The agriculture sector holds a lot of power within the European Union, receiving around one-third of the bloc’s total budget.
But, amid rising production costs and lower incomes, farmers have been voicing their frustrations on streets across the EU over the past few months.
These protests have resulted in promises for more funding and loosened rules from both the EU and individual countries.
Agriculture has become a “particularly sensitive subject” among EU politicians ahead of the European parliamentary elections in June, says Politico.
Earlier this month, Carbon Brief travelled to Amsterdam and Brussels to discuss these issues as part of a reporting trip organised by Clean Energy Wire, an EU-focused news service for climate and energy journalists.
Reporters spoke to academics, policymakers and farmers about the upcoming European elections and the future of farming across the bloc.
In this Q&A, Carbon Brief explores what these elections could mean for EU agricultural policy, the impact of the recent farmer protests and the possible pathways for farming in Europe.
- How important are climate and farming in the European parliament elections?
- What concessions have been made in response to the EU farmer protests?
- What does the future look like for EU agriculture?
How important are climate and farming in the European parliament elections?
The European parliamentary elections occur every five years. Voters across the EU will head to the polls over 6-9 June to elect 720 members of the European parliament (MEPs).
Each EU country is allocated a certain number of seats in parliament based on population size, from a minimum of six MEPs (Cyprus, Luxembourg and Malta) to a maximum of 96 (Germany). Candidates in each country are elected based on proportional representation.
The centre-right European People’s Party (EPP) won 189 out of 705 seats in 2019 – the highest portion of any group. The Greens/European Free Alliance (Greens/EFA) boosted their number of seats from 50 in 2014 to 74 in 2019.
This so-called “green wave” was particularly notable in Germany, where the Greens/EFA received more than 20% of the vote.
Climate change and the environment were key issues for voters in 2019, according to Eurobarometer surveys after the elections. Agriculture, on the other hand, was not listed as a main priority issue for people casting their ballots across the bloc.

Analysis of opinion polls and previous EU election results by the European Council on Foreign Relations, a foreign and security policy thinktank, suggested that this year’s results will “see a major shift to the right in many countries”.
The analysis, released in January, said that anti-European populist parties could top the polls in nine countries, including France, Italy and Poland. They could rank second or third in other places, such as Germany, Spain and Sweden.
Similar polls emerged ahead of the last election.
In the early days of 2019, Der Spiegel reported that public opinion researchers “believe that right-wing populists could end up with 20% of the EU-wide vote”.
These parties made gains in some countries in 2019, including Hungary, Italy and France, but, as the Guardian noted after the election, “a promised populist surge turned out to be more of a ripple” across the EU.
Recent analysis from the Jacques Delors Centre, a European thinktank, suggests that the “notion of a broad green backlash” in this year’s parliament election is “largely overblown”.
Based on an online survey of 15,000 people in Germany, France and Poland, they found that the majority of voters want more ambitious climate policy and would support “a raft of concrete measures” to cut emissions.
But a “sizeable minority” of people said they are against more ambitious climate policies – around 30% of people surveyed in Germany and Poland and 23% of those surveyed in France.
The chart below shows the percentage of people in each country who believe that the negative effects of climate change already affect them and their family, will do so in the future or will not affect them at all.

Rightwing parties have seen an increase in support in some recent national European elections. In Portugal’s parliamentary elections earlier this month, the centre-right won and support for the far-right also surged, the Financial Times reported.
There are a wide range of other votes happening in Europe this year, including legislative elections in Austria and federal elections in Belgium.
In the Dutch general election last November, the far-right Party for Freedom (PVV) won the highest number of seats in parliament. Coalition talks have been strained, with unresolved issues around finance and policy differences dividing the parties, but discussions remain ongoing.
The party gained support by “harnessing widespread frustration about migration”, according to BBC News. The housing crisis was also a key issue for voters, while farmers and people living in rural areas were concerned about proposed nitrogen-reduction plans.
Following a court ruling in 2019 that previous plans to tackle nitrogen emissions were not sufficient, the Dutch government re-developed these plans. In 2022, the government set targets to cut nitrogen pollution by as much as 70% in some parts of the country by the end of this decade.
Most of the country’s nitrogen emissions come from livestock and the construction sector and a voluntary “buy-out” scheme for farms is among the measures aimed to cut emissions. This would compensate farmers who choose to close their farms if they are located near nature reserves.
