A new programme to boost the climate resilience of drought-hit farmers in Iraq. Electricity installations that would give millions across Southern Africa access to clean energy. The conservation of critical ecosystems in Honduras to help local communities improve their livelihoods at home instead of needing to migrate to countries like the United States.
These and hundreds more climate programmes funded by the US government risk disappearing as an administration led by President Donald Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk threatens to shutter the state aid agency, USAID, and slash overseas development assistance.
“I think this is the end of US [government] climate funding,” predicted Karen Mathiasen, a project director with the Center for Global Development, a Washington-based think-tank. In an interview with Climate Home, she described as “shocking” the speed and brazenness with which the government is attempting to dismantle its foreign aid arm.
Which countries have not ratified the Paris climate agreement?
Aid organisations and contractors have been grappling with an unprecedented crisis since, on his first day in office, Trump ordered a 90-day funding freeze during which a programme-by-programme review would be carried out.
As the world’s largest bilateral development assistance agency, USAID is a major provider of grant-based finance for climate action in the Global South. Its climate programmes – amounting to close to half a billion dollars in 2024 – help countries cut greenhouse gas emissions and protect their citizens from the escalating effects of global warming.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio – who is now in charge of USAID’s work – said last week that only projects that make “America safer, stronger or more prosperous” will survive the cull, without explaining which criteria would be used for the assessment.
‘Devastating’ consequences
The sudden move has thrown the development world into disarray, with organisations forced to halt their operations overnight and furlough or lay off staff without being able to obtain clear information or guidance from US officials.
A USAID project in Honduras strengthens the sustainability of coffee farming. Credit: USAID/Honduras Transforming Market
Speaking to Climate Home, aid workers involved in USAID-funded climate projects in the Global South painted a picture of bewilderment and confusion.
“We are no longer able to transfer funds to our local partners – and it will be really hard for them to manage costs,” explained one senior official at a global humanitarian group, underscoring the “devastating” consequences of the funding freeze for frontline organisations.
Working in conflict-afflicted regions, the aid group supports projects to build climate resilience that struggle to attract any financing outside of development money, said the official, adding “that has all gone away now”.
“For many programmes a 90-day pause is as good as a cancellation because you lose all momentum, you lose community connection, you lose the trust you built up with communities which is vital to success,” they added.
Separately, in Malawi, Climate Home has learned that all USAID-funded projects have been halted, with staff members being told to remain at home, just as the country was hit by deadly floods last week.
Climate aid powerhouse
Climate Home analysed USAID’s portfolio of climate projects before its website went offline late last week, soon after Trump-ally Musk, the world’s richest man, labelled the agency as “a criminal organisation”, without providing evidence – and called for its closure.
We spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper.
Could gone to some great parties.
Did that instead. https://t.co/0V35nacICW
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 3, 2025
One of USAID’s single largest climate projects supports the large-scale roll-out of clean energy facilities across Southern Africa. With total budgeted funding of $84.5 million up to 2028, the programme aims to set up 3 million new electricity connections and avoid 14 million tonnes of planet-heating emissions – equivalent to the annual carbon footprint of Ivory Coast.
Other large US-backed renewable energy projects target Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Ecuador, Colombia and Bangladesh. The vast majority of these are implemented by profit-making American corporations that would be financially hit by any funding cuts.
Climate adaptation also features prominently in USAID’s portfolio. In the last year alone, the agency committed $22 million to boost the ability of farming communities in Iraq to deal with climate-related drought and $18.5 million to help the adoption of climate resilience measures in Palestine. Similar initiatives have been in place in dozens more countries across the Pacific, South Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America.
Many other USAID projects include climate-related activities – even if they are not explicitly labelled as such – especially in very fragile and conflict-affected regions.
“No future”
It is impossible to predict what will happen to USAID and its thousands of programmes in what is a fast-changing situation – although many staff are due to be placed on administrative leave at the end of this week amid rumours it will be be folded into the State Department. Any fundamental reforms of the agency, and especially its touted abolition, would legally need to be approved by the Republican-controlled Congress.
