Connect with us

Published

on

Uganda’s government has defended plans to ramp up its nascent oil industry by citing a contested scenario for rising fossil fuel use that is favoured by the Trump administration over more climate-friendly models.

Energy analysts have warned that the East African nation’s drive to fund development by producing and exporting oil is a risky strategy due to projections of cost overruns and over-supplied markets as the world transitions away from fossil fuels.

Asked to comment on such warnings, a spokesperson for the Petroleum Authority of Uganda (PAU) referred to the Current Policies Scenario outlined in the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2025 (WEO) report.

One of several different scenarios in the report, that scenario is the most negative on climate action – assuming current policies and no further emissions cuts – and projects that oil demand will continue to rise until at least 2050

“This position is aligned to Uganda’s development aspirations that will leverage our oil and gas resources,” the PAU spokesperson told Climate Home News.

    The issue highlights the stakes for Uganda as it invests heavily in oil infrastructure and also shows how U.S. pushback against climate action under President Donald Trump is being used to justify new fossil fuel projects.

    IEA’s “cautious” scenario

    The IEA’s annual World Energy Outlook report includes long-term projections for global trends on energy demand and supply, investments, government policies as well as the climate and transition targets that might affect energy markets in the years to come.

    They include several different scenarios including the Stated Policies Scenario, which reflects policies already implemented or announced and the Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario, which maps out a pathway to achieve specific energy and climate-related goals. Under the Stated Policies Scenario, oil demand is set to peak around 2030.

    The Current Policies Scenario (CPS) was removed from the WEO scenarios in 2020 but was reintroduced in last year’s report following pressure from the Trump administration, which has criticised the agency’s climate focus and urged it to include outlooks that better reflect continued fossil fuel use.

    Tanzania pushed African nations to oppose fossil fuel transition at COP30

    The Paris-based energy body describes the CPS as “cautious” and based on enacted laws and measures.

    Asked to comment on Uganda’s citing of the CPS to justify its oil industry plans, an IEA spokesperson said none of the scenarios were forecasts and “the IEA does not assign likelihoods of one scenario prevailing over another”.

    “There is no single storyline about the future of energy,” the spokesperson said, adding that it was up to governments and other stakeholders to explore the consequences of policy choices related to issues such as energy security, affordability and sustainability.

    Protecting the economy?

    Uganda’s oil ambitions involve developing two oilfields on the shores of Lake Albert – Tilenga and Kingfisher – and building the 900-mile (1,443-km) East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), with the aim of transporting 230,000 barrels of crude per day to Tanzania’s Tanga port for export.

    Officials from the government of President Yoweri Museveni say domestic crude production and a planned refinery will cut reliance on imported petroleum products and protect the economy.

    Ugandan Minister of Energy and Mineral Development Ruth Nankabirwa Ssentamu speaks during an interview at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29), in Baku, Azerbaijan November 15, 2024. REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov

    Ugandan Minister of Energy and Mineral Development Ruth Nankabirwa Ssentamu speaks during an interview at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29), in Baku, Azerbaijan November 15, 2024. REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov

    But climate and energy experts say the plan is risky. A report published this month by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis found that Uganda stands to benefit far less from oil production than previously projected.

    The country’s use of the IEA’s Current Policies Scenario raises further questions, said Dave Jones, chief analyst at Ember, an independent, non-profit energy think-tank focused on accelerating the global energy transition.

    [Using] the CPS, from a perspective of oil demand, is extraordinarily unrealistic,” he told Climate Home News. He said the CPS was not the IEA’s lead scenario “so countries should not give much weight to it”.

    He noted, for instance, that the CPS assumes the same number of electric vehicles are sold in 2050 as 2024 in the world outside of China and the EU.

    “This is completely at odds with all the evidence of 2025, which shows EVs’ sales share is soaring across many countries, especially emerging countries,” he said.

    African banks back oil export pipeline despite climate commitments

    Terry Githinji, Africa programme manager at Oil Change International, a research and advocacy group, said it was “alarming” that Uganda was relying on the most fossil-heavy IEA scenario to justify expanding oil production – warning of the dire climate and social impacts that such a path would entail.

    “Betting Uganda’s future on a high-risk fossil pathway that enriches foreign oil companies while leaving Ugandans to bear the economic and climate risks is a dangerous gamble, especially when the IEA’s own analysis shows renewables are cheaper, create more jobs, and deliver energy access faster,” Githinji added.

