Connect with us

Published

on

在特朗普(Donald Trump)开始第二个美国总统任期之际,中美再次打响贸易战几乎已成定局,而对能源转型至关重要的矿物可能会陷入这场交锋的漩涡。

特朗普已威胁要对来自中国、以及通过其他国家输往美国的中国商品加征关税。

与此同时,中国正在制定一套“多样化”的政策工具包,以应对日益加剧的贸易紧张局势。最近一个值得注意的例子是中国对锗、镓、石墨和锑等四种矿物实行出口管制。

所有这些矿物都在低碳技术中发挥着重要作用,但同时也具有军事等其他用途。

Carbon Brief等机构的分析表明,中国于2023年夏季首次实施的出口管制并未对关键矿物供应链产生持续影响。

然而,2024年12月初宣布的更严格的管控措施,特别是对美出口的限制,引发了关于这些措施可能产生多大影响的辩论。

在本文中,Carbon Brief探讨了美中之间围绕关键矿物的紧张关系,可能对供应链稳定性以及清洁能源转型产生的影响。

哪些矿物对清洁能源转型至关重要?

矿物对多种低碳技术的发展至关重要。

例如,铟和镓用于太阳能电池板的涂层,铜和“稀土”金属用于风力发电机的导体和永磁体,而从锂到锰的各种矿物则广泛应用于不同类型的电池。

中国在许多矿物的供应链中占据重要地位,尤其是在加工环节。如下表所示,全球超过一半的石墨、稀土元素(REEs)和钒的开采,以及大部分铝、钴、石墨、铟、锂、稀土元素和硅的加工均集中在中国。

然而,并非所有这些材料都被视为“关键矿物”。“关键矿物”是一个政治术语,用于描述那些在重要战略领域中发挥作用的矿物。

美国将50种矿物列为关键矿物,欧盟确定了34种关键矿物和另外16种“战略原材料”,而日本的清单上列出了35种矿物。

尽管中国自2016年以来没有更新其官方的关键矿物清单,但2023年11月,中国国家安全部官方公众号发布的一篇文章透露,中国至少将31种矿物视为关键矿物。

该文章比较了中国(橙色)、欧盟(绿色)和美国(蓝色)关键矿物清单中的重叠与差异部分。

大宗商品咨询公司CRU集团中国办事处特别顾问、前首席执行官约翰·约翰逊(John Johnson)告诉Carbon Brief,中国与欧盟和美国“清单上相似”的矿物在采购方面“竞争更激烈”。

尽管一些国家试图多样化关键矿物进口,以减少对中国的依赖,但国际能源署(IEA)的分析发现,根据已宣布的项目,从现在到2030年,矿物供应的现状不太可能改变。

不过,IEA指出,在电池制造等部分领域,欧洲和美国“已宣布的产能增加”应该“足以”满足2030年的国内应用需求。

但价格评估机构Benchmark Minerals Intelligence专注于石墨的高级分析师托尼·奥尔德森(Tony Alderson)对这一乐观预测表示怀疑。他告诉Carbon Brief,“对于设施利用率能达到100%的情况几乎闻所未闻”。他补充称,2030年以后,美国和欧盟对石墨的需求可能会远远超过供应。

中国控制关键矿物的能力如何演变?

在拜登政府时期,美国采用了“小院高墙”(small yard, high fence)策略,对半导体行业实施了一系列出口管制,并鼓励盟友采取类似措施。

作为回应,中国开始限制一些关键矿物的出口,包括在2023年8月对某些类型的镓和锗的出口实施管制,随后于2023年12月对石墨实施管制、于2024年9月对锑实施管制。

除锑之外,这些管制显然是北京对美国遏制中国半导体进口措施的回应。

与此同时,中国加强了出口管制制度,将分散的一系列出口管制政策统一整合为单一框架。

这包括制订“不可靠实体清单”、出口管制法、反外国制裁法和对被认为是“两用”物项的监管。

策纬咨询公司(Trivium China)的关键矿物和供应链研究负责人科里·康布斯(Cory Combs)告诉Carbon Brief:“(中国)过去的出口管制体系极为零散。”