But, as far as climate action is concerned, some experts believe the writing is already on the wall.
Shell dodges paying compensation for sham carbon credits in China
Along with the wider funding freeze, on his January 20 inauguration day Trump explicitly ordered federal agencies to explain how they would “revoke or rescind” policies implemented to support his predecessor Joe Biden’s international climate finance plan.
“I see no future [for climate projects],” the humanitarian official said, speaking anonymously due to the sensitivity of the situation, adding that it remains to be seen whether some resilience-building activities could be woven into humanitarian assistance, which is more likely to be continued. “But anything that talks significantly, or even marginally, about climate change doesn’t have a future.”
CGD’s Mathiasen, who offered a similar view, said adaptation finance stands to suffer the most severe consequences from the aid pullback. “It will further create further challenges to an agenda that’s already horrendously underfunded, while needs are real and growing,” she added.
The outlook might be less gloomy for renewable energy projects which offer higher returns and could more easily tap other financing sources. For instance, in sub-Saharan Africa, development banks have committed more than $50 billion to an ambitious “Mission 300” initiative aiming to provide 300 million energy-poor people with electricity by 2030.
African governments opt for gas-run cars over EVs to drive down transport emissions
“It is hard to tell yet [what will happen],” said Saliem Fakir, executive director of the Africa Climate Foundation, “but generally large power projects rely on multiple funders – and we also have significant flows of funds from the Gulf States.”
Other major global powers, like China, might be looking to fill the gap as developing nations conclude they can no longer rely on US funding. “The US reputation will suffer as the US will be seen as an unreliable partner and a non-rational actor,” said Mathiasen. “For that reason, this is extraordinarily short-sighted”.
Climate finance goals harder to reach?
Faten Aggad, executive director of the African Future Policies Hub, told Climate Home that an “unprecedented” shift in international aid flows should prompt recipient countries to reevaluate their policies.
“It is a reminder that ODA [overseas development assistance] is not an economic development strategy,” she said. “Countries will need to work on structural solutions to fund their needs, and that includes looking beyond direct financial transfers from development partners.”
But, in the near-term, it will be difficult to quickly find alternative sources of finance for projects dependent on US grants, Aggad warned.
A US retreat from aid funding could also significantly affect the ability of developed countries to fulfill their promise of channelling at least $300 billion a year in climate finance to developing nations by 2035 – an agreement struck just over two months ago at COP29.
In 2022, US contributions accounted for 12% of developed countries’ climate finance through bilateral channels and multilateral climate funds under the previous $100-billion annual goal, according to analysis by US-based think-tank the Natural Resources Defense Council.
In comments made last week, Ani Dasgupta, president and CEO of the World Resources Institute, said “it is still too early to tell what US cuts will mean for reaching the $300-billion and $1.3-trillion [climate finance] goals by 2035 – but they may impact the pace of the scale-up.”
(Reporting by Matteo Civillini; additional reporting by Vivian Chime; editing by Megan Rowling)
The post “No future”: Climate projects face existential threat after Trump’s aid shutdown appeared first on Climate Home News.
“No future”: Climate projects face existential threat after Trump’s aid shutdown
Sydney, Thursday 19 March 2026 — In response to escalating attacks on gas fields in the Middle East, including Israeli strikes on Iran’s giant South Pars gas field and Iranian retaliations on gas fields in Qatar and Saudi Arabia, the following lines can be attributed to Solaye Snider, Campaigner at Greenpeace Australia Pacific:
“The targeting of gas fields across the Middle East is a perilous escalation that reinforces just how vulnerable our fossil-fuelled world really is.
“Oil and gas have long been used as tools of power and coercion by authoritarian regimes. They cause climate chaos and environmental pollution and they drive conflict and war. The energy security of every nation still hooked on gas, including Australia, is under direct threat.
“For countries that are reliant on gas imports, like Sri Lanka, Pakistan and South Korea, this crisis is just getting started. It can take months to restart a gas export facility once it is shut down, meaning the shockwaves of these strikes will be felt for a long time to come.