    The post Uganda cites contentious IEA fossil fuel scenario backed by Trump administration appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Uganda cites contentious IEA fossil fuel scenario backed by Trump administration

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    In Guatemala, Indigenous women build climate resilience with old and new farming methods

    Published

    on

    In Guatemala’s southwest region lies a large lake with a storied history.

    Lake Atitlán is one of Central America’s most critical local sources of drinking water, and is surrounded by volcanoes, a thriving tourism industry and an ancient Mayan culture. The Sololá region has long been home to Indigenous communities who have been attracted to its fertile land and pristine natural resources.

    But in recent years, this site of natural beauty in Guatemala’s highlands has had to contend with the growing impacts of the climate and nature crises. Climate change is disrupting the rain cycle and significant areas of land show signs of erosion and loss of soil fertility. These changes are threatening crop production and pushing local people into food insecurity. 

    Elena Wason, co-executive director at Natün, a local non-profit supporting Indigenous people, told Climate Home News that community leaders have “identified deforestation and the effects of climate change in their communities as among their greatest concerns”. Forest cover declined by an estimated 12% in the past two years alone.

    Women are often the social group most exposed to these changes and Natün has focused its efforts on reviving Indigenous agriculture techniques in a bid to improve climate resilience and empower female farmers.

    How to fight drought

    The impacts of climate change on Indigenous communities can often lead to further environmental damage as farmers are forced to rely on unsustainable practices, such as cutting down trees to clear more land. This can accelerate water scarcity, soil erosion and ultimately food insecurity. 

    Giving nature breathing room builds climate resilience

    An ongoing adaptation project led by Natün has sought to reverse these impacts, working with local people to combine modern climate-smart agriculture and ancestral knowledge. The approach involves the use of drought-resistant crops, organic pest management and soil conservation techniques. This is increasingly recognised as an effective way to strengthen climate resilience. 

    “Our approach is based on soil analysis and the use of locally resilient, endemic tree species, significantly increasing survival rates and ensuring sustainable water availability despite changing rainfall patterns,” Wason explained.

    A farmer in one of the small family food gardens growing nutrient-rich crops. Image: Natün

    A farmer in one of the small family food gardens growing nutrient-rich crops. Image: Natün

    A US$170,000 grant from the Adaptation Fund-UNDP innovation platform (through the AFCIA programme) also allowed it to scale. For example, Natün established over 300 family food gardens – small spaces with shared resources that focus on growing nutrient-rich crops.

    The project was built for the long-term by embedding innovation within Indigenous knowledge systems, organic farming and Mayan land stewardship rather than imposing external solutions. In this way, it ensures that communities remain the architects of their own resilience. Diversified revenue streams, including carbon credits and replicable learning kits, further support its longevity.

    Nearly all of the typical Mayan gardens are managed by women, with the project training up to 30 women in climate-resilient practices, such as seed bank management. The approach has paid dividends by bolstering local food security and providing almost 19,000 people with sustainable food sources.

    Young South Africans take up sustainable agriculture for food security

    “The project uses locally led innovation by helping to restore sustainable Indigenous Mayan practices, while empowering vulnerable communities and women to build resilience and adapt to climate change and bolster food security,” said Mikko Ollikainen, head of the Adaptation Fund.

    “Community-led approaches like these can have profound positive impacts on the directly affected communities and beyond by creating practical scalable solutions,” he added.

    Growing incomes

    The programme was expanded in 2025 with the creation of over 260 small poultry farms, further diversifying family incomes. The early results have been positive: two-thirds of families with both a garden and poultry now have surplus produce and incomes that have grown by an estimated $61 per month.

    “These impacts especially benefit women, who not only make up 75% of programme participants and have taken leadership roles in managing community gardens, but also generally take on the responsibility of providing nutritious food for their families,” said Wason.

    The project follows an earlier $5.4 million activity in Guatemala, also funded by the Adaptation Fund, that focused on honey bee production, forest conservation and ancestral knowledge across Suchitepéquez and Sololá. The aim was to empower vulnerable communities and Indigenous populations to adapt to floods and landslides, while enhancing diverse production landscapes and livelihoods.

    Advancing women’s rights and empowerment in climate adaptation

    That project resulted in 6,093 hectares under forest management and conservation, nearly 1,500 beehives in operation, and 328 family gardens with the purpose of helping women adapt. Utilising such ancestral practices have helped to increase agricultural resilience in the Nahualate River basin, benefiting some 1,125 people.