他补充道,最近政策推进的主要目标之一是通过“确保所有内容集中管理且规则一致”来改善合规性。

这些举措为中国在2024年12月初加强关键矿物出口限制铺平了道路,其加大了对石墨出口的限制,并“原则上”禁止向美国出口镓、锗和锑。

中国商务部发言人表示,此举是对美国通过对中国芯片制造业实施广泛限制,将自己的出口管制“武器化”的回应。

初步出口禁令对关键矿物贸易流向的影响如何?

对中国初步出口管制(涉及镓、石墨和锗)的分析显示,尽管新规出台,但贸易大体上仍在继续。

如下方Carbon Brief汇编的图表所示,在2023年8月限制生效后,受限类型的镓和锗出口暂停了两个月。然而,这些出口从2023年10月起恢复,尽管水平略有下降。

并非所有类型的目标关键矿物都受到了为期两个月的暂停的影响,非管制产品(如锗氧化物)的流量没有明显变化。

对于石墨而言,主要产品的出口量总体保持稳定,但在限制措施实施前出现了出口量激增,这可能是由于囤积所致。2024年的平均出口量高于2022年水平。

奥尔德森告诉Carbon Brief,出口商发现,当局对韩国和日本的出口审批特别迅速,而针对美国和印度的产品“需要更长时间”才能获批。其他分析师报告说,大多数许可证似乎已经获批。

这种结果可能是有意为之。Trivium China的康布斯告诉Carbon Brief,初步出口管制的目标是提高中国对其加工的矿物使用情况的了解,这也是为何要求出口商申请许可证,而不是直接全面禁止出口的原因。

因此,立即切断对其他国家的供应并不是最初公告的目的。

对关键矿物的初步管制总体上遵循了中国之前非关税贸易措施的类似模式。除了锑以外,对关键矿物的管制都是为了应对被认为“损害中国国家主权、安全和发展利益”的企图,而非打响贸易争端的第一枪。

英国皇家联合研究所(RUSI)的一份报告指出,这是因为中国意识到全面出口禁令会加速其他国家实行去风险和实现供应链多样化,从而削弱中国的长期地位。

严格的出口管制也会让中国国内付出代价,影响工业活动和更广泛的经济增长。因此,皇家联合研究所认为,出口管制可能会被调整到既能吸引关注,又不会造成其所说的严重经济影响的程度。

对美管制是否标志着中国战略的重大变化?

2024年12月初宣布的措施显示,中国在对关键矿物出口管制方面进行了明显升级。

根据新规,镓、锗和锑“原则上”将不再允许出口到美国,石墨的销售也将受到更严格的控制。

康布斯与Trivium China联合创始人安德鲁·波尔克(Andrew Polk)在分析中写道,这些限制措施是一个信号,表明中国“准备更积极地反击美国的行动”。

这呼应了中国央行前行长易纲的说法。据《南华早报》报道,易纲表示:“我们都明白,从经济学角度,不予报复是最优解……但(面对国内压力),决策者几乎没有选择。”

奥尔德森指出,还需要更多时间观察政策实施的“严格程度”。就石墨而言,目前尚不清楚哪些产品会受到影响——更严格的管制可能仅限于“用于军事最终用途材料的99.999%(纯度)”,而非用于电动车电池的低纯度石墨。

Trivium China的评估指出,此次宣布表明中国将“堵住”允许“出口泄漏”的漏洞,但目前尚不清楚“北京会在多大程度上调查或惩罚涉嫌违规转口的第三国”。

彭博经济(Bloomberg Economics)高级地缘经济分析师杰拉德·迪皮波(Gerard di Pippo)对威胁的严重性持怀疑态度,他写道:“中国缺乏强制第三国遵守规定所需的法律影响力、出口管制监控能力和联盟网络。”

其他分析人士告诉《麻省理工科技评论》(MIT Technology Review),由于美国已采取措施使其供应链多样化,因此“在大多数情况下,这些禁令不会产生重大经济影响”。

尽管如此,奥尔德森表示,当前的不确定性凸显了对关键矿物的依赖者而言,“本地化至关重要”。

未来中美紧张局势会加剧对关键矿物的控制吗?

