Scientists have challenged the conclusions of a new study suggesting that the planet has already exceeded the 1.5C warming threshold set under the Paris Agreement.
Climate change is typically measured as the average global temperature increase relative to a “pre-industrial baseline”. The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), for example, uses the average temperature over 1850-1900 as their historical baseline. The planet has already warmed by around 1.2C compared to this period.
The new study, published in Nature Climate Change, uses proxy data from sea sponges in the Caribbean Sea to create a record of ocean temperatures from 1700 to the present day. This data suggests that warming started 40 years before the IPCC’s pre-industrial baseline period began.
Based on this new record, the authors say “warming is 0.5C higher than IPCC estimates”.
This means that “the global warming clock for emission reductions to minimise the risk of dangerous climate change has been brought forward by at least a decade”, the lead author told a press briefing.
However, many experts have warned that the framing of the study is misleading, arguing that the finding has no bearing on the Paris Agreement 1.5C limit, because it specifically “describes temperature rise relative to the late 19th century”.
Prof Richard Betts, head of climate impacts research at the UK Met Office Hadley Centre, who was not involved in the study, tells Carbon Brief that, crucially, the study “does not mean that impacts of climate change will occur earlier than expected”.
Other experts raised doubts that the 0.5C warming in the 1800s is human-caused, while many cautioned that proxy data from a single location should not be used to make assumptions about the entire planet.
The University of Oxford’s Prof Yadvinder Malhi, who was also not involved in the study, cautions that “the way these findings have been communicated is flawed, and has the potential to add unnecessary confusion to public debate on climate change”.
Shifting baselines
Humans have been releasing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere for centuries, causing global temperatures to rise.
In IPCC reports – considered the most authoritative summaries on climate science – scientists use a combination of land surface air temperatures and sea surface temperatures to assess changes in global mean surface temperatures (GMST).
The UN body reports global warming against a “pre-industrial baseline” of 1850-1900. It describes this baseline as “a pragmatic choice based upon data availability considerations” – in part because much of the observed climate data they use is only available from 1850.
For example, the Met Office’s HadSST4 dataset – one of the three datasets used in IPCC estimates of sea surface temperatures – goes back as far as 1850.
The IPCC also recognises that “both anthropogenic and natural changes to the climate occurred” before the 1850-1900 baseline. For example, in its 2021 report on climate science, the IPCC estimates that between 1750 and 1850-1900, GMST increased by around 0.1C. Of this, human activity was responsible for 0.0-0.2C, it says.
Nonetheless, researchers have typically followed suit in using the 1850-1900 average as their “pre-industrial baseline” to measure global warming.
In 2015, countries agreed under the Paris Agreement to hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2C above pre-industrial levels and pursue efforts to limit warming to 1.5C. “Pre-industrial” was not clearly defined in the agreement, but it has generally been taken to mean the average temperature over 1850-1900.
However, some scientists argue that the “pre-industrial baseline” period should begin before 1850.
The new study uses proxy data taken from sea sponges from the Caribbean sea, to present a timeseries of regional ocean temperatures from 1700 to the present day. Scientists collected sclerosponges from the ocean mixed layer – a region of ocean where heat is exchanged between the atmosphere and the ocean interior.
Between 1700-90 and 1840-60, the proxy data shows ocean warming of around 0.9C, according to the study. In the intervening time, there was some cooling, largely caused by volcanic eruptions, the authors say.
The plot below shows the proxy data (blue) from the year 1770, alongside the HadSST4 observed temperature record (purple), which begins in 1850, relative to a 1961-90 reference period. The authors have applied a 0.9C “offset” to their proxy data to account for pre-industrial temperature increase.
By comparing their proxy data against existing records of global temperature changes, the authors find “strong empirical evidence that the Caribbean ocean mixed layer has warmed proportionately to the average global increase in sea surface temperature, over the last ~50 years”.
The authors assume that the 0.9C offset “can be applied to land-air as well as the ocean mixed layer anomalies”, therefore concluding that GMST increased by 0.9C between 1700-1860 and 1961-90.
Meanwhile, global ocean temperatures measured using HadSST4 show only 0.4C of warming relative to the IPCC’s 1850-1900 pre-industrial period.