    Indigenous farmers in the Lake Atitlán region. Image: Natün

    Indigenous farmers in the Lake Atitlán region. Image: Natün

    Enduring benefits

    The long-term benefits of the Lake Atitlán project will be in providing communities, especially women, with practical tools to respond to the environmental challenges of drought, storms and deforestation in the Sololá region. These challenges are becoming more pronounced as the climate becomes more extreme and unpredictable.

    Guatemala is ranked among the most exposed countries to climate risk. The World Bank estimates that up to 83% of its GDP is generated in areas prone to disasters. As such, it is not only the people around Lake Atitlán who stand to benefit from sustainable farming techniques.

    The Natün project is easily replicable by harnessing local knowledge and offering a practical model that can be adapted across Indigenous communities facing similar climate pressures. In a country with an Indigenous population of over 6 million people, this approach will be of importance to many other communities as they face similar existential crises in a warming world.

    Adam Wentworth is a freelance journalist based in Brighton, UK.

    The post In Guatemala, Indigenous women build climate resilience with old and new farming methods appeared first on Climate Home News.

    In Guatemala, Indigenous women build climate resilience with old and new farming methods

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    World Bank’s climate work can endure without finance target, experts say

    Published

    on

    The World Bank has scrapped its headline climate finance target under pressure from the Trump administration, but experts believe the survival of its wider climate programme should preserve support for clean energy and resilience in developing nations.

    Following tense negotiations between its government shareholders, the global lender announced this week it would extend its Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) while “retiring” its commitment to direct 45% of its financing to projects with climate benefits – a target it has already met.

    “It could have been a lot worse,” said Danny Scull, a senior policy advisor at think-tank E3G. “I would have loved to see the most ambitious outcome possible, but it is far less likely we’ll see a scenario where the bank all of a sudden reverses its current trajectory and starts delivering less on climate,” he added. 

      Introduced in 2021, the CCAP has been credited with overhauling the World Bank’s approach to climate finance after years of criticism over the development finance institution’s lukewarm support for cutting planet-heating emissions and building resilience to extreme weather and rising seas.

      Since the CCAP began, the World Bank’s climate finance nearly doubled to $39.2 billion in 2025, with 48% of its financing showing climate “co-benefits” and exceeding the target first set at COP28. 

      US attack partially rebuffed

      With the CCAP due to lapse at the end of June, the US – the World Bank’s largest shareholder – mounted a campaign for the lender to axe the programme entirely. Last April, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent publicly welcomed the plan’s upcoming expiration, urging the bank to “shift its myopic focus on climate” and abandon its “distortionary” 45% climate finance target. 

      But Washington was left increasingly isolated during protracted negotiations in recent months as both European governments and a wide-ranging coalition of developing countries held firm on the plan’s extension, sources with knowledge of the discussions told Climate Home News.

      In May, executive directors representing a bloc of nearly 100 countries, including China, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Russia, sent a letter to the World Bank’s board requesting the CCAP be extended and calling for an independent review of the programme.

      While the US had previously seemed unwilling to compromise with its European counterparts, that intervention got it to “back off from its most extreme positions”, E3G’s Scull said.

      Focus on “outcomes”

      In its statement on Monday, the World Bank Group said it would place less weight on the amount of money flowing into projects with climate benefits and shift its focus to “outcomes”, including indicators such as greenhouse gas emissions avoided and the number of people better shielded from climate risks.

      The UK’s international development minister, Jenny Chapman, said in a post on LinkedIn this week that the extension of the CCAP is “a critical step forward”, adding that the stronger emphasis on results “is essential to ensure maximum impact, and the UK will hold the Bank to account to ensure delivery”.

      Despite ditching its headline goal, the international lender is still expected to keep counting the volumes of climate finance for the vast majority of its activities. That’s because the individual entities belonging to the group continue to have their own climate targets embedded in their current mandates. 

      World Bank climate funding greens African hotels while fishermen sink

      For example, the International Development Association (IDA), which supports the world’s poorest nations, has committed to providing 45% of its funding to climate-related activities until 2028. And its larger lending arm, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), should keep aiming for 30% of its financing to have climate benefits. 

      Joe Thwaites, a climate finance expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), said these targets “can be a backstop against the bottom falling out”. “Client countries are emphasising that they want to see more investments in clean energy and resilience,” he added. 