康布斯和波尔克写道,中国近期管制的动机尚不明确。这可能是为了抗议美国限制特定芯片及制造工具的出口,以及将140家中国公司列入贸易黑名单,也可能是为了“警告即将上台的特朗普政府”不要加剧紧张局势。

外界普遍预计,特朗普开始其第二任期后,美中贸易紧张关系将加剧。

美国两党都对中国“威胁”其工业能力表示担忧。然而,特朗普第二任期可能会优先使用广泛的关税来缩小对华贸易逆差。

康布斯告诉Carbon Brief,北京的目标是“改变美国的行为”,因此在争端中会使用特朗普能够理解的手段,如广泛的贸易关税,而不是出口管制等更细微的工具。

他补充说,特朗普的顾问们会在多大程度上重视关键矿物还有待观察。如果北京使用额外管制施压特定的美国公司,促使它们向美国政府施压,这一问题可能会进入决策视野。

约翰逊指出,中国有理由避免将关键矿物出口问题进一步升级,鉴于其在高纯度石英、铁矿石和钾肥等矿物出口等方面依赖于美国。

此外,他表示,各国认为的关键矿物“会随着时间而变化”,因为新技术会创造对新矿物的需求,同时使其他矿物变得过时。

回收技术的发展也可能缓解供应链压力。国际能源署指出,如果成功扩大回收利用规模,“到2050年,新采矿活动需求可降低25%至40%”。

The post Q&A: 中美贸易战对能源转型意味着什么? appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Q&A: 中美贸易战对能源转型意味着什么?

Continue Reading

Climate Change

UN seabed regulator defends authority as mining firms seek to halt inquiry

Published

on

The UN body that regulates mining in international waters has defended its authority over ocean governance after two subsidiaries of deep-sea mining firm The Metals Company (TMC) launched legal action to halt an investigation into their conduct.

Speaking at the International Seabed Authority’s (ISA) annual meeting in Kingston on Monday, secretary-general Leticia Carvalho said the regulator’s role “matters more than ever” as governments grapple with growing pressure to exploit the deep seabed for minerals needed for the energy transition.

“The deep seabed belongs to no single country and no corporation; it belongs to all of us,” Carvalho said, describing its resources as “the common heritage of humankind”.

“If we lose sight of this,” she added, “we risk repeating on the ocean floor the same injustices and destruction we still strive to remedy on land.”

The conflict stems from TMC’s attempt to bypass the UN process by applying for US-sponsored ocean mining permits offered last year by the Trump administration. The Canadian firm aims to become the first company to mine the seabed for minerals like nickel, rare earths and manganese used in the production of both clean energy technologies and military equipment.

Several governments, including China, condemned the move as a “violation of international law”. In response, ISA member states agreed to open an inquiry into its licence-holders – among them two of TMC’s subsidiaries – to make sure they have complied with international law. If they are ultimately found to have breached those obligations, their exploration contracts could be revoked.

In June, the two TMC subsidiaries – Tonga Offshore Mining Ltd (TOML) and Nauru Ocean Resources Inc (NORI) – filed claims against the ISA at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), asking the court to suspend the inquiry while the case proceeds. The companies argue they are being targeted “without lawful procedural basis”, “in breach of due process”, and without “good faith”.

Environmental groups have accused The Metals Company of using legal tactics to block the investigation into its subsidiaries.