Protests kicked off in 2019 in response to the possible nitrogen-reduction measures and demonstrations have continued over the past few years. These frustrations were among the reasons the populist Farmers-Citizen Movement (BBB) won the biggest share of seats in the Dutch provincial elections last March.
This party was set up in 2019 after a surge in farmer protests over nitrogen-reduction plans and fears of the impact they would have on farming.

Months out from the European parliament elections, it is still unclear how these issues will affect the final results.
European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen has voiced support for farmers in her campaign to continue leading the commission. She recently said that her party, the EPP, “will always be by the side” of farmers.
The Guardian reported that von der Leyen “has made climate concerns a lower priority” since announcing the re-election bid in February. But the EU’s climate commissioner, Wopke Hoekstra, recently told Politico that the bloc must “focus just as much, and probably more” on climate action in the years ahead.
Hoekstra’s comments followed a climate risk report from the European Environment Agency that outlined the “major challenges” the continent faces from extreme heat, drought and floods.
Bas Eickhout, a Dutch MEP in the Greens/EFA party, tells Carbon Brief that he believes the next parliament’s five-year term is “quite crucial, [with] this rise of right-wing populism and, at the same time, the attacks on the green deal” – the EU’s climate policy package.
Mohammed Chahim, the vice-president of the Social and Democrats Group and another Dutch MEP, tells Carbon Brief that he is “very concerned” about the future strength of EU environmental policy, but believes that parties can “find common ground under which we can continuously improve competitiveness” for farmers at the same time.
What concessions have been made in response to the EU farmer protests?
Since the end of last year, farmers have been protesting in several countries across the EU.
The protesters have many concerns, including competition from cheaper imports, environmental regulations and the rising costs of energy and fertiliser.
The complaints from farmers differ from country to country, as highlighted in Carbon Brief’s recent analysis of the key demands from farmer groups in 12 countries.
Many relate to environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity and conservation, but others relate more to trade policy. Farmers in several countries are protesting against proposed measures, such as a trade agreement that is still being finalised between the EU and several South American countries.
In some countries, protesters are calling for more action on climate adaptation. For example, in Greece, farmers are asking the government to implement measures to prevent farmland from being damaged by flooding and other extreme weather.
In other countries, farmers are calling for fuel subsidies to continue and for fertiliser and pesticide restrictions to be reconsidered.

In several eastern European countries, farmers have raised concerns about Ukrainian grain imports. Farmers in countries surrounding Ukraine have been arguing for months that they “can’t compete” with the price of these imports.
The protests in France were largely halted in February after the government promised more “cash support” and withdrew a planned agricultural fuel tax increase, said Le Monde.
The French government also suspended national efforts to halve the use of pesticides by the end of this decade, the Daily Telegraph reported, which environmentalists described as a “major step backwards”.
On 31 January, the European Commission pushed back rules requiring farmers to set aside some land for biodiversity. This measure, which was due to take effect this year, was postponed.
Earlier this month, the commission proposed to review some terms of the EU farmer subsidies, including making this now-postponed land measure voluntary instead of mandatory when it takes effect.
The review is aimed to reduce paperwork for farmers and allow “greater flexibility for complying with certain environmental conditionalities”, the commission said.
Von der Leyen said in a statement that the EU’s agricultural policy “adapts to changing realities”, but continues to focus on “the key priority of protecting the environment and adapting to climate change”.
The commission president also scrapped a proposal to halve pesticide use.
This was an “absolute symbolic act” considering it was already “killed in parliament”, Dutch MEP Mohammed Chahim tells Carbon Brief. Last November, MEPs rejected the pesticide proposal, leaving it with an uncertain future.
What does the future look like for EU agriculture?
Agriculture generates around 25-30% of global emissions; in the EU, the figure averages about 10%. Global livestock emissions alone account for almost one-third of human-caused methane emissions, according to the UN Environment Programme.
At the same time, agriculture is particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Drought can wither crops, extreme heat can kill livestock and floods can damage soil quality.
The EU has put forward plans to both reduce agricultural emissions and make the sector more resilient and sustainable for the future.
The “farm-to-fork” strategy, a policy plan forming part of the wider green deal, was proposed in 2020 as a way to make food systems “fair, healthy and environmentally friendly”. The plans under this strategy include measures to reduce fertiliser use, increase organic farming and provide more consumer information on “healthy, sustainable” food choices.
However, around half of the actions promised under this strategy have fallen by the wayside, Euronews reported on 19 February.
The next European parliament term will have a number of key agricultural issues to tackle including a reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, the EU farmer subsidy system, before 2027.

Earlier this year, the EU launched a “strategic dialogue” to bring together farmers, retailers and other stakeholders to discuss the future of EU agriculture. A report on the outcome of these talks will be given to the commission president this summer outlining a “common ground for the future of the union’s agri-food sector”.
Looking more globally, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization last year released a “roadmap” to change agrifood systems and end hunger without exceeding the 1.5C global temperature limit.
There is an “urgent need” to reform agrifood systems, the report said, in order to meet climate goals and improve food security.
It listed a number of global targets, including reducing livestock methane emissions by one-quarter by 2030, halving food loss and waste at retail and consumer level by 2030 and reaching net-zero deforestation around the world by 2025. A recent Nature Food comment piece criticised elements of this report.
Given that the future of agriculture is still being resolved on an EU and global level, Dutch MEP Bas Eickhout says it is not surprising to see farmers protesting over their concerns. He believes, however, that the protesting farmers “throwing manure on the street” are the “extreme voices” being amplified. He told Carbon Brief in Brussels:
“There are a lot behind who are not putting their manure here on the Berlaymont building. They are not happy, but they’re not protesting.”

He said that farmers need to receive more profits from the wider food chain, adding:
“[There are] a lot of producers, a lot of consumers and a couple in the middle that have the power. That’s where the profits are. There are enough profits in the food chain, but they are not ending up at the farms…[it is a] fundamental economic problem that is happening.”
John Arink, an organic farmer, recently spoke to Carbon Brief and other media outlets on his farm near the village of Lievelde, in the east of the Netherlands. (Read Carbon Brief’s Cropped newsletter from last week for more on Arink’s farm.)
He wants to see a future with less intensive farming and more outdoor space for animals to grow. He said:
“In Holland, we have some kind of a mantra that says the intensive way of producing milk and meat is very efficient. But it is not when you calculate all of the indirect dues of materials and energy, it shows that the intensive way of farming is very inefficient.
“Maybe from the financial point of view it can be efficient, but we have to look at it in the ecological way. And from that point of view, it’s very inefficient to produce so intensively.”
The post Q&A: The impact of farmer protests on the EU’s upcoming parliamentary elections appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Q&A: The impact of farmer protests on the EU’s upcoming parliamentary elections
Climate Change
COP30 Bulletin Day 7: Brazil outlines options for a possible deal in Belém
Last Monday, to get the COP30 agenda agreed, Brazil promised to hold consultations on four controversial issues: emissions-cutting, transparency, trade and finance. Last night, after most delegates had spent their day off exploring the Amazon, the Presidency released a five-page document summarising what was said in those consultations.
Nothing in that “summary note” has been agreed by countries. But it collects together divergent views and forms the basis of what could become a politically agreed statement (known in the jargon as a cover decision) at the end of the COP. It has three key strands on boosting climate finance, strengthening emissions reductions and tackling trade measures linked to decarbonisation.
It includes the key rhetorical messages the COP30 presidency wants to include – that this is a “COP of Truth”, multilateralism is alive (despite President Trump’s efforts to thwart climate action) and the Paris Agreement is now moving from negotiation to implementation.
On emissions-cutting and the need to raise ambition – sorely lacking after the latest round of national climate plans (NDCs) – the note includes an option to hold an annual review and explore the “opportunities, barriers and enablers” to achieve the global efforts agreed at COP28 in Dubai to triple renewable energy and double energy efficiency by 2030; accelerate action to transition away from fossil fuels; and halt and reverse deforestation. This is essentially where any reference to a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels could be anchored.
The document also includes proposals to “urge” developed nations to include finance in their NDC climate plans and “encourage” all countries that have set a range of percentage emissions reductions in their NDCs – like the EU’s 66.25-72.5% – to move toward the upper end of the range.
On finance, options include a three-year work programme on provision of finance by wealthy governments and a goal to triple adaptation finance (something the least-developed countries are pushing for) or just repeating the finance goal agreed at COP29 and “noting” a new roadmap to achieve that (which rich nations very much prefer).
There are also various options for how to talk about where climate and trade overlap: an annual dialogue, roundtables, consultations, a new platform or just to keep discussing in the ‘response measures’ strand of climate talks.
Li Shuo, head of the Asia Society Policy Institute’s China Climate Hub, told Climate Home News it was highly significant that – after two years of the issue being buried in climate talks – trade has now been “anchored in the endgame of this COP”.
The various potential outcomes in the summary note could be included in existing agenda items or they could be lumped together into what is usually referred to as a cover text but the Brazilian government would likely prefer to call a “mutirão decision” or a delivery, response or global action plan.
Essentially, after governments ignored the presidency’s pleas not to add contentious items to the agenda, it looks like they could get at least some of what they want by turning those issues into the headline deal from COP30 .
At the start of the high-level segment of the conference on Monday morning, where environment ministers deliver their speeches, UN climate chief Simon Stiell urged governments “to get to the hardest issues fast”.
“When these issues get pushed deep into extra time, everybody loses. We absolutely cannot afford to waste time on tactical delays or stone-walling,” he added.
The presidency consultations on the issues in the note will continue on Monday, along with negotiations on adaptation metrics and a Just Transition Work Programme among others. The COP30 president then plans to convene a “Mutirao” meeting of ministers and heads of delegation on Tuesday “to bring together various outcomes”.
Korea joins coal phase-out coalition at COP30
As fossil fuels have grabbed headlines at COP30, major coal producer South Korea kicked off the second week of the Belém conference with an actual concrete pledge: the country will phase out most of its coal power by 2040.
Operating the seventh-largest coal fleet in the world, Korea announced on Monday that it will join the Powering Past Coal Alliance (PPCA), an initiative launched in 2017 by the UK and Canada to encourage countries to wean themselves off the planet’s largest source of emissions. Oil and gas exporter Bahrain is another new member.
Asian industrial giant Korea said that out of 62 operating coal power plants, it will commit to retiring 40 of them by 2040. The phase-out date of the remaining 22 plants “will be determined based on economic and environmental feasibility”.
Korean Minister of Environment Kim Sung-Hwan said at an event announcing the pledge that the country will play a “leading role” in the energy transition.
“South Korea is known as a manufacturing powerhouse. Unfortunately renewable energy has taken a low share in our power mix, but going forward we are determined to foster renewable energy industries,” he told journalists. “We will show the world that we can create a decarbonised energy transition.”
Asked about a fossil fuel transition roadmap – an idea floated around by many governments in Belém – Sung-Hwan said “humanity and all of the governments should work together to achieve a decarbonised green transition”, adding that “COP30 will be an important momentum”.
UK climate minister Katie White said Korea was taking an “ambitious step”, and that they can “reap the rewards that we are seeing from our own clean energy transition”.
Korea is a major importer of oil and gas. Domestically, it has historically relied on coal for electricity, but the country’s production of the fossil fuel has decreased steadily by 86% in the last 25 years, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). Their nuclear fleet, on the other hand, has nearly doubled in the same time period.
The post COP30 Bulletin Day 7: Brazil outlines options for a possible deal in Belém appeared first on Climate Home News.
COP30 Bulletin Day 7: Brazil sets out options to reach a deal in Belém
Climate Change
Your Summary of Negotiations: Nov. 17
Frustration about slow progress at the United Nations Climate Conference boiled over last week, when on Tuesday, Indigenous activists pushed past security at the entrance of the main conference hall, called the Blue Zone, and briefly occupied the space. The action was meant to draw attention to the exclusivity that happens at the COPs. Danielle Falzon, a sociologist at Rutgers University, who researches the climate talks, says, “In the UNFCCC setting, success is measured by how long you stay in the room, how polished your presentation is, how fluent you are in bureaucratic English — and how well you can pretend that the world isn’t burning outside.”
Sônia Guajajara, Brazilian minister of the Indigenous peoples, stated in an interview that nearly 5,000 Indigenous people were participating in various events around the city, with about 900 granted official accreditation to participate in events inside the Blue Zone. Analysis finds 1,600 fossil fuel representatives at UN climate summit in Brazil, outnumbering almost every country delegation aside from Brazil. “There is no solution to avoid climate change without the participation of Indigenous people; they need to be here,” said Guajajara.
On Friday morning, dozens of Indigenous activists blocked the front of the COP30 summit venue, staging a sit-in that forced delegates to use a side entrance to resume their negotiations on tackling climate change. Security has increased checks, and lines to enter are getting longer.

Meanwhile, a parallel event, called the People’s Summit, was inaugurated on Wednesday at the Federal University of Para, after a flotilla of more than 5,000 people aboard around 200 vessels sailed together in the waters around Belem to arrive at the venue. The People’s Summit has been convening alongside the official COP since 1992, making space for frontline communities to raise voices together. You can read their manifesto here.
International activists are calling for a treaty to phase out fossil fuels and address the root cause of the climate crisis. “If we continue to extract hydrocarbons from the Earth, we will exterminate ourselves,” said Olivia Bissa, president of the Chapra Nation in the Peruvian Amazon.
Transparency International’s examination of the list of registered participants found that 54% of participants in national delegations either did not disclose the type of affiliation they have or selected a vague category such as “Guest” or “Other.” The UNFCCC still lacks a conflict of interest policy for attendees. This enables fossil fuel businesses to use the space to unduly influence negotiations, strike side deals, and spread climate disinformation.
On Thursday, Brazil launched the Belém Health Action Plan, a blueprint to help health ministries respond to the effects of climate breakdown. It also identifies children as a uniquely vulnerable group for the first time.
There has been much speculation about the Trump administration’s leaving the Paris Agreement and the absence of the US in this COP’s negotiations. The US Climate Action Network held a press conference on Thursday to make it known that frontline communities and climate justice organizations from the US have not retreated. Christiana Figueres, a Costa Rican diplomat who played an essential role in the Paris Agreement, commented, “What the US has done is a choice; it is a sad choice, but it does not stop the advance of all others who are on the [clean energy] track,” Figueres says. “All it has done is open up the space hugely for China, which is completely delighted that they don’t have any substantial competition.”
Indeed, China is leading the world in renewable energy. In 2022, China installed roughly as much solar capacity as the rest of the world combined, then doubled its additional solar capacity in 2023. On Tuesday, the Climate Action Network gave a Ray of the Day Award to the G77 + China negotiating bloc for calling for the establishment of a Just Transition Mechanism under the UNFCCC — a proposal that mirrors many of the core elements civil society and trade unions have been advancing through the Belém Action Mechanism (BAM):
- Integrating fairness and equity into all levels of implementation;
- Promoting coordination and knowledge-sharing across sectors and institutions;
- Supporting non-debt-creating finance for transitions;
- Strengthening social dialogue; and
- Ensuring that people, not profits, remain at the heart of climate action.
On Saturday, thousands took to the streets outside the conference for the People’s Summit March. The joyous and defiant demonstration was the first major protest outside the annual climate talks since COP26 four years ago in Glasgow, as the last three gatherings were held in petrostates headed by authoritarian governments with questionable human rights records and little tolerance for demonstrations — Egypt, Dubai, and Azerbaijan.
Negotiations around finance, especially for adaptation and loss and damage, will likely heat up in this second week. The absence of meaningful finance at COP30 has been striking. Richer nations have repeatedly shirked their responsibilities and are dragging their feet on new commitments, despite being the primary contributors to global warming emissions. Some are even resorting to creative accounting. Canada’s repackaging of the final portion of its existing commitments as “new” funding is especially disappointing. Relying on uncertain private sector funds or loans leaves lower-income nations exposed to further economic risks and debts, rather than delivering the climate justice they deserve.
The post Your Summary of Negotiations: Nov. 17 appeared first on Climate Generation.
Climate Change
Week One at COP30: Reflections from the Amazon
Standing in the Blue Zone in Belém, Brazil, surrounded by thousands of negotiators, activists, scientists, and Indigenous leaders, I’m struck by how profoundly location shapes conversation. This is the first COP held in the Amazon rainforest—not symbolically nearby, but actually within it.
Through Climate Generation’s support, I’m able to spend two weeks here building strategic relationships and supporting mission-driven organizations. Their partnership — rooted in a mission to ignite and sustain the ability of educators, youth, and communities to act on systems perpetuating the climate crisis — enables Terra40 to deliver strategic event campaigns that include comprehensive Event Planning, Marketing, and Delegation Management to organizations like HBCU Green Fund at COP30.
Here’s what the first week has taught me.
The Beautiful Congregation
One of my favorite aspects of global forums is the congregation itself: diverse nations, peoples, and languages weaving together in one space. You hear Portuguese, Spanish, French, Chinese, Indigenous languages, Arabic — all at once. It’s a powerful reminder that we’re interconnected yet unique, each bringing something distinct to the table, yet all here for the same urgent purpose. But that diversity isn’t just poetic — it’s strategic. Different cultures approach negotiation, relationship building, and decision-making in fundamentally distinct ways. Understanding these differences determines whether you can build coalitions that actually drive policy change. For Climate Generation’s work with educators and youth, teaching students about these diverse approaches prepares them to be more effective climate advocates.
Indigenous Leadership Takes Center Stage
The most significant shift at COP30 is the centrality of Indigenous voices. In previous COPs, Indigenous peoples often felt relegated to side events. Here in Belém, they’re in the negotiating rooms, leading pavilions, and setting the agenda.
Indigenous leaders from Brazil, Peru, Ecuador, and beyond are presenting traditional ecological knowledge that challenges and complements Western scientific frameworks. They’re not asking for a seat at the table — they’re reminding everyone that this is their table, their land, their knowledge systems that have sustained these ecosystems for millennia.
This directly connects to acting on systems perpetuating the climate crisis—one of those systems is the marginalization of Indigenous knowledge in climate solutions. For Minnesota classrooms, this means teaching students that climate solutions already exist in communities worldwide. Our job is to listen, learn, amplify, and support.
The Unglamorous Reality
Let me be honest about what Week One actually looked like: jet-lagged client meetings, navigating a massive venue, negotiations stretching past midnight, building relationships over coffee in crowded corridors, and adjusting strategy in real-time. Global forums look polished from the outside. Inside, they’re an organized chaos that requires flexibility, cultural competence, strategic thinking, and stamina. But this is also where the magic happens — where an environmental justice leader from Louisiana connects with an Indigenous forest guardian from Acre, where relationships form that outlast the two-week conference.
This messiness matters for climate education. Real climate action isn’t always tidy. It’s a mix of coalition-building, compromise, setbacks, breakthroughs, exhaustion, and hope. Preparing young people for this reality — while sustaining their ability to act — is precisely what Climate Generation’s mission describes.
Connecting Global to Local
What does COP30 mean for Climate Generation’s work with Minnesota educators, youth, and communities?
- Local solutions matter globally. Minnesota’s work on agricultural climate adaptation and renewable energy transition is part of conversations happening here. Small-scale innovations can influence international policy.
- Relationship-building is a strategy. Just like at COP30, meaningful climate work requires cultural intelligence, trust-building, and long-term relationship investment—not just data and messaging.
- Diverse voices strengthen solutions. Climate Generation’s vision of ‘a just and abundant world beyond climate crisis’ requires centering voices often marginalized: Indigenous communities, communities of color, rural communities, and young people.
- Personal connection drives action. The most effective negotiators here connect abstract targets to individual experience. This transforms information into action—exactly what Climate Generation does in Minnesota classrooms and communities.
Looking Ahead
As we head into Week Two, negotiations intensify. I’ll continue sharing insights through this partnership — because understanding how global climate policy happens should be accessible to everyone, from international negotiators to teachers in Minnesota. The climate crisis is global. But so are the solutions, relationships, and movements being born here in Belém. When educators, youth, and communities in Minnesota learn from these global convenings, they’re better equipped to act on the systems perpetuating the crisis — right where they are.
___
Fuzieh Jallow is the Founder & CEO of Terra40. This blog was written in partnership with Climate Generation
About This Partnership: Climate Generation provided COP30 credentials to Terra40 in exchange for on-the-ground insights and educational content. Learn more at climategen.org. Follow Terra40 @terra40global for real-time COP30 updates.
The post Week One at COP30: Reflections from the Amazon appeared first on Climate Generation.
-
Climate Change3 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Greenhouse Gases3 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year 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
-
Climate Change1 year 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”
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Renewable Energy4 months ago
US Grid Strain, Possible Allete Sale