      No major change expected

      The World Bank’s provision of climate finance is also crucial for wealthy countries’ efforts to meet a commitment to provide $300 billion a year for developing countries by 2035 under the new UN climate goal agreed at COP29 in 2024. 

      That year, multilateral development banks (MDBs) accounted for around half of all climate finance provided by developed countries under the previous $100-billion-a-year goal, according to calculations by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 

      UK development minister Chapman said this week that the bank “must continue to meet the expectations of the wider international community, including those set out at COP29”. There, MDBs said that by 2030, their annual joint climate financing for low- and middle-income countries would reach an estimated $120 billion.

      Fractious COP29 lands $300bn climate finance goal, dashing hopes of the poorest

      Rajneesh Bhuee, just transition lead at campaign group Recourse, said it was a “blow” that the World Bank’s headline target had been dropped, but she doesn’t expect to see climate financing reducing – at least in the short term. 

      “This is the [bank] management’s way of alleviating pressure from the US and ensuring they can have some sort of calm internally,” she told Climate Home News.

      Thwaites said shareholder countries should hold the bank’s leadership accountable for delivering what countries have “agreed and need” on climate action.

      “If World Bank climate finance does start to fall, donors should focus their support on other international financial institutions that continue to prioritise climate,” he added.

      IMF also steps back from climate focus

      Regional development banks outside of the Americas may be under less pressure to water down their climate mission. But the World Bank’s sister institution – the International Monetary Fund (IMF) – has seen its enthusiasm for climate action ebb, according to a report released in June by its official watchdog, the Independent Evaluation Office.

      The report said that in 2021, the fund placed great emphasis on tackling climate change, as shown by its flagship climate strategy published that year and the establishment of the Resilience and Security Trust in 2022.

      But in the last year or so, it found “decreasing emphasis on climate-related issues” which coincided with IMF cost-cutting, “emerging geopolitical challenges” and reduced support for climate action from some unnamed IMF member countries.

      Last year, US finance minister Bessent accused the IMF of “mission creep”, accusing it of spending too much time on climate action, gender and social issues. 

      The evaluation report found that the focus on climate change among the IMF’s management and executive board has weakened, and its flagship reports have not included any climate-related chapters since 2023. IMF head Kristalina Georgieva and other managers mentioned climate-related terms in speeches and statements to the board far less in 2025 than the preceding years, it noted. 

      While most of the nearly 700 IMF’s staff surveyed welcomed the swing away from climate work, others bemoaned it and felt “self censored” when working to promote awareness of the risks of climate change to the global economy – which the IMF is tasked with protecting.

      The post World Bank’s climate work can endure without finance target, experts say appeared first on Climate Home News.

      World Bank’s climate work can endure without finance target, experts say

      Continue Reading

      Climate Change

      Analysis: UK newspapers have already printed 63 editorials in 2026 backing North Sea drilling 

      Published

      on

      UK newspapers have already published 63 editorials this year calling for more oil and gas extraction in the North Sea, according to Carbon Brief analysis.

      The national outlets, including the Sun, the Daily Telegraph and the Times, argue that the nation “needs” more North Sea drilling to provide “home-sourced oil and gas” amid a “full-blown energy crisis”.

      These newspapers seek to blame energy secretary Ed Miliband’s “net-zero crusade” for curbing UK fossil-fuel production – despite supplies dwindling for decades before he took the role.

      The push for North Sea drilling in newspaper editorials – considered a publication’s formal “voice” – is part of a wider rejection of net-zero policies by the UK’s right-leaning press.

      Figures ranging from ex-Labour prime minister Tony Blair to hard-right Reform UK leader Nigel Farage have repeated similar arguments that more drilling will “boost” the UK economy.

      Even US president Donald Trump has weighed in, attributing, in part, the resignation of Keir Starmer as UK prime minister to him “fail[ing] badly” on North Sea oil.

      Despite these claims, experts say trying to extract the last barrels of domestic oil and gas would have no impact on people’s energy bills and very little effect on energy security.

      More drilling

      North Sea oil and gas production is a highly politically charged issue in the UK, especially under the current Labour government.

      When Labour won the general election in 2024, the new government committed to a “phased and responsible” transition away from fossil-fuel extraction in the North Sea.

      As part of this pledge, it ruled out issuing new exploration licences for oil and gas. Since then, the government has allowed some “tiebacks”, where new drilling is undertaken close to existing sites.

