still short on startup cash -
UK halves Green Climate Fund contribution, as it spends more on security
After promising £1.6 billion to the UN’s flagship climate fund in 2023, the UK government has now said it will only hand over half as much -
EU, UK lead push for electrification as “powerful weapon” against fossil fuels
A group of dozens of countries seeks to build momentum for a COP31 pledge to electrify 35% of global energy use by 2035 as an alternative to fossil fuels
The floated changes to the climate finance budget were immediately criticised by groups working on climate justice for developing countries, including Bond, the UK network for NGOs, which described the decision as “disappointing”.
“Robbing Peter to pay Paul is not the answer and pitches marginalised communities in the UK against marginalised communities in lower-income and climate-vulnerable countries,” BOND CEO Romilly Greenhill said in a statement. “Climate finance must not worsen the debt burden of countries that are already suffering the worst – and most costly – impacts of a climate crisis they did not cause.”
Hunt for money
Burnham promoted both policies as measures to combat the rising cost of living and “give people breathing space”, with climate campaigners and industry groups noting they are also likely to reduce the UK’s climate-heating emissions by encouraging bus travel and the use of electric vehicles and heating.
But thorny questions remain over how the policies will be paid for. The government said Tuesday’s VAT cut for electricity would be funded by scrapping the previous government’s digital ID programme, but Darren Jones, a former minister involved with that policy, said it had been “unfunded” – a statement that dominated media coverage.
A day later, the government said the new bus fare cap would cost £454 million ($606m). Transport minister Heidi Alexander told Sky News that £54 million would be taken from an under-spend in the budget of the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) and £400 million would come from changing unspecified international climate finance from grants to loans. The details “still need to be worked through”, she said, adding that the government “had wanted to make an announcement today”.
Mohamed Adow, director of Nairobi-based think-tank Power Shift Africa, said “climate finance was never meant to be a pot of money that governments raid when they need to pay for domestic spending”.
DESNZ had not responded to a request for comment at the time of publication. “We’re not wanting to fleece anyone here, and we actually want to maximise the development potential of this money that is available,” minister Alexander said in her TV interview.
Aside from the controversy over their funding, the policies themselves were widely welcomed by climate campaigners. Jess Ralston, energy lead at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU), said the tax cut on electricity bills “could help households to switch to electric heat pumps, protecting UK homes from becoming ever more exposed to the whims of Putin and Trump when turning on their gas boiler”.
The last few months have seen global momentum build behind electrification, spurred by the US-Iran war disrupting oil and gas supplies and driving up prices. The Turkish and Australian COP31 presidencies have announced a global target to boost electrification, backed by the European Union, Canada, Philippines, UK and others.
Campaigners call for lower power prices
While reaction to the VAT cut was supportive, some questioned whether £45 a year of savings per household is enough and called for more measures to cut electricity bills.
Friends of the Earth’s energy lead Imogen Dow said those on the lowest incomes should be given cheaper electricity through a “social tariff” and the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) think-tank – which is close to the Labour Party – said levies on energy bills should be shifted to general taxation.
Matthew Paterson, a politics professor at Manchester University, told Climate Home News that the most effective way to reduce electricity bills is to take on the UK’s private electricity companies, while consumer-oriented measures like the VAT cut are “tinkering around the edges”.
Jarrod Birch, head of policy and public affairs for the EV charging industry association Charge UK, said that while the policy would make home-charging cheaper, people who charge their vehicles at public points will still have to pay 20% VAT. The UK’s tax authority is fighting a court ruling that ordered it to reduce the tax motorists pay on public chargers to the current household rate of 5%.
Further measures will be the responsibility of Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero Miatta Fahnbulleh, who is relatively new to politics after a career at left-wing, pro-climate think tanks the IPPR and the New Economics Foundation.
Michael Jacobs, political economy professor at Sheffield University and former adviser to UK Labour prime minister Gordon Brown, said Fahnbulleh would be a “climate advocate” who would continue the “progressive climate agenda” of her predecessor Ed Miliband.
“She’s a very creative policy wonk so I expect there to be lots of policy innovation under her,” he said, “I think she will be looking at new ways to encourage take-up of heat pumps and domestic batteries.”