“It is a gross and tragic injustice that while civilians are killed and lose their homes to this escalating violence, and families struggle with a tightening cost-of-living, gas giants like Woodside and Santos have seen their share prices surge on the prospect of windfall war profits.
“We must break this cycle. Transitioning to local renewable energy is the way to protect Australian households from the inherent volatility of fossil fuels like gas.”
-ENDS-
Images available for download via the Greenpeace Media Library
Media contact: Lucy Keller on 0491 135 308 or lkeller@greenpeace.org
Greenpeace response to escalating attacks on gas fields in Middle East
Climate Change
DeBriefed 20 March 2026: Energy crisis deepens | Brazil’s new climate plan | New Zealand climate case
Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.
This week
Iran war fallout continues
WORK FROM HOME: The International Energy Agency has advised its member countries to take 10 steps in response to the ongoing energy crisis fuelled by the Iran war, including reducing highway speeds and encouraging people to work from home, said the Guardian. It came after retaliatory attacks between Israel and Iran continued to destroy energy infrastructure in the Middle East, causing energy prices to soar further, said Reuters.
SUPPLY DISRUPTED: The IEA also said it is prepared to make more of its member nations’ 1.4bn-barrel oil reserves available to help ease the impacts of what it called the “biggest supply disruption in the history of the oil market”, reported Bloomberg. The outlet noted that Asian countries have been hit hardest by the shortages, caused by a “near-halt” of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.
EU SUMMIT: The energy crisis dominated talks at an EU leaders summit on Thursday, said Politico. Arriving at the summit, Spain’s prime minister Pedro Sánchez attacked other European leaders for using the energy crisis as an excuse to “gut climate policies”, according to the EU Observer. The Financial Times said that some European leaders have asked the European Commission to overhaul its flagship emissions trading system (ETS) by summer in response to the energy crisis.
COAL BOOST: In response to the conflict, utility companies in Asia are “boosting coal-fired power generation to cut costs and safeguard energy supply”, said Reuters. UN climate change executive secretary Simon Stiell told Reuters: “If there was ever a moment to accelerate that energy transition, breaking dependencies which have shackled economies, this is the time.”
Around the world
- WINDFARM WINDFALL: The Trump administration in the US is considering a nearly $1bn settlement with TotalEnergies to cancel the French energy company’s two planned windfarms off the US east coast and have it instead invest in fossil-gas infrastructure in Texas, according to documents seen by the New York Times.
- BUSINESS CLASH: Following “clashes” with the agribusiness sector, Brazil launched its new climate plan, which calls for a 49-58% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 2022 levels by 2025 and includes “specific guidelines for different sectors”, reported Folha de Sao Paolo.
- SALES SLUMP: Sales of liquified petroleum gas from India’s state-run oil companies have fallen by 17% this month due to cuts in deliveries to commercial and industrial consumers “amid the widespread logistical bottlenecks triggered by the Iran war”, said the Economic Times.
- CUBAN ENERGY CRISIS: The US imposed an “effective oil blockade” on Cuba, leaving the country facing its “worst energy crisis in decades”, reported the Washington Post. Meanwhile, Chinese exports of solar panels to the island have “skyrocketed” since 2023, it added.
- RECORD HIGHS: An “unprecedented” heatwave in the western and south-western US is “shattering dozens of temperature records” and could lead to drought in California in the coming months, reported the Los Angeles Times.
- VULNERABILITY CONCERNS: Landslides that killed more than 100 people in southern Ethiopia have “renewed concerns about Ethiopia’s vulnerability to climate-related disasters”, said the Addis Standard.
1%
The percentage of England’s land surface that could be devoted to renewables by 2050, according to the long-awaited “land-use framework” released by the UK government this week and covered by Carbon Brief.