As such, the authors suggest that human-caused warming to date is actually 0.5C higher than IPCC estimates.
Dr Malcolm McCulloch – an emeritus professor at the University of Western Australia and lead author on the study – told a press briefing that, according to his study, the 1.5C Paris temperature threshold has already been crossed in around 2010-12.
He continued:
“It means that now, temperatures are at least 1.7C above the pre-industrial level. It also means that the 2C target will be passed in late 2020 unless there are major reductions in emissions…
“The big picture is that the global warming clock for emission reductions to minimise the risk of dangerous climate change has been brought forward by at least a decade”.
However, many scientists are concerned about this framing of the study.
Warming limits
Dr Friederike Otto, who was not involved in the study, is a senior lecturer in climate science at Imperial College London’s Grantham Institute. She says the paper “does not tell us anything about whether we have exceeded the 1.5C temperature limit set in the Paris Agreement”.
She continues:
“That limit was established as the threshold of unacceptably dangerous warming and describes temperature rise relative to the late 19th century. If this study has indeed identified warming from before the mid-1800s, that doesn’t mean the planet is any closer to breaking the 1.5C limit as it is widely understood.”
(The IPCC best estimate – in all but the highest emission scenario – is that global warming will pass 1.5C in the first half of the 2030s.)
Mahli adds:
“Our models of climate warming impacts are based on warming relative to 1850-1900 and moving the baseline definition of pre-industrial does not make these expected impacts worse…
“It is the date of the reference period that matters rather than whether it is labelled pre-industrial or not. The period 1850-1900 is a period of relatively reliable global data when industrial era human-caused climate change was likely negligible.”
Dr Andrew King is a senior lecturer in climate science at the University of Melbourne and was not involved in the study. He tells Carbon Brief that the findings of the study do not have any implications for the Paris Agreement warming limits, because these were “written in 2015 with a view to limiting further global warming from that point onwards”.
He adds:
“While the lack of clarity on what pre-industrial means was problematic, it doesn’t really affect that goal or any of the analyses on climate impacts at global warming levels that have been performed.”
King also tells Carbon Brief that the authors have not demonstrated that pre-1850s warming is due to human activity.
Malhi agrees that “this early industrial-era warming, if real, is almost certainly not human-caused”. He notes that human-caused emissions over 1750-1900 account for only 2.5% of total emissions to date, and says they are “unlikely to have caused substantial warming compared to the 1.4C of warming caused by the remaining 97.5% of cumulative emissions”.
Dr Duo Chan, a lecturer in climate sciences at the University of Southampton, also advises “caution” when interpreting the results, noting that “this new warming estimate does not align” with historical estimates of the different factors that affect the climate.
He notes that, according to Berkeley Earth temperature estimates, the land warmed by around 0.05C per decade over 1850-1900. The new proxy data from the sponges suggests that the ocean warmed almost twice as quickly as the land over this time – a “puzzling observation given the ocean warms more slowly than land”, he says.
Dr Zeke Hausfather, Carbon Brief’s contributing science writer, adds that the study authors are “conflating ocean mixed layer temperature with sea surface temperature in a way that is confusing”. He adds that “their reconstruction also seems a bit at odds with other palaeoclimate reconstructions – such as PAGES2k – that do not see large differences in pre-1900 temperatures”.
The sclerosponge record
Coralline sclerosponges are an ancient type of calcifying sea sponge which can live for hundreds of years. As they grow, chemicals called strontium and calcium build up in their skeletons. The ratio of strontium to calcium in their skeletons is higher during warm periods and lower during cool periods.
Scientists collected live specimens of sclerosponge from the Caribbean sea and analysed the ratios of strontium to calcium in their skeletons to reproduce a timeseries of ocean temperatures in the region from the year 1700 to the present day.
Dr Amos Winter is a professor of Earth and environmental systems at Indiana State University and author on the study. He told the press briefing that there is no such thing as a “perfect proxy”, but said the sclerosponge record is “as good as possible – the holy grail of reconstruction”.