Aid budget in Miliband’s hands
Despite reports he could be made finance minister, Miliband has been appointed Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. Miliband has attended many climate COP meetings over several decades, most recently representing the UK at COP29 and COP30, and has been targeted by the right-wing media for his support for climate action and opposition to new oil and gas drilling in the UK’s part of the North Sea.
In his new role, Miliband will be responsible for the UK’s overseas aid budget including its international climate finance, which the Starmer government had slashed to fund increases in defence spending.
UK cuts support for climate action abroad to fund military instead
Jacobs said he expected Miliband to prioritise climate and development in the UK’s foreign policy and to push Burnham and new finance minister John Healey to reverse Starmer’s aid cuts.
But there are fears Healey could try to cut the aid budget further to fund the military. Healey was a surprise pick for Chancellor of the Exchequer and grabbed headlines when he resigned as Starmer’s defence minister in June over what he saw as insufficient defence spending.
The post Will new UK PM’s green measures at home cause climate finance pain overseas? appeared first on Climate Home News.
Will new UK PM’s green measures at home cause climate finance pain overseas?
AMSTERDAM, Netherlands, 22 July 2026 – Greenpeace Netherlands has launched legal proceedings against a multi-billion-dollar global expansion plan by the biggest meat producer in Australia, JBS, in an escalation of climate litigation against the livestock industry.
Greenpeace petitioned a Dutch court to compel the meat giant to disclose information in order to challenge its business policies in court, including a US$6 billion global expansion, for which almost half is earmarked for Nigeria.
Elizabeth Atieno, Food Campaigner at Greenpeace Africa, said: “JBS’ meat empire expanded hand-in-glove with Amazon destruction, colossal emissions, human rights and corruption scandals, all with barely a semblance of transparency. This is the business model it wants to export to sub-Saharan Africa. JBS promises food security, but its expansion in Nigeria risks causing irreversible environmental damage and the displacement of smallholder farmers to line the pockets of wealthy global elites.
“Nigerians know well from the legacy of companies like Shell the destructive impact wrought by unchecked corporate power. As Greenpeace Africa has argued before the African Court of Human Rights, states with jurisdiction over multinationals must hold those corporate actors accountable – wherever they operate in the world. We welcome this bold legal action: the Netherlands and other European states must not be safe havens for corporations like JBS seeking to evade their responsibilities.”
In light of JBS’ longstanding failure to publish accurate and reliable information on its climate, nature and human rights impacts or its expansion plans, Greenpeace Netherlands views accessing this data as a necessary precursor to formal litigation in order to support its case. The case has the potential to be the first climate litigation of this scale against the livestock industry. This could set a major precedent for future legal challenges against the industrial agriculture sector, a major source of global emissions, particularly of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, responsible for 0.5°C of warming since the Industrial Revolution.[1]
JBS, via its subsidiary JBS Foods Australia, is the largest meat and food processing company in Australia. With a weekly processing capacity of over 50,000 cattle, it accounts for almost a quarter of all beef processing in the country, as well as a significant presence in the lamb, pork and farmed fish markets. [2] In 2022, ABC’s Four Corners accused the company of ‘repeatedly failing to protect its workers from horrific injuries.’ [3]
Marieke Vellekoop, Executive Director at Greenpeace Netherlands, said “In a month where JBS has thrown its flagship environmental commitments onto the scrap heap, JBS’ disdain for basic transparency only adds to the impression that this meat giant has something to hide and is desperate to prevent its expansion plans from going public. We were hoping we wouldn’t have to trouble a judge with this matter, but JBS has left us no choice but to seek our right to information through the Dutch courts.