“We find ourselves in this Orwellian situation where these companies are trying to effectively get an injunction against the ISA from continuing its inquiry,” said Louisa Casson, who leads Greenpeace’s global campaign against deep-sea mining.

“The stakes are so high and that’s why we’re seeing this pretty extraordinary move to try to get an injunction against the ISA,” she added.

    Mining the deep ocean floor

    The ISA has been negotiating a mining code for the deep ocean floor for over 12 years without success. Nearly 40 governments, including the UK, France and Germany, have called for a moratorium or precautionary pause on deep-sea mining until there is sufficient scientific evidence that it can proceed without causing serious harm to marine ecosystems.

    Rather than wait for the UN process, industry frontrunner, The Metals Company, decided to apply for US permits offered by the Trump administration last year. In May, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) certified TMC’s application to explore 120,000 square kilometers of sea floor.

    The firm wants to mine an area in the Pacific known as the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, which holds critical minerals inside potato-sized rocks found in the deep ocean floor known as polymetallic nodules. The minerals like manganese, nickel and rare earths are used in clean energy technologies like batteries and wind turbines.

    But the area is also a little-understood ecosystem inhabited by thousands of unnamed species. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the world’s largest environmental network, says mining this area would threaten the existence of over half of all molluscs reliant on deep-sea vents.

    A field of manganese nodules in the ocean floor. (Photo: photo by NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research)
    A field of manganese nodules in the ocean floor. (Photo: photo by NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research)

    Governments launch inquiry

    Seeking to discourage companies from bypassing the UN process, the ISA’s member states unanimously agreed to open an inquiry into whether holders of its exploration licences complied with their contractual obligations under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

    “The stage we’re at now is countries grappling with what they can do about this. What tools do they have to constrain this pathway that would go against international law,” Casson said.

    Both NORI and TOML continue to hold ISA exploration contracts in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. NORI’s license, however, expires later this month on July 21st and is up for review.

    The inquiry is currently ongoing, but Casson said that if governments decide to cancel NORI’s license, other firms could apply for the ISA permit and compete for mining rights in the area.

    “If that happens, it could really put into jeopardy TMC USA’s application (for US permits) because then suddenly that area could be open for a competing claim,” she explained. “At the moment, TMC is trying to kind of play both sides and shore up the area so that there will be no competition.”

    Deep-sea mining firms push back

    The cases before ITLOS are the first contentious disputes over deep-sea mining to reach the court designed for maritime disputes and the first brought directly by private contractors against the ISA. Among the companies’ legal advisers is former ISA secretary-general Michael Lodge.

    Both NORI and TOML claimed that, unless the inquiry is suspended, there is a “real
    and imminent risk of prejudice” that “may have significant legal and practical consequences” for
    their activities.

    The claim was backed by the Pacific island nation of Nauru, which has sponsored TMC’s push to mine the Clarion-Clipperton Zone and would benefit from the economic activity. The country raised “concerns on the adherence of due process with respect to the treatment of NORI”.

    The mining companies allege that the ISA has singled them out among other applicants by requesting additional documentation, and that the UN auditors did not give them an opportunity to “meaningfully respond” to their concerns.

    The ISA rejected those allegations as “wholly unsupported assertions”. It added that, given TMC’s application for US mining permits, it had done “what any reasonable regulator would do”: with the unanimous support of member states, it opened an inquiry simply to establish the facts.

    A view of the International Seabed Authority council meeting in Kinston, Jamaica. (Photo: Andrés Felipe Carvajal Gómez/ ENB)
    A view of the International Seabed Authority council meeting in Kinston, Jamaica. (Photo: Andrés Felipe Carvajal Gómez/ ENB)

    Delay tactics

    A decision from the maritime court is now expected by July 18, which has added to a “climate of significant regulatory uncertainty”, according to global law firm HSF Kramer.

    As ISA countries meet in Kingston this week, the court’s president asked them “not to act in any way that could hinder any order” the court may make.