Latest climate research
- Approaching international climate action by shifting the burden of mitigation onto higher-income countries could avoid 13.5 million premature deaths from air pollution in middle- and lower-income countries by 2050 | The Lancet Global Health
- Beavers can turn the ecosystems surrounding streams into “persistent” sinks of carbon that can sequester an order of magnitude more than non-beaver-modified ecosystems can store | Communications Earth & Environment
- Mobile-phone data from seven diverse countries during the summer heatwaves of 2022-23 showed a “widespread tendency to withdraw into homes” and an increase in out-of-home activities that can offer cooling, such as indoor retail | Environmental Research: Climate
(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)
Captured
Carbon Brief this week published a significant update to its map of how climate change is affecting extreme weather events around the world. The map now includes 232 new extreme weather events from studies published in 2024 and 2025. Of these events, 196 were made more severe or more likely to occur by human-driven climate change, 12 were made less severe or less likely to occur and 10 had no discernible human influence. (The remaining 14 studies were inconclusive.)
Spotlight
New Zealand breaks new ground on climate litigation
This week, Carbon Brief speaks to experts about a first-of-its-kind climate lawsuit in New Zealand.
Earlier this week, representatives from two environmentally focused legal advocacy groups challenged the New Zealand government’s climate-action plan in court.
The plaintiffs argued that the measures laid out in the plan are insufficient to achieve the country’s legal obligation to hold global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial temperatures.
The case could be “influential” in shaping lawsuits and rulings around the world, one legal expert not involved in the case told Carbon Brief.
Reductions vs removals
The new case contends that there are several issues regarding the New Zealand government’s response to climate change.
One of the key arguments the plaintiffs make is that New Zealand’s second emissions reduction plan, which covers the period from 2026-30, is overreliant on the use of tree-planting to achieve its targets.
When the plan was released in December 2024, it was “immediately clear that it was a pretty lacklustre plan”, Eliza Prestidge Oldfield, senior legal researcher at the Environmental Law Initiative, one of the groups behind the legal case, told Carbon Brief.
The plan called for large-scale planting of pine tree plantations, which are not native to New Zealand and have a high risk of burning. Because of this, there are concerns about how permanent any carbon removal provided by these plantations actually can be, experts told Carbon Brief.
Catherine Higham, senior policy fellow at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment who was not involved in the case, said:
“The lawyers are arguing that there are real challenges with equating the emissions that you may be able to remove from the atmosphere through afforestation with actual emissions reductions, which are much more certain.”
‘Global dialogue’
While other climate lawsuits elsewhere in the world have also focused on the inadequacy of a government’s plan to meet its stated emissions-reduction targets, this is the first such case that addresses the role of removals head-on.
Lucy Maxwell, co-director of the Climate Litigation Network, told Carbon Brief that the lawsuit “builds on a decade of climate litigation” in national, regional and international courts.
Maxwell, who was not involved in the New Zealand case, added that there is a “real global dialogue” between, not just plaintiffs, but national courts as well. She said:
“[National courts] look to common issues that have been decided in other countries. They’re not binding on that court if it’s at the national level, but they are influential.”
Given that many other countries have legal frameworks requiring their governments to create plans outlining the pathway to their long-term climate targets, Prestidge Oldfield told Carbon Brief that other jurisdictions “should be interested in these questions around the level of certainty”.
Higham noted that, even if the case is successful, addressing the plan’s shortfalls will face its own set of challenges. She told Carbon Brief:
“A lot of these decisions are political and they can be politically contentious…Those [measures] have to be put into action through legislation and that is then subject to the usual political process. So that’s where the challenge comes in.”
While she could not speculate on the outcome of the case, Prestidge Oldfield said it was “very heartening” to see that both the judge and the opposing counsel “appreciated how much of a concern climate change is globally”.
She added:
“It’s not a given that the judge would even be interested in climate change.”
Watch, read, listen
COMMON APPROACH: The Heated podcast analysed fossil-fuel advertisements and highlighted the most common deception tactics they employed.
THREAT ASSESSMENT: Mongabay mapped the potential threat that oil extraction poses to Venezuela’s ecosystems, including the Amazon rainforest and its coral reefs.
SALT LAKES? GREAT!: High Country News interviewed journalist Dr Caroline Tracey about her new book on saline lakes – such as Utah’s Great Salt Lake – the threats that face them and what they can teach us.