      Roughly 90% of the fossil fuels that are likely to be extracted in the North Sea have already been burned. North Sea oil and gas extraction was, therefore, already on a clear downward trajectory long before Labour came to power, having dropped 75% between 2000 and 2024.

      Nevertheless, many newspapers have relentlessly called for more oil and gas production, framing the Labour policy as “self-destructive” and compromised by “green ideology”.

      This has ramped up significantly in 2026. Just six months into the year, newspapers have already published 63 pro-North Sea editorials, according to analysis by Carbon Brief. This is more than double the number published in 2025, as shown in the figure below.

      Chart showing that there have already been 63 newspaper editorials in 2026 calling for more North Sea drilling
      Cumulative number of UK newspaper editorials supporting more fossil-fuel extraction in the North Sea in 2025 (blue) and January-June 2026 (red). Source: Carbon Brief analysis.

      Right-leaning newspapers have led this campaign, with the Sun alone publishing 25 editorials, while the Daily Telegraph and the Times have published 10 each.

      ‘Full-blown energy crisis’

      The biggest surge in pro-North Sea drilling editorials came in March, as the Iran war escalated and a global energy crisis began to take shape. Newspapers published 24 such editorials that month, despite the crisis largely arising from the world’s reliance on fossil fuels.

      The Daily Express said the UK needed more “home-sourced oil and gas” and the Daily Mail highlighted the “perverse limit on domestic fossil-fuel production”.

      As the weeks progressed, the Sun lamented price rises and potential fuel shortages, proposing North Sea drilling as a solution to the “full-blown energy crisis”.

      Yet, UK oil and gas is sold by private companies on the open market at international rates. This means UK consumers have no particular right to the fuels or control over the prices they are bought for.

      The Sun claimed – without evidence – that if the North Sea had been prioritised, the UK “might just have the cheapest electricity in the world”. It also said net-zero “forces us to spend billions” on imports.

      In fact, the UK’s high energy prices are primarily the result of its reliance on gas to generate electricity.

      The nation is reliant on oil and gas imports, in part, because the North Sea is a “mature basin” that saw its output collapse long before the UK even had a net-zero target.

      Renewables and low-carbon technologies – often dismissed by the same newspapers – are expected to have a far greater impact on cutting imports than new drilling ever could.

      Miliband’s ‘crusade’

      Much of the criticism by these newspapers of Labour’s North Sea stance is tied to their highly personal criticism of Miliband. Of the 63 editorials arguing for more drilling, nearly three-quarters also attacked him as a “net-zero zealot” on a “green crusade”.

      The Times said the energy and net-zero secretary was pursuing a “masochistic policy” by not expanding North Sea drilling and that he had “cloaked his zealotry in spurious rationality”.

      This all fits with a broader trend that has seen right-leaning newspapers launch frequent, personal attacks on Miliband.

      In the roughly two years since Labour won the election, giving the government a clear mandate for its net-zero policies, there have been around 230 editorials criticising Miliband.

      (These have redoubled in recent days, amid rumours that he may be made chancellor under Andy Burnham, if the new Makerfield MP becomes the next prime minister, as is widely expected.)

      Such attacks have increasingly spilled over into politics. Conservative shadow energy secretary Claire Coutinho has accused Miliband of “fanaticism” and Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has even likened him to a “Nigerian military dictator”.

      The newspapers have also interpreted any support for North Sea drilling as a rebuke of Miliband. Both the Sun and the Daily Telegraph welcomed an essay by Blair, in which he argued that “we must…use what is left of our North Sea oil and gas resources”.

      The Sun heralded Blair as Labour’s “most successful election winner” and said he “nailed the chief mistakes” of the current government, including:

      “Allowing Ed Miliband free rein on net-zero – especially the banning of North Sea drilling.”

      Several of the newspapers have also thrown their support behind the Conservative party, as it frames itself as an anti-net-zero, pro-fossil fuel alternative to Labour.

      The Daily Mail described Badenoch’s proposal to drill more in the North Sea as a “concrete plan”, while the Sun – in an echo of Trump’s slogan – has simply urged her to “drill, Kemi, drill”.

      The post Analysis: UK newspapers have already printed 63 editorials in 2026 backing North Sea drilling  appeared first on Carbon Brief.

      Analysis: UK newspapers have already printed 63 editorials in 2026 backing North Sea drilling 

      Continue Reading

      Trending

      Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com