    At the hearing representing the ISA, renowned human rights lawyer Philippe Sands said the deep-sea mining firms were engaging in “strategic litigation” meant to delay the inquiry and send the ISA into a years-long legal process.

    “It’s a delaying tactic, and nothing would make them happier than for you to kick this into the long grass for two years while you sort out the merits. That is what they want this Tribunal, the Chamber, to do. You are being instrumentalized in this process,” Sands told the judges.

    The post UN seabed regulator defends authority as mining firms seek to halt inquiry appeared first on Climate Home News.

    UN seabed regulator defends authority as mining firms seek to halt inquiry

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    28 quotes from next UK leader Andy Burnham on climate, net-zero and fossil fuels

    Published

    on

    The UK’s incoming prime minister Andy Burnham has remained tight-lipped on his views on climate change during his leadership campaign.

    When asked his views on reversing Labour’s manifesto pledge to stop new North Sea drilling in June – a move that the oil-and-gas industry and right-wing media have pushed for in recent months – he said he had “something of an open mind” on the issue.

    But a trawl of Burnham’s past comments about climate change, net-zero and fossil fuels reveals a different picture.

    Just a year ago in June 2025, Burnham, while mayor of Greater Manchester, gave his support to the fossil fuel treaty – a proposed international pact on phasing out coal, oil and gas – calling it a “lifeline” that “all governments” should join.

    In a video message endorsing the treaty, he also said that “there should be no turning away from net-zero”.

    During his last bid to be Labour leader in 2015, he used similar language, saying:

    “Labour under my leadership will never turn our back on either our duty to tackle climate change or the prospects offered by the green economy.”

    Burnham has spoken about the threat of climate change since at least 2008, noting in 2021 that accelerated action could “create thousands of good jobs”, but also warning that net-zero risked becoming the “next Brexit”.

    Burnham is yet to appoint his cabinet, but there is much speculation that he will select current net-zero secretary Ed Miliband as his chancellor – with their ally Miatta Fahnbulleh having a “strong chance” of taking Miliband’s former position.

    Below, Carbon Brief recounts 28 things that Burnham has said about climate change, net-zero, fossil fuels, energy and transport.

    Climate change

    “Tackling climate change isn’t just about protecting the planet – it’s a powerful opportunity to build a fairer, greener future for our communities and businesses.”

    Calling for local councils to be given more power and money for climate action, 29 November 2025


    “There is little doubt that Greater Manchester’s biodiversity has taken a hit over the years, with habitats being lost, destroyed and becoming less diverse due to the impact of development, climate change, pollution and invasive species…We are committed to delivering a city-region for all residents to enjoy – a fairer, greener and more prosperous place for everyone.”

    Statement after Greater Manchester declared a “biodiversity emergency”, 25 March 2022


    “Over the next decade, if we accelerate our response to the climate crisis, we can create thousands of good jobs, improve homes, overhaul our transport system and make [Manchester] an even better place to live.”

    Greater Manchester Green Summit, 18 October 2021


    “The environment has never been higher on the national and international agenda.”

    Statement after visiting a peat bog restoration project in England, 9 January 2020


    Andy Burnham (left) and others, including members of Massive Attack, endorsing the Fossil Fuel Treaty in June 2025
    Andy Burnham (left) and others, including members of Massive Attack, endorsing the Fossil Fuel Treaty in June 2025. Credit: Fossil Fuel Treaty

    “I think climate change [action] will be driven more quickly from the bottom up, if I’m honest. It’s the will of evolution if you wait for the government to act…When governments aren’t listening you get out and get your voice heard…so I think [climate protesters] deserve our encouragement, not our criticism.”

    Speaking to Manchester Evening News at a student climate protest in Manchester, 24 May 2019


    “Labour under my leadership will never turn our back on either our duty to tackle climate change or the prospects offered by the green economy.”