He explained that the Caribbean is “the ideal location to measure global trends”. According to the paper, the region is “ideally positioned” to have a “minimal” impact from the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, while “still registering the broader effects” of the El Niño-Southern Oscillation climate phenomenon.
He adds that the sclerosponge temperature reconstruction is “very robust” when compared to other assessments of temperature trends.
Dr Gavin Schmidt, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, says that the new data is a “useful addition to the database” of palaeoclimate proxies. However, he adds:
“Estimates of the global mean temperatures before 1850 require multiple proxies from as wide a regional variation as possible, thus claims that records from a single record can confidently define the global mean warming since the pre-industrial are probably overreaching.”
Prof Gabi Hegerl, a professor of climate system science at the University of Edinburgh, says that the paper presents a “nice new record” of ocean temperatures, but says that “the interpretation in terms of global warming goals overstretches it”.
She warns that “a single location cannot substitute global data, as climate varies across the globe, which is why the only way to measure global temperature is to get data from across the globe”.
Similarly, Hausfather calls the finding “interesting”, but says it “should be combined with other proxy records in a larger synthesis before it will change our prevailing views here”.
The post Scientists challenge ‘flawed communication’ of study claiming 1.5C warming breach appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Scientists challenge ‘flawed communication’ of study claiming 1.5C warming breach
Marcelo Behar is the COP30 Special Envoy for Bioeconomy and co-founder of Ambition Loop Brazil.
Can we be the generation to end the rampant deforestation that is harming the planet’s ecosystems and climate? Back in February, the Brazilian COP30 Presidency opened a call for submissions on its proposed Roadmap for Halting Deforestation and Forest Degradation, which closes today.
What might look like a technical step quickly drew significant attention, with more than 100 responses submitted by governments, civil society organisations, businesses and other stakeholders.
This level of engagement is telling. It reflects both the urgency of the issue and the recognition that this process could shape whether the global goal to end deforestation by 2030 finally moves from ambition to delivery.
As a Brazilian, I see this moment with both pride and realism. Brazil has played a central role in elevating forests on the climate agenda, and the COP30 Presidency has shown leadership in carrying this issue forward far beyond the Belém summit.
COP30 rainforest fund unlikely to make first payments until 2028
But last year also offered a sobering signal. Despite strong efforts from the Brazilian Presidency, the proposed roadmap did not secure consensus in the final outcome of COP30. That outcome underlined a simple truth: while there is broad recognition of the importance of forests, agreeing on how to move forward remains complex. The road ahead is still long and likely uneven.
That is precisely why this moment matters.
Progress on commitments falling short
The world is not short of commitments. Over the past decade, countries have repeatedly pledged to halt and reverse deforestation by 2030. There is a growing body of experience through the REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation) programme, including the emergence of jurisdictional approaches that are beginning to connect forest protection with finance at scale.
Initiatives such as the Forest and Climate Leaders’ Partnership have helped sustain political attention and cooperation among countries, while national strategies continue to evolve, and Indigenous Peoples and local communities remain at the forefront of protecting forests.
And yet, progress is still falling short.
The gap is not only one of alignment. It is also one of political will – and of having a credible, shared pathway that brings together these efforts in a way that drives implementation at scale.
Civil society is watching this process closely. For many organisations working across climate, nature and conservation, this is not just another initiative – it is a priority. After years of advocating to end deforestation, there is a strong sense that this moment cannot be lost. The expectation is clear: this roadmap must move beyond intention and help unlock real progress.
The opportunity now is to ensure that it does exactly that. This cannot become another report.
Implementation key to roadmap success
A detailed assessment of pathways and challenges, however valuable, will not be enough to change outcomes on the ground. What is needed is an implementation roadmap, one that connects existing commitments, aligns incentives and provides clarity on how to move from ambition to delivery between now and 2030.
The consultation process is an important step. But its value will ultimately be judged by what it produces.
If the roadmap is to succeed, several priorities should guide its development.