“JBS appears to believe that despite moving to the Netherlands, our rules do not apply to it. This legal action aims to prove it wrong – and lay the ground for a first major climate and nature lawsuit against the dangerous expansion of the global meat industry.“
At the centre of the dispute is JBS’ planned US$ 2.5 billion investment in industrial livestock production in Nigeria.[2] Civil society groups in Nigeria have raised urgent warnings that the aggressive expansion will threaten local food security, drive regional instability, and accelerate ecological degradation. There is no available evidence that JBS has conducted any impact assessments or community consultations in Nigeria, and local efforts to gather more information via Freedom of Information requests have reportedly been ignored.[3]
The escalation to the courts follows the refusal of JBS, the world’s largest meat company, to comply with a formal disclosure demand delivered by Greenpeace Netherlands in April. The environmental group is utilising new Dutch legislation, which grants parties with a legitimate interest the right to demand access to specific corporate data necessary to build litigation against Dutch companies.[4]
Greenpeace Netherlands’ lawyers allege that JBS’ historic business practices and future expansion plans are inconsistent with the company’s climate and biodiversity obligations and represent a breach of its Dutch duty of care, which requires companies to act in line with international human rights law.[5]
If the court rules in favor of Greenpeace Netherlands, it is entitled to seek the required information in the form of documents and from senior JBS figures under oath, raising the prospect of the Batista brothers being forced to testify in Dutch court. JBS reincorporated as a Dutch entity (JBS N.V.) last year to facilitate a dual listing on the New York Stock Exchange.
In April, JBS was forced to temporarily suspend its first annual general meeting since moving its headquarters to Amsterdam after it was disrupted by dozens of Greenpeace Netherlands activists.
Last week, JBS scrapped two flagship commitments to reach Net Zero emissions by 2040 and eradicate deforestation from its supply chain. It also removed any explicit reference to Indigenous lands from all of its current policies. Greenpeace Netherlands is concerned this indicates JBS is seeking to expand unconstrained by the climate, nature and human rights impacts of its business.
–ENDS–
Notes:
[1] The livestock sector is estimated to be responsible for 31% of global methane emissions (more than oil and gas operations). In comparison to CO2, methane is shorter lived (around 12 years) but has a much stronger ability to trap heat in the atmosphere over its lifetime: it has approximately 80 times more climate impact than CO2 when measured over 20 years. This means that changes in methane emissions have a more rapid effect on the climate than changes in CO2. See Greenpeace Netherlands letter to JBS dated 30 April 2026.
[2] JBS Foods Australia, Our Business
[3] ABC, Australia’s biggest meat company JBS is repeatedly failing to protect its workers from horrific injuries, 25 April 2022
[4] JBS announcement
[5] Experts raise concerns over the risks of industrial animal farming (The Sun Nigeria)
[6] Simplification and modernisation of Dutch evidence law (Fieldfisher)
[7] Greenpeace Netherlands petition to Dutch court available here. Media briefing with further details on JBS expansion plans, including in Nigeria, available here.
Greenpeace launches legal challenge against Australia’s biggest meat company
Climate Change
“Next year is too late for regulations”: Beetaloo Energy’s 2GW gas-powered AI data centre a “disaster proposal” destined to cause climate chaos
SYDNEY, Wednesday 22 July 2026 — Beetaloo Energy has secured land from the NT Government for a massive $40 billion “hyperscale” AI data centre near Darwin, which would be powered by 2 gigawatts (GW) of gas power fracked directly from the Beetaloo basin, prompting calls from Greenpeace for urgent federal legislation.
The proposal marks a dangerous escalation in the AI data centre industry’s expansion, which threatens to entrench fossil fuel infrastructure for decades and put immense pressure on the region’s fragile water resources — while continuing to be unregulated.
Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “This disaster proposal for a 2GW gas-powered AI data centre in the NT is a shocking example of the unchecked expansion of hyperscale data centres in Australia. It is also, critically, more evidence for the urgent need for a moratorium on all new data centres until strong, binding regulations are put in place to protect our communities and climate.
“This proposal mirrors the frenzied, unchecked expansion currently wreaking havoc on communities in the US. We are seeing cowboy data centre operators treat Australia like a playground, steam-rolling ahead with projects that would lock down precious water resources and spike emissions, despite the overwhelming community opposition.
“Every day, more councils, communities and environmental groups are joining Greenpeace’s call for a moratorium on data centres, yet as of today there is still no system of safeguards or rules in place to regulate these companies.
“While Beetaloo Energy and the NT Government prepare to bulldoze ahead with this climate and water disaster, the Prime Minister is asleep at the wheel, promising to legislate a vague set of standards next year.
“Next year is too late, and anything less than mandating data centres cover their own energy demand, and then some, with new renewable energy is not enough.”
-ENDS-
Media contact
Lucy Keller on 0491 135 308 or lucy.keller@greenpeace.org
-
Climate Change11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases11 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
-
Renewable Energy9 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测