    Labour leadership candidate speech, 15 July 2015


    “Climate change can seem a distant, impersonal threat – in fact the associated costs to health are a very real and present danger…We need well-designed climate change policies that drive health benefits.”

    Speaking to the Guardian about a study on climate and health, 25 November 2009


    “The Stern report on the economics of climate change has changed the debate, in this country and around the world. It made it clear that the people who could suffer most from a failure to tackle climate change, or from a lack of ambition in our approach to it, are those living in the developing countries. They are the most vulnerable…[and] Stern said that the cost of not acting would be large. That is why the government took various measures in the recent spending review to ensure that we are prepared to face the challenges posed by climate change.”

    Speaking in the UK parliament on the economic impacts of climate change on his final day as chief secretary to the Treasury, 24 January 2008

    Net-zero

    “There should be no turning away from net-zero.”

    Speaking after giving his support to the fossil fuel treaty – a proposed global pact to introduce laws to phase out coal, oil and gas – on behalf of Manchester, 6 June 2025

    Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative on Bluesky: The Fossil Fuel Treaty is not just a plan, said Mayor Burnham

    “An opportunity is opening up for Britain as other countries move away from net-zero. We should seize that…We can make Britain a green leader. This is not the time to tiptoe, it is the time to commit to this path.”

    Speaking at Innovation Zero World Congress in London, 29 April 2025


    “[We] need a government that fully buys into the 2038 vision because the UK will not get to 2050 unless places like Greater Manchester are freed up to go faster – and we’re ready to go faster.”

    Speaking about Greater Manchester’s aim to reach net-zero by 2038, 19 October 2022


    “In Greater Manchester we have plans to build 30,000 net-zero social rented homes because we recognise that a successful city region needs good quality, affordable accommodation for everyone.”

    Speech on the future of cities, 24 June 2022


    “By building a broad consensus behind the drive to net-zero, we can ensure that the transition is a fair one that delivers social justice as well as climate justice. This is an opportunity for all of us to show how cutting carbon emissions in our cities can make a real difference to our communities – away from the abstractions and rooted in the real world.”

    Panel discussion in Glasgow during the COP26 climate summit, 12 November 2021


    “To the extent that people have picked up anything from COP26, it’s a sense that the drive to net-zero will mean cost and inconvenience for ordinary people and offsetting for the wealthy and entitled. All of a sudden, you can feel how net-zero could become the new Brexit – a debate that gets very divided on class grounds…This has got to be a wake-up call. We cannot let this happen. We need to act now to build a broad social consensus behind the drive to net-zero. How to do that? It starts with taking control of the climate narrative from those steering it in the wrong direction and turning it around…We must show how, if done in the right way, the drive to net-zero is actually an opportunity to reduce the cost of living; to make people’s lives better and society fairer.”

    Writing for the London Standard, 5 November 2021

    
Andy Burnham on X: We need to use Week 2 of COP26

    “The drive to net-zero is a chance to re-industrialise the north of England, this time in a clean way. Create really good jobs, future-facing jobs for people, better public transport, improve people’s homes…If we go quickly towards net-zero, it’s the quickest way to level up the country.”

    ITV interview at COP26, 1 November 2021


    “If we really embrace the drive to net-zero, that is the route to level up the country…But it needs substantial investment, upfront, now, of the kind that Rachel Reeves, shadow chancellor [and chancellor under Keir Starmer’s government], has been talking about. We need long-term predictable funding.”

    Interview with GB News at COP26, 1 November 2021


    “I would have preferred to hear slightly less about carbonated wine and much more about a decarbonised economy.”

    Referencing a UK budget, which included tax cuts for sparkling wine and other drinks, 28 October 2021


    “Decarbonising is not just about lowering costs on to people. It’s the route to get better, cheaper public transport. It’s the route to getting homes that are cheap to run. It’s actually the way we can create thousands of good jobs for the people who live in Greater Manchester. This is the route to levelling up the country by going further and faster on decarbonisation.”