-
With no COP30 roadmap, hopes of saving forests hinge on voluntary initiatives
The world is falling short of a target to halt deforestation by 2030, but the “Amazon COP” failed to agree a concrete global plan to save rainforests despite backing by over 80 nations -
Deep in the Amazon, forest protection cash must vie with glitter of illegal gold
The TFFF fund launched at COP30 aims to pay communities to protect the rainforest, but will it be enough? On French Guiana’s border with Brazil, the profits to be had from mining are far higher
First: policy. It must be designed as a tool for implementation. That means going beyond diagnosis to define concrete action: who needs to act, by when, and how progress will be tracked. The solutions are not new, but coordination has been missing.
Second: accountability. It should bring coherence to the existing landscape. The value of a roadmap lies not in creating new commitments, but in connecting what already exists: global targets, REDD+ experience, national action plans, Indigenous leadership and supply chain initiatives. Reducing fragmentation is essential to accelerating delivery.
Early milestones needed
Third: finance. It must be grounded in economic reality. Halting deforestation will not happen without addressing the incentives that underpin it. Aligning public finance, private investment, and market demand with forest protection is not a technical detail; it is the core of the transition.
Fourth: transparency. Legitimacy will depend on openness. A credible roadmap cannot be developed behind closed doors. Governments, Indigenous Peoples and local communities, civil society, business and finance actors all have a role to play and must be able to see how their contributions shape the outcome.
Fifth: urgency. Progress must be visible in 2026. Without early milestones, momentum will fade. By the time climate negotiators gather in Bonn mid-year, the roadmap should have a clear structure, priority actions and growing political backing.
Governments must deliver on the plan
Finally, countries themselves will need to step forward. Last year’s outcome showed that support alone is not enough. Delivering this roadmap will require active political engagement. That means governments that are willing not only to participate in the process, but to help shape and implement it.
Brazil has created an important opening. It has also taken on the responsibility that comes with leadership: to help turn a widely supported idea into something that can deliver in practice.
The commitment to end deforestation by 2030 already exists. What is still needed is a path. And the courage to walk it.
The post How a Brazil-led roadmap can rescue global pledge to halt deforestation appeared first on Climate Home News.
How a Brazil-led roadmap can rescue global pledge to halt deforestation
A US biofuels producer that exports “green” aviation fuel to Britain and the European Union has purchased beef tallow from a Brazilian supply chain tied to illegal deforestation in the Amazon, shipping data and a court document show.
Diamond Green Diesel (DGD), a major provider of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and renewable diesel, has sourced hundreds of thousands of tonnes of beef tallow from Brazil, alongside waste fats from other sources, over the last three years, as global demand for biofuel feedstocks soars.
Reporting by Unearthed and nonprofit investigative outlet Repórter Brasil reveals DGD’s connection to a rendering plant that has sourced supplies from a meatpacker fined for buying cattle from an illegally deforested Amazon reserve. A previous investigation by Reuters and Repórter Brasil found DGD had bought animal fat from two other rendering factories linked to supplies of cattle from illegal ranches.
The newly identified factory, Pacífico Indústria e Comércio de Óleos e Proteínas Ltda, which is based in Cacoal, a small city in the far-western Amazon state of Rondônia, has been supplied by Rondônia meatpacker DistriBoi, a 2022 court document shows.
DistriBoi was fined two years ago for illegally purchasing cattle from the state’s Jaci-Paraná conservation reserve, which has been ravaged by illegal ranching.
There is no suggestion that the companies involved were aware of deforestation at farm level. But the findings suggest a traceability gap in the supply chain of feedstocks for sustainable fuels, where cattle by-products are subject to less oversight than the primary commodities of the cattle industry, such as meat and leather.
Pristine rainforest blanketed the Jaci-Paraná reserve when it was created 30 years ago to protect traditional forest activities such as rubber tapping and nut harvesting.
Today, illegal ranching has devoured nearly 80% of its forest cover and it has become a notorious example of the devastation wrought by land grabbers in the world’s largest rainforest.
“The damage to biodiversity has been devastating,” said local Indigenous activist Neidinha Suruí, who featured in the 2025 Emmy Award-winning documentary “O Território”.
“It is sad to see what has been lost,” she said.
Greener air travel?
The “renewable diesel” and sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) that are being exported by DGD – a joint venture between US oil refiner Valero Energy Corp and Texas-based Darling Ingredients – are classed as “green” because they are made from feedstocks classified as waste, including tallow, which consists of fat separated from cattle carcasses.