Coming up
- 23 March-2 April: Third meeting of the preparatory commission for the High Seas Treaty, New York
- 24-27 March: 64th session of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Bangkok
- 26-29 March: 14th ministerial conference of the World Trade Organization, Yaoundé, Cameroon
Pick of the jobs
- International Centre of Research for the Environment and Development (CIRAD), IPCC chapter scientist | Salary: €3,200-3,750 per month. Location: Nogent-sur-Marne, France
- Avaaz, chief of staff | Salary: Dependent on location. Location: Remote, with preferred time zones
- Green Party, social media officer | Salary: £31,592-£32,192. Location: Remote or Westminster, UK
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 20 March 2026: Energy crisis deepens | Brazil’s new climate plan | New Zealand climate case appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Around 300 scientists, civil servants, journalists and climate experts took part in the 11th annual Carbon Brief quiz on Wednesday 18 March 2026.
For the second time, this year’s quiz was hosted by Octopus Energy at its headquarters in central London.
In total, 39 teams participated – 25 teams in person and 14 teams joining via Zoom.
Competing teams reflected a wide range of climate change and energy professionals. The list included journalists, civil servants, climate campaigners, policy advisers, energy experts and scientists.
Organisations represented included: Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) in India; New Scientist; the Times; Business Green; the Bartlett School of Environment, Energy and Resources (BSEER), UCL; Verisk Maplecroft; BBC; World Weather Attribution; Grantham Institute at Imperial; DESNZ; WWF; European Climate Foundation (ECF); the ENDS Report; C40 Cities; Ricardo; Met Office; Meliore; E3G; Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI); Energy Transitions Commission; Carbon Tracker; Ember; Royal Meteorological Society; Civil Service Climate and Environment Network (CSCEN); Changing Markets Foundation; Cerulogy; Oxford Sustainable Law Programme; Université de Lausanne; University of Exeter; Centre for Environment and Sustainability, University of Surrey; UK Parliament; Skeptical Science; ECIU (Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit); Octopus Energy; DeSmog; Department for Transport and Royal School of Mines.
Teams were tested with five rounds of questions – general knowledge, policy, science and two picture rounds. (See the slideshow of the questions and answers below).
After two hours of playing, this year’s winners were announced.
Comprised of players from the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) in India, last time’s second place team, “Emissions Impossible” won the coveted Carbon Brief trophy with a total score of 76 out of 100 available points.
In joint second place, with 59 points, were the “Potato-sized nodules”, a mixed team of journalists from New Scientist, the Times and Business Green.
Sharing second place, after leading at the half-way point, were “You cannot BSEERious” from the Bartlett School of Environment, Energy and Resources at UCL.
In fourth place, with 57 points, were “Risky Quizness”, from Verisk Maplecroft.
A certificate was awarded to the BBC for the best team name, as voted for by Carbon Brief staff: “High hopes [low confidence]”.
See the full leaderboard:
All the questions and answers from this year’s quiz can be found in this PDF document.
This year’s trickiest round was picture round two, which asked teams to match the quote to the author, with an average score of 5.9 out of 20 available points.
No team correctly guessed that “Chris Funk: Drought, Flood, Fire” was the source of the quote: “How greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere is pretty straightforward. It is really important that we understand this. But almost nobody does, because it is not something that we are taught in school.”
Science was the second hardest round, earning an average score of 6.1 points out of 20.
No team correctly guessed “religious leaders” as the least trustworthy source of climate information, according to a 2025 study using public polling from seven global south countries.
The highest-scoring round was general knowledge, with an average of 13.8 out of 20 questions answered correctly.
Carbon Brief would like to thank all the teams who took part and we look forward to hosting the quiz again in the spring of 2027.
If you would like to participate in next year’s quiz, please contact us in advance at quiz AT carbonbrief DOT org.
Photos by Kerry Cleaver
The post The Carbon Brief Quiz 2026 appeared first on Carbon Brief.
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 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
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Renewable Energy2 years ago
GAF Energy Completes Construction of Second Manufacturing Facility