    Speaking to Manchester Confidential, 20 October 2021


    “[I am] asking people to stop seeing the environmental agenda as a cost and a burden agenda. I think this is a barrier that we’ve got to get over. Already in the media interviews I’ve done today, people are saying ‘can you afford it?’, ‘can it be achievable when times are tough?’.

    “My answer to that is, at some point in the 21st century, all homes will be zero-carbon. At some point in this century, all buildings of any kind will be zero-carbon…All cars will be zero-carbon, all public transport will be zero-carbon…The question is: when? And surely the places that embrace those things first are putting themselves in a position of economic strength when it comes to facing up to the future. Rather than seeing the whole agenda as a burden, we’ve got to see it for the benefits that it can bring.

    “There may be a greater upfront cost in a zero-carbon home, but let’s stop thinking, as we tend to do in Britain, of the short-term, the short-termist approach to life. Surely let’s start talking to the public about the lifetime cost.”

    Greater Manchester Green Summit, 21 March 2018


    Fossil fuels

    “I’ve got something of an open mind, you know. I don’t have a sort of fixed position.”

    Speaking on the issue of new North Sea oil and gas in a New Statesman interview, 3 June 2026


    “We would fight this in GM [Greater Manchester]…Communities across the north would face all the danger and disruption while big oil and gas walk away with all the profits.”

    In response to Reform’s call for fracking, on X, 25 August 2025

    Andy Burnham on X: We would fight this in GM

    “I am proud to endorse the fossil-fuel treaty proposal today on behalf of Greater Manchester. It’s not just a plan – it’s a lifeline. It’s a call to end coal, oil and gas, hold polluters accountable…I urge all governments, nationals and subnationals to join this fight.”

    Statement upon endorsing the fossil-fuel treaty, 5 June 2025

    Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative on X: In a historic moment, Mayor Andy Burnham

    “Fracking is the past, it is not the future.”

    Speech at London climate protest, 20 September 2019


    “I have called for a moratorium on fracking. Far too many potential risks and unanswered questions.”

    On X, 22 June 2015

    Andy Burnham on X: This explains why I have called for a moratorium on fracking

    Energy and transport

    “What I would do, if successful, is lay out a plan for more public control over water, energy, transport, so that over the period we can get those bills down, fares down, and give people and give businesses breathing space.”

    LBC interview, 2 July 2026


    “I am all in favour of tough decisions at a national level. I don’t believe there should be a third runway at Heathrow, for instance. But I think those are decisions for national government.”

    Guardian interview, 13 June 2019


    “There is a debate to be had about aviation, isn’t there? There are changing public attitudes about aviation. Rather than just saying no to people flying, don’t we need to accelerate research into low and zero-carbon forms of aviation?”

    Guardian interview, 13 June 2019


    “Today, I stand alongside the mayors of some of the greatest cities in the world. I’m committed to a cleaner, greener and healthier future for Greater Manchester. Around a third of greenhouse gas emissions in our city-region come from transport.”

    When signing the C40 Fossil-Fuel-Free Streets Declaration, which includes support for zero-emissions vehicles and walking and cycling, on behalf of Manchester, 14 September 2018

    The post 28 quotes from next UK leader Andy Burnham on climate, net-zero and fossil fuels appeared first on Carbon Brief.

    28 quotes from next UK leader Andy Burnham on climate, net-zero and fossil fuels

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    A strong El Niño spells more climate pain for the Philippines

    Published

    on

    Suresanathan Murugesu is the country director of Action Against Hunger in the Philippines

    The Philippines is caught in an extreme weather trap. Here, forecasts for a strong El Niño in the months ahead do not just indicate a period of drought – they also point to torrential rain and flooding.

    It could hardly come at a worse time, threatening communities that are still struggling to recover from previous typhoons, such as last year’s Typhoon Tino, as well as two strong earthquakes – in Cebu in September 2025 and last month’s 7.8-magnitude quake in Mindanao.

    Forecasts point to the arrival of one of the most intense El Niños in recent history this year and into 2027, with the United Nations warning that it could be the strongest in decades around the world.

    The peak of the El Niño is expected towards the end of the year, but the weather phenomenon is already estimated to have caused agricultural losses of nearly €30 million (£25.9 million), potentially affecting the livelihoods of 4 million farmers.

      On the climate frontline

      For many, El Niño is a figure in a report or a distant headline, but for those of us who live and work on the ground, it is a reality that is already hitting the most vulnerable families.

      When I travel through the communities of the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region – in the south – or speak with families on the island of Siargao or in the Zamboanga region, I do not see data or graphs.

      I see a father looking at his cracked rice field, wondering how he will pay off the debts from a harvest that is already lost before it has even begun. I see a mother walking under a relentless sun because her village’s well has dried up, carrying the water that sustains the health of her children and her entire community.

      And what we are seeing today – 26 provinces experiencing drought and millions of dollars in agricultural losses – is only the beginning.

      Loss and damage fund delays first project approvals as needs dwarf resources

      Many Filipino families are still trying to rebuild and recover after last year’s typhoons and the two earthquakes. In Mindanao, where the recent magnitude 7.8 earthquake displaced more than 90,000 people and destroyed over 19,000 houses, uncertainty remains about when the people will be able to fully recover and return home. 

      Today, they are trying to protect the meagre possessions they have and, if they are lucky enough to have their home unscathed by typhoons and earthquakes, their homes from flooding; tomorrow, they will have to survive the hardship and impact of drought.

      The effects of El Niño threaten to exacerbate their troubles.

      Struggle for basic needs

      Many low-income Filipino families already face significant challenges to meet their basic needs.

      In our daily visits, we see how life is becoming increasingly difficult for millions of people. Rising fuel and transport costs are driving up the price of basic foodstuffs, making them unaffordable for many families. At the same time, crop failures and income losses are leaving households without livelihoods, while disasters contribute to further suffering.

      A farmer collects rice along the side of the road during a hot day in Candaba, Pampanga, Philippines, April 30, 2024. REUTERS/Eloisa Lopez

      A farmer collects rice along the side of the road during a hot day in Candaba, Pampanga, Philippines, April 30, 2024. REUTERS/Eloisa Lopez

      But we are not just talking about hunger. We are talking about health, safety and dignity. Water shortages are forcing many people to resort to unsafe sources, increasing the risk of disease. And, as is the case in so many crises, it is the most vulnerable who bear the heaviest burden: walking long distances every day to fetch water or food, enduring enormous physical strain and facing risks of violence and insecurity.

      Building resilience

      Faced with this reality, our response is based on a simple idea: to be there before the crisis reaches its most critical point. At Action Against Hunger, we work alongside communities to anticipate the situation, assessing the impact of the drought and activating early response mechanisms to protect their livelihoods and access to water.

      We translate climate forecasts into concrete action plans: from support for farmers to programmes ensuring safe water. All of this is done in coordination with local authorities and international partners, because we know that what we do today will make the difference tomorrow.

      A supercharged El Niño is coming – are we ready?

      The hardest months are yet to come. But the question is not just what will happen, but what we are doing now to prevent it. How many tables will remain empty and how many children will see their health compromised will depend on our ability to act in time.

      We cannot stop El Niño. But we can prevent it from becoming a crisis of human dignity. We cannot afford to look the other way whilst the earth cracks and opportunities disappear. Because behind every statistic, there is a family struggling to get by. And that is a reality we cannot ignore.

      The post A strong El Niño spells more climate pain for the Philippines appeared first on Climate Home News.

      A strong El Niño spells more climate pain for the Philippines

      Continue Reading

      Trending

      Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com