Many governments and airlines are pinning their hopes for greener flying on SAF made with organic waste materials, including Britain which introduced a compulsory blending requirement last year.
Top green jet fuel producer linked to suspect waste-oil supply chain
Air travel accounts for about 2.5% of global carbon emissions and in contrast to other transport sectors that can be electrified, shrinking aviation’s carbon footprint is much more difficult.
Waste products such as beef tallow and used cooking oil (UCO) are considered the greenest of viable SAF feedstocks on the grounds that they do not create competition with foodstuffs such as soy oil or palm oil, nor increase deforestation pressure.
But there is concern that the global rush to ramp up SAF use could indirectly exacerbate deforestation pressure by increasing demand for feedstocks such as tallow and UCO.
That could increase the profit margins of cattle ranches – including illegal ones – and have other unintended consequences, such as encouraging fraud in supply chains, as Climate Home News has reported.
An investigation published in March by Climate Home News and Swedish broadcaster SVT found that Finnish biofuels giant Neste is sourcing key ingredients for its SAF from an opaque supply chain that enables fresh palm oil to be passed off as used, waste oil.
Because tallow is classified as waste by regulators in markets including the UK and EU, the green fuel industry’s most widely used certification scheme – International Sustainability and Carbon Certification (ISCC) – does not assess whether forests were cleared to rear the cattle that produced it in the first place.
-
Amazon fires threaten initiatives to raise cash for rainforest protection
Brazil’s Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF) and other innovative finance tools will be showcased at COP30, but surging wildfires in the Amazon pose a threat to their success, climate experts warn -
Deep in the Amazon, forest protection cash must vie with glitter of illegal gold
The TFFF fund launched at COP30 aims to pay communities to protect the rainforest, but will it be enough? On French Guiana’s border with Brazil, the profits to be had from mining are far higher -
Funding gap threatens next round of IPCC climate science reports, chair warns
The latest IPCC session in Bangkok was clouded by persistent differences over when its flagship reports should be published and concern over cost-cutting proposals
This allows tallow from cattle to qualify as a sustainable feedstock for green fuels, even if they were raised on illegally deforested land.
“There is clearly an oversight within the rules if the products, in this case animal tallow, are originally coming from deforested land,” said Cian Delaney, a campaign coordinator at the clean transport and energy advocacy group Transport & Environment.
That means government SAF mandates aimed at stemming air travel emissions could help boost the earnings of cattle ranchers linked to illegal deforestation in Brazil, where ranching and other forms of agriculture have been the main driver of forest loss.
Land grabbers clear way for ranchers
Once covered by an unbroken rainforest canopy, Rondônia’s Jaci-Paraná reserve has been decimated by illegal deforestation driven by cattle ranching – a major cause of tree loss in the Amazon.
Land-grabbers have seized – often violently – and cleared more than three-quarters of its forest for pasture, as ranching has steadily advanced into the southern Amazon.
Suruí, the local Indigenous activist, said companies that buy products derived from illegal activities perpetuate environmental crimes in the rainforest.
“If there were no meat processors buying illegally sourced cattle, there would be no land grabbing and no deforestation,” Suruí told Repórter Brasil, which partnered on the new investigation with Unearthed, and a team of journalists supported by JournalismFund Europe.
Lawsuits and linked supply chains
Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has pledged to end all deforestation in the country by 2030, in part by strengthening environmental enforcement in the world’s biggest rainforest.
In Rondônia, authorities have launched more than 50 lawsuits related to land-grabbing and deforestation in the Jaci-Paraná reserve alone. Local slaughterhouse DistriBoi is named in 31 of the lawsuits, including the 2024 case in which it was fined.
According to the 2022 court document, which concerned an unrelated labour dispute, lawyers for Pacífico refer to DistriBoi as the rendering plant’s “largest supplier of raw materials”.
US-based DGD received almost 15,000 tonnes of tallow from Pacífico from 2023 to 2025 at its Texas refinery, as well as used cooking oil from various countries and sources, according to trade database Panjiva.
Darling Ingredients is also a parent company of Pacífico since its 2022 acquisition of Brazilian rendering company FASA Group.
A spokesperson for Darling Ingredients denied that Pacífico had sourced beef residues from DistriBoi’s Ji-Paraná slaughterhouse – one of two that the meatpacker operates in Rondônia.
“The rendering plant Pacífico does not source any materials from the slaughterhouse Distriboi in Ji-Paraná,” the spokesperson said in an emailed response, without providing evidence or commenting directly on the content of the 2022 court document.
Darling did not respond to a follow-up question about Distriboi’s other slaughterhouse in the region, which, according to cattle transfer documents, has also bought from a farm that has illegally cleared forest within the extractive reserve.
“Our relationships are typically with the slaughterhouse, several levels removed from cattle ranchers. Regardless, we are committed to ensuring our raw materials are deforestation free. We expect our raw material suppliers to abide by our supplier code of conduct. In addition, we are in the process of requiring all [the] raw materials to attest that their material is deforestation free,” the spokesperson said in a statement.
DistriBoi said in an apparent reference to the pending Jaci-Paraná lawsuits that “the matters mentioned … are already under review, including by higher courts”. It has previously denied wrongdoing. The company’s statement did not address a question about its commercial ties to Pacífico.
Valero Energy, the major refiner that co-owns DGD with Darling Ingredients, did not respond to requests for comment, nor did DGD itself.
From slaughterhouse to SAF
In an effort to rein in carbon emissions from air travel, regulators in Britain and the EU have mandated progressively increasing SAF blending quotas in the years ahead, creating a new market for feedstocks including beef tallow.
Brazil’s exports of tallow to the US have risen sharply in recent years, up from less than 10,000 tonnes in 2021 to almost 400,000 tonnes last year, according to Panjiva, reflecting growing demand for biofuels like SAF.
In the UK, Europe’s biggest aviation market by seat capacity, jet fuel was required to contain 2% SAF by the end of 2025, rising to 10% by 2030 and 22% by 2040.
DGD shipped 134,000 tonnes of SAF worth nearly $90 million from Texas to the UK in 2025, according to trade data from Panjiva. The company also exported smaller amounts of renewable diesel to Britain.
The EU received biofuels, including small quantities of SAF, worth over $1.1 billion from DGD’s Texas refinery last year, figures show.
Is the world’s big idea for greener air travel a flight of fancy?
Unearthed’s investigation could not identify which airlines or airports buy DGD’s SAF once it arrives in Britain.
Valero, DGD’s other parent company, is positioning itself as a key player in the transition to lower-carbon fuels in the UK, where it markets its renewable diesel under the Texaco brand.
It has been an active participant in SAF policy discussions and has criticised the government’s planned cap on waste fat sources in SAF, calling them “the world’s most cost-effective production route for SAF” in a submission to parliament.
Helping to cut emissions?
Even tighter oversight over SAF feedstocks is crucial to ensure that blending mandates such as Britain’s are effectively lowering emissions, said Anna Krajinska, a director at Transport & Environment UK.
Forests store vast amounts of carbon; when they are cut down or burned this carbon is released into the atmosphere.
“If there’s tallow coming from land that’s been deforested, then those emissions might be so high that you might not be getting to the greenhouse gas reduction threshold,” Krajinska said.
But as the world’s appetite for flying keeps on growing, some experts say SAF is the only viable means to reduce aviation emissions at present.
Referring to the deforestation links identified in Unearthed’s investigation, Wouter Dewulf, an aviation economist at Belgium’s University of Antwerp, said it “would be important to assess how large this infraction is”.
“I’m quite sure you have aberrations,” Dewulf added. “But biofuels are the best alternative for the moment.”
T&E’s Delaney said there needs to be less opacity and better oversight from regulatory authorities. “Right now, there are just too many blindspots,” he added.
The post UK imports of “green” jet fuel linked to Amazon deforestation appeared first on Climate Home News.
UK imports of “green” jet fuel linked to Amazon deforestation
A company has proposed to build a crude oil pipeline crossing the Canadian border near where the long-contested project would have entered the United States.
No project better embodies the nation’s wild swings in climate and energy policy than the Keystone XL pipeline.
-
Climate Change8 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases8 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
-
Renewable Energy6 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits