UK chancellor Rachel Reeves has unveiled the first spending review under the current Labour government, announcing funding for nuclear power, energy efficiency and carbon capture and storage (CCS).
A spending review establishes each ministry’s spending limits and priorities for the rest of the parliamentary term.
The Department of Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) received one of the largest jumps in capital spending, despite energy secretary Ed Miliband reportedly being one of the last to agree to a spending settlement.
Before the final details had been announced, the Times was describing Miliband as one of the “biggest winners” from the process.
High-profile funding announcements in the Treasury’s spending review include £14.2bn for the Sizewell C new nuclear power plant in Suffolk, the first state-backed nuclear power station for decades.
Elsewhere, two new CCS clusters – Acorn and Viking – were allocated funding and railways across the nation were given a boost.
Below, Carbon Brief runs through the key announcements.
- Departmental spending
- Energy efficiency
- Energy infrastructure investment
- Transport
- Other announcements
Departmental spending
Spending reviews are an opportunity for governments to stake out their priorities by setting the budgets for departments over the rest of this parliament.
Reeves’ spending review has been viewed by experts and media commentators as an opportunity to boost Labour’s flagging popularity and pursue some of its key manifesto commitments, including net-zero.
It covers plans for departmental “resource” spending – including day-to-day running costs – out to 2028-29 and “capital” spending out to 2029-30.
The latter includes injections of funding for infrastructure and public services, such as major clean-energy and transport projects.
In her speech launching the review, Reeves did not specifically mention the terms net-zero or climate change, but stressed the importance of achieving energy security via domestic, low-carbon power. “Clean energy” also featured prominently in the review document itself.
Overall, total departmental budgets are set to grow by 2.3% in real terms across the spending review period.
The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) is expected to see a 16% increase in overall departmental spending, reaching £12.6bn in 2028-29.
(This does not include the boost in funding for Sizewell C nuclear plant, which will see a 15.6% increase thanks to a £14.2bn investment over the next five years. See: New nuclear.)
The chart below – taken from the spending review document – shows that while the absolute increase in spending on areas such as health, defence and education is higher, DESNZ is among the most highly prioritised in relative terms.
The review document emphasises that this increase in public money is necessary to mobilise private investment and “secure the UK’s electricity system with homegrown, clean power by 2030”.
Other departments that are also relevant for climate action have not seen the same overall increases in budget.
The Department for Transport (DfT) is set to see its overall departmental spending drop by 0.4%. However, the review notes that capital spending will increase, including more money for local low-carbon transport options and major rail projects.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) budget is also expected to fall overall, but support for “nature-friendly farming” is set to more than double over the review period.
Energy efficiency
Leading up to the spending review, there had been speculation that the government might cut plans to invest £13.2bn on upgrading the nation’s homes under its “warm homes plan”, which had been a manifesto commitment ahead of last year’s election.
Such a move could have cost households more than £1.4bn a year in avoidable energy bills, according to analysis from thinktank the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU).
However, the spending review confirmed the pledged £13.2bn in funding for the scheme, covering spending between 2025-26 and 2029-30.
The government says this will help to cut bills by up to £600 per household through energy efficiency measures, heat pumps, solar panels and batteries. It will also help support tens of thousands of jobs across the country, the spending review adds.
According to innovation agency Nesta, the warm homes funding is roughly double the previous government’s commitment, amounting to a £6.6bn increase in government spending on home upgrades over the current parliament, compared with the previous one.
It will see around one-fifth of the nation’s housing stock upgraded by 2029, although to a varying degree.
Responding to the announcement, trade association Energy UK’s chief executive Dhara Vyas said in a statement:
“It’s also very important that millions of customers will see a direct benefit from today’s announcements. By reaffirming the funding to improve the energy efficiency of millions of homes and supporting the switch to cleaner heating alternatives, customers can expect warmer and more comfortable homes, cleaner air and cheaper bills – showing how the energy transition can improve their daily lives.”
Funding for the warm homes plan in the spending review follows £3.4bn in investment announced for the scheme at the autumn budget in 2024. At the time, Labour had said that this was just the “first step” in investment for decarbonisation and household energy efficiency within the scheme.
Further details for the warm homes plan will be confirmed in October, the spending review says.
Beyond energy efficiency, Reeves announced what she called the “biggest boost to investment in social and affordable housing in a generation”, confirming £39bn in funding for a 10-year affordable homes programme.
This will nearly double government spending on affordable housing, according to reporting earlier this week.
Miliband recently announced changes to the “future homes standard” that will mean almost all new homes will have to be built with rooftop solar as a default, high levels of energy efficiency and low-carbon heating, such as heat pumps.
As such, new properties built under the affordable homes programme will largely have to include energy efficiency measures and low-carbon energy technologies.
Energy infrastructure investment
GB Energy
The spending review also confirms that it will allocate £8.3bn in funding for Great British Energy (GB Energy) and the linked GB Energy – Nuclear, another manifesto commitment.
It says this has been achieved by allocating £9.6bn in “additional financial transactions, such as loans and equity investments, to support growth”.
(It explains that “financial transactions” are designed to “allow government to invest alongside the private sector, through equity investments, loans and guarantees”. The document also says that GB Energy will be designated as a “public financial institution”.)
In addition to this top-line confirmation for GB Energy, the spending review also gives it an extra £300m in support for offshore wind supply chains.
This forms part of the “government’s investment in resilient and clean energy security, boosting domestic jobs, mobilising additional private investment and securing manufacturing facilities for critical clean energy supply chains such as floating offshore platforms”, it notes.
The spending review confirms up to £80m for port investment to support floating offshore wind deployment in Port Talbot in Wales, subject to final due diligence.
GB Energy funding follows on from Labour’s manifesto, promising investment into technologies such as floating offshore wind, as well as partnering with local authorities and the private sector to support the deployment of mature technologies.
New nuclear
Ahead of the spending review, the chancellor announced a £14.2bn investment in the planned Sizewell C new nuclear power plant in Suffolk.
The plant is being jointly developed by the UK government with French state-owned utility firm EDF Energy, which is already building the Hinkley C plant in Somerset.
Each new plant will have a capacity of 3.2 gigawatts (GW), enough to power six million homes. During its construction, Sizewell C will provide 10,000 jobs, including 1,500 apprenticeships, according to the government.
In a statement earlier this week, energy secretary Ed Miliband said new nuclear was needed for energy security, lower bills and to help cut emissions. He said:
“We need new nuclear to deliver a golden age of clean-energy abundance, because that is the only way to protect family finances, take back control of our energy, and tackle the climate crisis.
“This is the government’s clean energy mission in action- investing in lower bills and good jobs for energy security.”
Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme following the investment announcement, Miliband stated that China would not be able to invest in the new nuclear plant in Suffolk. He further clarified that, while the majority of the investment would come from the UK government, there will also be private investment announced at a later date.
Sizewell C will be one of the first new nuclear power stations in the UK in decades, with no new nuclear power plants having opened since 1995 and all but one of the existing fleet expected to retire by the early 2030s.
The under-construction plant at Hinkley Point C is also being developed by EDF and is expected to serve as a “blueprint” for Sizewell C.
The Hinkley C plant is being funded via a “contract for difference” (CfD), under which EDF is responsible for the upfront investment costs, but will receive £92.50 per megawatt hour (MWh, 2012 prices) for each unit of electricity generated. (This will drop to £89.50/MWh in 2012 prices as a result of the Sizewell C project going ahead.)
EDF has reportedly accepted that Hinkley C will cost more than £40bn to complete, but has “rejected claims” that the Sizewell C scheme would cost a similar amount.
Sizewell C is due to be funded under the “regulated asset base” (RAB) model and so will not receive a CfD, but the details of this deal are not yet available. The final investment decision on the project is due later this summer, according to reports.
Additionally, the government announced Rolls-Royce has been selected to build small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) following a “rigorous” two-year competition.
Rolls-Royce will partner with Great British Energy – Nuclear as part of the government’s industrial strategy, which will see £2.5bn invested over the spending review period.
The firm is expected to build three SMRs, with the first connecting to the grid “in the mid-2030s”, according to Rolls-Royce.
The spending review also included over £2.5bn for nuclear fusion. This will include support for the design and build of a prototype energy plant in Nottinghamshire.
The document notes that the government is providing a “pathway for privately led advanced nuclear technologies”, although details are not elaborated.
Great British Energy – Nuclear will shortly publish a new framework with the National Wealth Fund for exploring further investment opportunities for viable nuclear projects.
The spending review includes £13.9bn for the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, to keep “former nuclear sites and facilities safe and secure as it decommissions sites and manages nuclear waste”.
Carbon capture and storage
The UK has already pledged “up to” £21.7bn of funding over 25 years to support five carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects, involving “clusters” of connected facilities.
Most of this funding will come from levies on consumers, but the government has also been gradually announcing chunks of public investment to get these initiatives off the ground.
The spending review allocates another £9.4bn of capital spending by 2029. This will partly go towards “maximis[ing] deployment to fill the [CO2] storage capacity” of the first two funded clusters.
At the same time, the government also confirmed its support for the next two clusters – Acorn in north-east Scotland and Viking in the Humber in the spending review. These projects are set to be up and running in the 2030s.
The review states that the government is providing the “development funding to advance [the] delivery” of these clusters, with a final investment decision expected “later this parliament, subject to project readiness and affordability”.
Pathways set out by government advisors at the Climate Change Committee (CCC) suggest CCS is required to meet the UK’s net-zero targets.
However, the government has faced intense scrutiny over its investments in CCS. A report by the influential Public Accounts Committee earlier this year said investing public funds in this relatively undeveloped technology was a “high risk” approach.
Transport
The spending review includes a number of commitments for regional transport projects that could help cut UK emissions, including rail upgrades, bus lanes and cycleways.
Overall, the Department for Transport (DfT) settlement will reach total funding of £31.5bn in 2028-29, a slight increase from current levels. This includes support for the HS2 high-speed rail project.
HS2, which had its second phase out to Manchester cancelled under the Conservatives in 2023, will see its funding drop over the spending period.
Meanwhile, capital spending on transport projects around the country is set to experience a 4% real-terms growth rate each year out to 2029-30.
Regional transport projects receiving funding include the TransPennine Route Upgrade between York and Manchester, with £3.5bn, as well as £2.5bn for East-West Rail between Oxford and Cambridge and £300m for rail investment in Wales.
(For comparison, despite the declining funds, HS2 will receive £25.3bn over the period.)
Other relevant investments in the spending review include a commitment to “more than double” city region transport spending per year by 2029-30, by providing a total of £15.6bn for elected mayors across England. The review says this could go towards local transport priorities, including “zero-emission buses, trams and local rail”.
Additionally, there is another £2.3bn allocated for investment in local transport grants to support “bus lanes, cycleways and congestion improvement measures” for areas outside the larger regions with mayors.
The review includes a relatively small sum – £2.6bn – of capital investment that is set aside to “decarbonise transport” as “part of the government’s clean energy mission”.
This is made up of £1.4bn to “support continued uptake” of electric vehicles, in particular vans and heavy goods vehicles (HGVs), as well as £400m for charging infrastructure and £616m for walking and cycling infrastructure.
Some of these funds will also support the production of “sustainable” aviation fuel (SAF) in the UK by extending the government’s advanced fuels fund.
The spending review also includes funding for transport projects that may not help to decarbonise the nation’s transport. Notably, there is £24bn of funding by 2030 to “maintain and improve motorways and local roads across the country”.
Also, while the project is not mentioned in the spending review document itself, Reeves’s speech mentioned “backing Doncaster airport” alongside “investment to connect our cities and our towns”. (The airport is currently closed, but there has been a local political effort to reopen it.)
Other announcements
R&D funding
The government is increasing research and development (R&D) funding to £22.6bn per year by 2029-2030.
This will include funding for the UK’s science base, the spending review says, such as the non-departmental public body UK Research and Innovation and research initiative Horizon Europe.
Part of this funding will go to the government’s new R&D missions accelerator programme. Some £500m of public funds are intended to leverage a further £1.5bn of private investment in innovation that supports the government’s “missions”.
(One of the five key “missions” announced by the Labour government in its manifesto is to “make Britain a clean-energy superpower”.)
Additionally, R&D funding will include up to £750m for a new supercomputer at Edinburgh University, the largest in the UK. This will be used to support a broad range of fields, including climate and weather predictions and research into fusion power.
In a statement, secretary of state for Scotland Ian Murray welcomed the funding for the supercomputer, adding:
“This will see Scotland playing a leading role in creating breakthroughs that have a global benefit – such as new medicines, health advances and climate change solutions.”
Ahead of the publication of the delayed UK industrial strategy, the spending review lists relevant R&D commitments.
It says over £3bn in R&D and capital funding over the next four years will go to advanced manufacturing across the UK, “anchoring the supply chain of zero emission vehicles, batteries and ultra-low and zero-carbon emissions aircraft[s]”.
Clean-energy industries will also receive “significant additional funding”, it adds.
Flood defences and farming funds
As part of the spending review, the government announced investment in climate adaptation and the natural environment to “increase the UK’s resilience to the effects of climate change and protect the ecosystems that underpin the economy and food security”.
This includes £2.7bn in sustainable farming and nature recovery funding until 2028-29, as well as £4.2bn to build and maintain flood defences from 2026-27 to 2028-29.
According to the spending review, farmers will benefit from £2.3bn through the farming and countryside programme and up to £400m from additional nature schemes
There will be increasing support for “nature-friendly farming” through environmental land management schemes, which will grow from £800m in 2023-24 to £2bn by 2028-29. This will be sustained by “rapidly winding down” other subsidy payments.
The spending review states that this will make a “significant contribution” to the Environment Act targets, including improvements to water and air quality and creating spaces for wildlife to support biodiversity.
Funding for both flood defences and farm schemes follows the government stating that it was facing “significant funding pressures” of almost £600m in 2024-25 in the autumn budget.
Foreign aid and climate finance
The government announced in February that it would further cut aid spending to 0.3% of gross national income (GNI) by 2027 in order to fund higher defence spending.
This came just three months after the UK, alongside other developed countries, had committed to raising at least $300bn a year for climate action in developing countries at the COP29 climate summit.
Developed countries have traditionally used their aid budgets to meet such “climate finance” goals.
But observers have noted that scaling up climate finance to meet this new target will be difficult, as nations cut back their overseas spending and the world faces overlapping humanitarian crises.
When announcing the cut earlier this year, prime minister Keir Starmer said that the UK would retain its focus on “tackling climate change” in its aid spending. The government also acknowledged that the decision to cut aid would require “many hard choices”.
The government has a pledge to spend £11.6bn over five years on climate finance in developing countries, which ends in 2025-26. Beyond that, it is expected to announce a new pledge to feed into the $300bn goal.
The spending review does not provide details of precisely what this goal will be, or whether it will be more ambitious as other aid programmes undergo swingeing cuts.
It states that the funding plan “prioritises UK multilateral investment across issues where the international system needs to deliver at scale and to reform”, including the “climate and nature crisis”.
It also says the three departments that provide nearly all UK climate finance – the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, DESNZ and Defra – will “maintain progress” on the nation’s international climate goals.
However, the amounts of aid channelled via all three of these departments will be lower in the coming years than they are now, according to the government’s figures.
Response to climate-risks report
In a separate document published alongside the spending review, the government also set out its response to the latest “fiscal risks and sustainability” (FRS) report, published by the Office for Budget in September 2024.
Within this, the government reiterates its intention to “accelerate to net-zero”, including via its target for clean power by 2030.
The response adds that, alongside this, the government recognises that it “must also take action to build resilience and ensure the UK is well-prepared for the changing climate”.
It says that FRS identified flooding and extreme heat as areas that need particular attention, before setting out its spending commitments in these areas.
The response also confirms two important dates for UK climate-policy watchers.
First, the response says the government will, in October 2025, publish its “carbon budget delivery plan”. This will set out the plans and policies the government will put in place in order to meet the first six carbon budgets, covering the years out to 2037.
Second, it says that the government will legislate for the seventh UK “carbon budget” by June 2026. This is a legally binding limit on emissions covering five years from 2038 to 2042. The CCC has recommended an 87% reduction below 1990 levels.
The post UK spending review 2025: Key climate and energy announcements appeared first on Carbon Brief.
UK spending review 2025: Key climate and energy announcements
Greenhouse Gases
CCL Partners with Central Michigan University Students to Create Climate Change PSAs
CCL partners with Central Michigan University students to create climate change PSAs
By Elissa Tennant
What makes a memorable public service announcement? Is it the visuals? The messaging? The catchy tagline? Or is it all of the above?
Citizens’ Climate Lobby’s marketing team proudly partnered with Central Michigan University (CMU) to explore this question. Over the course of the 2024-2025 academic year, CMU students created five, one-minute PSAs to educate the public on climate change solutions and encourage volunteer signups to CCL.
First, students in Dr. Jinhee Lee’s Fall 2024 Advertising and PR Research class conducted and presented formal research on ideal slogans and concepts. After weeks of research, they determined an ideal tagline would be: “Your Actions Shape Their World.” This tagline taps into the emotional appeal behind volunteering for the climate. Everything we do today is to create a better world for generations to come, including our own children.
Dr. Lee’s students also passed on key concepts and ideas from their research that the animation students used to shape their creative concepts for each PSA.
The research students then passed the baton to the students in CMU’s Spring 2025 Animation Jr. Studio II: Short Form Production class. Working in groups of three, these students created full animations, from concept to final product, along with short social media previews for each PSA.
The students produced excellent work. Every piece is well-done, and each takes a different approach to talking about climate. Some groups used heartfelt sentiment, others leaned into humor, but all make the same, clear point: Our actions today shape the world of tomorrow.
CCL is grateful for this partnership and the hard work of all involved CMU students and staff. Enjoy the full showcase of animated PSAs below.
PSA #1: Urban Forests
Animation, Story & Design
Martha Kalumbula
Haley Kershaw
Diana Malla
Music by Zack Stark
Sound Design by Maggie Bauer
PSA #2: Fire!
Animation, Story & Design
Jo Moorehead
Cady Stalvey
Jillian Todd
Music by Kenzie Greene & Brendan Erickson
Sound Design by Maggie Bauer
PSA #3: Mudman
Animation, Story & Design
Megan Blades
Ava Ciaramitaro
Caroline Westfall
Music by Sammy Blades
Sound Design by Maggie Bauer
PSA #4: Pet Call
Animation, Story & Design
Makayla Dixon
Brayden Johnson
Kameron McClain
Music by Jay Batzner
Sound Design by Maggie Bauer
PSA #5: River
Animation, Story & Design
Emily Billinghurst
Michele McGraw
Estrella Moreira
Music by Angelo Buford
Sound Design by Maggie Bauer
Additional Credits
CCL would also like to thank the following people who contributed to the success of these projects:
Producers/Professors
Stephan Leeper
Rose Brauner
Production Partners
Professor of Advertising – Jinhee Lee
Professor of Commercial Music – Jay Batzner
Branding Consultant – Chip Humitz
CCL Mt Pleasant Chapter Co-Leader – Marie Koper (who initially brought the project to CCL!)
JRN 369 Advertising and PR Research Students
Ellison Elward
Madison Fagerstrom
Gigi Fox
Nash Fulgham
Liberty Guilmette
Olivia Jones
Kara Lacerna
Laura Lubahn
Lorenzo Martinez
Kathryn Nickell
Gabriella Pierzecki
Payton Thurston
Samuel Tomaszewski
View and share the full playlist of PSAs on YouTube here!
The post CCL Partners with Central Michigan University Students to Create Climate Change PSAs appeared first on Citizens' Climate Lobby.
CCL Partners with Central Michigan University Students to Create Climate Change PSAs
Greenhouse Gases
DeBriefed 11 July 2025: Texas floods; Global warming ‘tripled’ Europe heat deaths; Ireland exits coal
Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.
This week
Deadly Texas floods
EXTREME FLOODING: At least 120 people died and 173 remain missing one week after flash floods in Texas, NBC News reported. The floods were “one of the deadliest weather events in recent American history”, the New York Times said. The newspaper said it is “too early to say with certainty” the role of climate change, but this type of extreme rainfall is “precisely the kind of phenomenon that scientists say is becoming more common because of global warming”.
STORM CONDITIONS: Bloomberg noted that drought, the “abnormally hot Gulf of Mexico” and other factors fuelled the “storm that spawned the floods” in Kerr county. Climate scientists told Inside Climate News that the “torrential downpours on 4 July exemplify the devastating outcomes of weather intensified by a warming atmosphere”.
CUTS QUESTIONED: The Guardian reported on a warning from experts that such floods could become the “new normal” as “Donald Trump and his allies dismantle crucial federal agencies that help states prepare and respond to extreme weather and other hazards”. E&E News reported that “forecasts and warnings largely worked during the catastrophe in Texas”, but that “those systems are expected to degrade as Trump’s cuts take hold”.
HIMALAYAN FLOODS: Elsewhere, heavy rainfall “battered” two Himalayan states in India, “leading to widespread damage, disruption and loss of life”, India Today reported. Pakistan’s Dawn newspaper reported that “record high summer temperatures” have “accelerated the melting of glaciers”, leading to deadly flooding in some parts of the country.
Europe heat deaths
RAGING HEAT: Around 1,500 of the 2,300 heat deaths during the heatwave that “seared Europe at the end of June” can be attributed to climate change, according to World Weather Attribution analysis covered by the Guardian. The newspaper said that Milan was the “hardest-hit city” and that 88% of the “climate-driven deaths” were in people aged over 65.
MORE EXTREMES: Extreme heat continued to affect much of Europe this week. In Catalonia, Spain, more than 18,000 people were ordered to remain indoors as a “wildfire raged out of control, consuming almost 3,000 hectares of vegetation”, Reuters said. Marseille airport closed as a major wildfire encroached on the southern French city, Le Monde reported.
‘CLIMATE DELAYERS’: Meanwhile, a “far-right” political group successfully outbid other groups to lead negotiations for the EU’s next climate target on behalf of the European parliament, according to Politico. This role for the Patriots for Europe group “give[s] the far right unprecedented influence” over the 2040 target, the outlet said, adding that it “strongly opposes the EU’s climate policies”. An early attempt to curb the bloc’s influence failed, Reuters said.
Around the world
- LIBYAN OIL: BP and Shell have “signed agreements to assess new opportunities in Libya”, the Financial Times reported, joining several oil majors resuming exploration following the country’s civil war.
- SOLAR POWER: Trump issued an executive order targeting “unaffordable and unreliable ‘green’ energy sources”, reported Inside Climate News. But the outlet said it is unclear whether this will “have much of an effect”.
- CLIMATE MOTION: The UN Human Rights Council passed a motion on climate change and human rights – but only after the Marshall Islands withdrew a “divisive amendment” calling on states to recommit to a fossil fuel phase-out, Reuters said.
- BELÉM INCOMING: Meanwhile, the president of COP30 told Climate Home News that countries “already decided” to transition away from fossil fuels and climate negotiations can now focus on a “timeline or rules for how this transition will be made”.
- LAW: The International Court of Justice will issue a major opinion on the legal obligation of countries to address climate change on 23 July, reported Reuters. Although it is nonbinding, experts told the newswire that it “could set a precedent in climate change-driven lawsuits” around the world.
74%
The percentage of global wind and solar projects under construction that are located in China, according to a Global Energy Monitor report.
Latest climate research
- Annual meltwater from the Greenland ice sheet “significantly increased” in the past three decades | Nature Climate Change
- The wealthier and more democratic a nation, the less their citizens engage in climate activism | Journal of Environmental Psychology
- Climate change has “played an important role” in genetic and demographic changes in Tibetan macaques | Science Advances
(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)
Captured
Water levels soared by more than eight metres in just over two hours on the Guadalupe River within an area known as “flash flood alley” in Texas on 4 July. The resulting floods caused devastation for people in nearby homes and summer camps. Satellite imagery in NBC News showed the scale of the impact. Carbon Brief examined the potential role of climate change in the flood and how it was covered by global media.
Spotlight
Ireland exits coal
This week, Carbon Brief looks at the significance of Ireland becoming the latest European country to end coal-powered electricity.
Ireland has joined the UK and a slew of other nations in burning its last lump of coal – the most polluting fossil fuel – to generate electricity.
Coal use ceased on 20 June at Moneypoint, the country’s last coal-burning power station, in line with a 2019 government pledge.
Spain and Italy are expected to become the next European countries to leave behind coal power, according to Beyond Fossil Fuels.
Ireland’s move offers an important “signal” for the country’s energy transition, said Margie McCarthy, the director of research and policy insights at the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland (SEAI). She told Carbon Brief:
“We’ve put in place a lot of really ambitious legislation and climate action plans, but we are still more than 80% reliant on fossil fuels across all of our energy demands…Coal is a particularly carbon-intensive fossil fuel, so any movement away from that is a good step forward.”
Coal controversies
Gas (42.1% in 2024) and renewables (39.6%) generate the vast majority of Ireland’s electricity. Coal, despite its overall decline, experienced a mini-comeback in 2021 and 2022 – broadly in line with EU trends when gas prices soared as Russia restricted supplies and countries later dropped Russian fossil fuels following the country’s invasion of Ukraine.
The share of Ireland’s electricity coming from coal increased from 4% in 2020 to 14% in 2021. This fluctuated again in recent years, dropping to 4.6% in May 2025.
The ESB, the state-owned energy company that runs Moneypoint, was criticised in 2022 for resuming shipments from a controversial Colombian mine as an alternative to Russian coal. The company had stopped buying coal from the Cerrejón mine in 2018.
Cerrejón is “Latin America’s largest open-pit coal mine” – six times the size of Manchester, a recent article from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism said. Ireland’s national broadcaster RTÉ reported in 2024:
“According to local communities, lawyers’ organisations and court rulings, in its four decades of operation it has driven an environmental crisis that has destroyed the health, lives and culture of many thousands of Indigenous people.”
An ESB spokesperson told Carbon Brief that it sourced a “limited amount of coal from Cerrejón between April 2022 and August 2023”.
Next steps
Now that coal use has wound down, Moneypoint will remain available to generate electricity using oil on a back-up basis until 2029.
The ESB “expects low levels of running of the plant going forward”, a spokesperson said.
The company plans to turn Moneypoint into a “green energy hub”, with a major offshore windfarm, a wind turbine construction hub and a green hydrogen facility on site.
Looking at Ireland’s ongoing energy transition, McCarthy said that, although gas still plays a “significant” role, increases in wind, solar and electricity interconnection are “good signals to move in the right direction”. She added:
“We just need to keep the pace going. We need to accelerate quicker…and that we make sure we’re managing demand while we are trying to accelerate that pace.”
Data centre dilemma
A major cause of Ireland’s growing electricity demand is data centres, which consumed more than one-fifth of the country’s electricity supplies in 2024 – more than all urban households.
Ireland has become an “EU pioneer of data centres” thanks to “its low taxes, temperate climate and fibre cable access to the US and Europe”, according to the Financial Times.
McCarthy highlighted the importance of ensuring that “data centre demand is not undoing the renewable energy share, or the final energy consumption reductions that are required as part of our targets and obligations”. She added:
“It’s very fair to say that the efficiency measures in data centres have been significant…But the issue is that the demand is outpacing any efficiency measures that are being introduced.”
Watch, read, listen
OIL TO LITHIUM: A Climate Home News article looked at the challenges facing Nigeria’s efforts to “supply refined lithium to the electric vehicle battery industry”.
PODCAST CHAT: The Rest is Politics podcast spoke to the UK Climate Change Committee chief executive, Emma Pinchbeck, about net-zero and the energy transition.
BRRR: A BBC News “in depth” article explored the growing “battle” for control over the Arctic, along with the security challenges from climate change and other issues in “one of the world’s coldest places”.
Coming up
- 7-25 July: 30th session of the International Seabed Authority (part II), Kingston, Jamaica
- 14-23 July: UN high-level political forum on sustainable development, New York
- 17 July: UN General Assembly third informal dialogue on the Pact for the Future, New York
- 14-18 July:20th ordinary session of the African ministerial conference on the environment, Nairobi, Kenya
Pick of the jobs
- New Scientist, environment news reporter | Salary: £40,000-£50,000 (pro rata). Location: London
- Environmental Defense Fund, senior analyst, mission finance | Salary: €56,000-£61,000. Location: Belgium, the Netherlands or UK
- Daily Telegraph, environment editor | Salary: Unknown. Location: London
- United Nations Human Settlements Programme, junior nature-based solutions and climate consultant | Salary: Unknown. Location: Kenya
- Brookline.News, freelance environmental reporter | Salary: Unknown. Location: Massachusetts, US
DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
The post DeBriefed 11 July 2025: Texas floods; Global warming ‘tripled’ Europe heat deaths; Ireland exits coal appeared first on Carbon Brief.
At least 120 people have died after a devastating flash flood swept through homes and holiday camps in central Texas in the early hours of 4 July.
The disaster unfolded after a severe rainstorm caused the Guadalupe River to swell to its second-greatest height on record.
Headlines have been dominated by the death of 27 children and counsellors from a summer camp for girls near the banks of the river.
In the aftermath of the flooding, many news outlets questioned whether the Trump administration’s decision to cut staff from the federal climate, weather and disaster response services may have impacted the emergency response to the disaster.
However, others defended the agency’s actions, saying that the appropriate warnings had been issued.
Scientists have been quick to point out the role of climate change in driving more intense rainfall events.
A rapid attribution analysis found “natural variability alone” could not explain the extreme rainfall observed during the “very exceptional meteorological event”.
Meanwhile, social media has also been awash with misinformation, including claims that the floods were caused by geoengineering – an argument that was quickly dismissed by officials.
In this article, Carbon Brief unpacks how the flood unfolded, the potential role of climate change and whether advanced warnings were affected by funding cuts to key agencies.
- How did the flooding develop?
- What impact did the flooding have?
- What role did climate change play?
- Were the forecasts and warnings affected by recent job cuts?
- What conspiracy theories have been circulating?
- How has the media responded?
How did the flooding develop?
The flash flooding began in the early hours of the morning on Friday 4 July, with early news coverage focusing on Guadalupe River in Kerr County.
According to BBC News, the US National Weather Service (NWS) reported a “swathe of around 5-10 inches (125-250mm) of rainfall in just three to six hours across south-central Kerr County”, equivalent to “around four months of rain [falling] in a matter of hours”.
The slow-moving weather system was fed by moisture from the remnants of Tropical Storm Barry, which had brought flooding to Mexico, before tracking north as it died out, the outlet explained.
Kerr County is a “hillier part of Texas than surrounding counties”, meaning that “moisture-laden air was forced upwards, building huge storm clouds”, the article noted:
“These storm clouds were so large they effectively became their own weather system, producing huge amounts of rain over a large area.”
Prof Hatin Sharif, a hydrologist and civil engineer at the University of Texas at San Antonio, explained in an article for the Conversation why Kerr County is part of an area known as “flash flood alley”:
“The hills are steep and the water moves quickly when it floods. This is a semi-arid area with soils that don’t soak up much water, so the water sheets off quickly and the shallow creeks can rise fast.”
He added that Texas as a whole “leads the nation in flood deaths” – by a “wide margin”.
As the rain lashed down, the “destructive, fast-moving waters” of Guadalupe River rose by 8 metres in just 45 minutes before daybreak on Friday, said the Associated Press, “washing away homes and vehicles”.
The Washington Post reported that the river reached its “second-greatest height on record…and higher than levels reached when floodwaters rose in 1987”. It added that “at least 1.8tn gallons of rain” fell over the region on Friday morning.
The floodwaters swept through camps, resorts and motorhome parks along the banks of Guadalupe River for the Fourth of July weekend.
A timeline of events by NPR reported that “boats and other equipment that was pre-positioned started responding immediately”.
The article quotes Texas lieutenant governor Dan Patrick, who said there were 14 helicopters, 12 drones and nine rescue teams in action – as well as “swimmers in the water rescuing adults and children out of trees”. He added that there were 400 to 500 people on the ground helping with the rescue effort.
By Saturday 5 July, more than 1,000 local, state and federal personnel were on the ground helping with the rescue operation, NPR said.
In the days that followed, further periods of heavy rainfall meant that flood watches remained in place for much of the weekend, said Bloomberg.
Newspapers and online outlets were filled with images from the area. For example, the Sunday Times carried photos and video footage of the floods, while BBC News had drone footage of the “catastrophic flooding”.
What impact did the flooding have?
The floods have killed at least 119 people, according to the latest count reports by the Guardian:
“In Kerr county, the area that was worst affected by last Friday’s flood, officials said on Wednesday morning that 95 people had died. The other 24 people who have died are from surrounding areas. The Kerr county sheriff said 59 adults and 36 children had died, with 27 bodies still unidentified.”
There are also 173 people believed to still be missing, the Guardian said, including 161 from Kerr County specifically.
Bloomberg noted that “some of the victims came from additional storms around the state capital Austin on 5 July”. It added that, according to officials, “no one had been found alive since 4 July, when the deluge arrived in the pre-dawn hours”.
BBC News reported that continuing rains following the initial flood “hamper[ed] rescue teams who are already facing venomous snakes as they sift through mud and debris”.
Headlines have been dominated by the death of 27 children and counsellors from Camp Mystic – a 700-acre summer camp for girls, which has been running for almost 100 years, noted the Guardian.
BBC News reported that “many of the hundreds of girls at the camp were sleeping in low-lying cabins less than 500ft (150 metres) from the riverbank”.
Lieutenant governor Patrick “told of one heroic camp counsellor who smashed a window so girls in their pyjamas could swim out through neck-high water”, the outlet reported. He added that “these little girls, they swam for about 10 or 15 minutes” before reaching safety.
The Associated Press reported:
“Dozens of families shared in local Facebook groups that they received devastating phone calls from safety officials informing them that their daughters had not yet been located among the washed-away camp cabins and downed trees. Camp Mystic said in an email to parents of the roughly 750 campers that if they have not been contacted directly, their child is accounted for.”
The New York Times published images and videos of the aftermath at the summer camp.
Visiting the site on Sunday 6 July, Texas governor Greg Abbott tweeted that the camp was “horrendously ravaged in ways unlike I’ve seen in any natural disaster”.
In the immediate aftermath of the floods, US president Donald Trump, at his golf club in Bedminster in New Jersey, signed a major disaster declaration that freed up resources for the state, reported France24.
A preliminary estimate by the private weather service AccuWeather put the damage and economic loss at $18bn-$22bn (£13.2bn-£16.2bn), the Guardian reported.
Former president Barack Obama described the events as “absolutely heartbreaking”, reported the Hill. In a statement, former president George W Bush and his wife Laura – who was once a counselor at the camp – said that they “are heartbroken by the loss of life and the agony so many are feeling”, another Hill article reported.
American-born pontiff Pope Leo XIV also “voiced his sympathies”, reported another Guardian article. Speaking at the Vatican, he said:
“I would like to express sincere condolences to all the families who have lost loved ones, in particular their daughters who were in a summer camp in the disaster caused by flooding of the Guadalupe River in Texas.”
What role did climate change play?
As the planet warms, extreme rainfall events are becoming more intense in many parts of the world.
This is principally because, according to the Clausius-Clapeyron (C-C) equation, the air is able to hold 7% more moisture for every 1C that the atmosphere warms, which means warmer air can release more liquid water when it rains.
For example, a recent study of the US found that the frequency of heavy rainfall at “durations from hourly to daily increased in 1949-2020”. It added that this was “likely inconsistent with natural climate variability”.
In addition, research indicates that, in some parts of the world, increases in the intensity of extreme rainfall over 1-3 hours are “stronger” than would be expected from the C-C scaling.
However, many other factors – such as local weather patterns and land use – affect whether extreme rainfall leads to flooding.
Local meteorologist Cary Burgess told Newsweek that “this part of the Texas Hill Country is very prone to flash flooding because of the rugged terrain and rocky landscape”. For example, the outlet notes, 10 teenagers died in flash floods in July 1987.
In the aftermath of the flooding in Texas, Dr Daniel Swain, a climate scientist at the University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, told ABC News that there is “abundant evidence” that “highly extreme rain events” have “already increased considerably around the world as a result of the warming that’s already occurred”.
Prof Andrew Dessler from Texas A&M University wrote on climate science newsletter The Climate Brink that “more water in the air flowing into the storm will lead to more intense rainfall”. He added:
“The role of climate change is like steroids for the weather – it injects an extra dose of intensity into existing weather patterns.”
Dr Jennifer Francis, a climate scientist at the Woodwell Climate Research Center, told Bloomberg that Texas is “particularly flood-prone because the fever-hot Gulf of Mexico is right next door, providing plenty of tropical moisture to fuel storms when they come along”.
Many outlets pointed out the higher-than-average sea surface temperatures in the Gulf of Mexico. BBC News said:
“Sea surface temperatures in the Gulf of Mexico, where some of the air originated from, continue to be warmer than normal. Warmer waters mean more evaporation and so more available moisture in the atmosphere to feed a storm.”
Yale Climate Connections reported that sea surface temperatures were up to 1C above average in the central Gulf of Mexico. It said that human-caused climate change made these conditions up to 10 times more likely, according to the Climate Shift Index from Climate Central.
(This index gives the ratio of how common the temperature is in today’s climate, compared to how likely it would be in a world without climate change.)
Bloomberg was among a number of outlets to note that, in the run-up to the flooding, nearly 90% of Kerr County was experiencing “extreme” or “exceptional” drought. This meant the soil was hard and less able to soak in water when the intense rainfall arrived.
Just days after the event, rapid attribution group ClimaMeter published an analysis of the meteorological conditions that led to the flooding.
It stated that “conditions similar to those of the July 2025 Texas floods are becoming more favorable for extreme precipitation, in line with what would be expected under continued global warming”.
According to the analysis, the flooding was a “very exceptional meteorological event”. It explained that “meteorological conditions” similar to those that caused the floods are “up to 2 mm/day (up to 7%) wetter in the present than they have been in the past”. It added:
“Natural variability alone cannot explain the changes in precipitation associated with this very exceptional meteorological condition.”
The field of extreme weather attribution aims to find the “fingerprint” of climate change in extreme events such as floods, droughts and heatwaves.
ClimaMeter focuses on the atmospheric circulation patterns that cause an extreme event – for example, a low-pressure system in a particular region. Once an event is defined, the scientists search the historical record to find events with similar circulation patterns to calculate how the intensity of the events has changed over time.
The study authors warned that they have “low confidence in the robustness” of their conclusions for this study, because the event is “very exceptional in the data record”, so they do not have many past events to compare it to.
In its coverage of the attribution study, the Wall Street Journal highlighted some of the research’s limitations. It said:
“Remnant moisture from Tropical Storm Barry stalled over the region and repeatedly fed rainfall, making it hard to compare the weather pattern to historical data.”
The outlet quoted one of the study’s co-authors, Dr Davide Faranda, a scientist at France’s National Centre for Scientific Research, who said the data “nonetheless suggests that climate change played a role”.
Many other climate scientists have also linked the flooding to climate change.
For example, Dr Leslie Mabon, a senior lecturer in environmental systems at the Open University, told the Science Media Centre:
“The Texas floods point to two issues. One is that there’s no such thing as a natural disaster – and one area that disaster experts will be probing is what warnings were given and when. The second is that the pace and scale of climate change means extreme events can and do exceed what our infrastructure and built environment is able to cope with.”
Were the forecasts and warnings affected by recent job cuts?
Observers were quick to question how the response to the floods has been impacted by recent sweeping cuts to federal climate, weather and disaster response services by the Trump administration.
BBC News explained how staffing cuts overseen by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency – the initiative formerly led by Elon Musk – have reduced the workforce National Weather Service (NWS).
The news outlet reported that – since the start of the year – “most” probationary employees had their contracts terminated, 200 employees have taken voluntary redundancy, 300 opted for early retirement and 100 were “ultimately fired”.
(The Trump administration has also proposed a 25% cut to the budget of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – the agency which oversees the NWS – but this would not come into force until the 2026 financial year.)
The Independent was among a raft of publications to report the weather service had predicted 1-3 inches (2.5-7.6cm) of rain for the region – significantly less than the 10-15 inches (25-38cm) that ultimately fell.
CNN detailed how the first “life-threatening flash flooding warning” for parts of Kerr County – which would have triggered alerts to mobile phones in the area – was issued just past 1am on Friday morning by the NWS. This was 12 hours after the first flash flood warning and followed “several technical forecasts” issued on Thursday afternoon and evening with “increasingly heightened language”, it said.
Other publications focused on staffing shortages at local branches of the weather service. The New York Times and Guardian were among the outlets who reported that “key staff members” had been missing at the two Texas NWS offices involved in forecasting and warning for the affected region. This included a “warning coordination” officer.
Writing on social media platform BlueSky, Dr Daniel Swain – the climate scientist from the University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources – said claims that the weather service “did not foresee” the floods were “simply not true”. He stated:
“This truly was a sudden and massive event and occurred at [the] worst possible time (middle of the night). But [the] problem, once again, was not a bad weather prediction: it was one of “last mile” forecast/warning dissemination.
“I am not aware of the details surrounding staffing levels at the local NWS offices involved, nor how that might have played into [the] timing/sequence of warnings involved. But I do know that locations that flooded catastrophically had at least 1-2+ hours of direct warning from NWS.”
Rick Spinrad, who led NOAA over 2021-25, speculated that the communication problems could have been caused by staffing shortages. He told the Hill:
“I do think the cuts are contributing to the inability of emergency managers to respond…The weather service did a really good job, actually, in getting watches and warnings and…wireless emergency alerts out.
“It is really a little early to give a specific analysis of where things might have broken down, but from what I’ve seen, it seems like the communications breakdown in the last mile is where most of the problem was.”
The Trump administration, meanwhile, was quick to push back on the suggestion that budget and job cuts to climate and weather services had aggravated the situation.
In an official statement provided to Axios, a White House spokesperson said criticisms of the NWS and funding cut accusations were “shameful and disgusting”. It added:
“False claims about the NWS have been repeatedly debunked by meteorologists, experts and other public reporting. The NWS did their job, even issuing a flood watch more than 12 hours in advance.”
Meanwhile, when a reporter asked Trump whether the administration would investigate whether recent cuts had led to “key” vacancies at the NWS, he responded that “they did not”.
Asked if he thought federal meteorologists should be rehired, Trump said:
“I would think not. This was the thing that happened in seconds. Nobody expected it. Nobody saw it.”
Media outlets highlighted how the disaster put a spotlight on the risks of forthcoming federal cuts to NOAA and the government’s plans to dismantle the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
The Guardian reported on warnings that such floods could become the “new normal” as “Trump and his allies dismantle crucial federal agencies that help states prepare and respond to extreme weather and other hazards”.
Dr Samantha Montano, professor of emergency management at Massachusetts Maritime Academy, told the outlet.
“This is what happens when you let climate change run unabated and break apart the emergency management system – without investing in that system at the local and state level.”
CBS News reported about how, in 2017, Kerr County officials rejected proposals to install an outdoor warning system for floods on the grounds of cost. The outlet noted that neighbouring counties Guadalupe and Comal both have flood sirens in place.
What conspiracy theories have been circulating?
As with many other natural disasters, the floods have been followed by a wave of fast-spreading online misinformation.
One of the most popular theories to have taken hold is that the floods were caused by cloud seeding – a form of geoengineering where substances are purposefully introduced into the clouds to enhance rainfall.
In a pair of Twitter posts, each viewed by several million people, one account claimed the state of Texas was “running seven massive cloud seeding programs” and asked: “Did they push the clouds too far and trigger this flood?”
It also linked the floods and cloud seeding operations conducted by Rainmaker Technology Corporation, a weather modification start-up partly funded by US billionaire Peter Thiel.
Rainmaker Technology Corporation CEO Augustus Doricko found himself in the eye of the social media storm, as social media users pointed to his organisation’s links to Thiel and shared a photo of the businessman with former US president Bill Clinton.
The cloud seeding theory received a major boost when it was promoted by Mike Flynn, Donald Trump’s former national security advisor and one of the “most integral figures in the QAnon movement”, according to the Guardian.
The weather modification theory was picked up by existing and prospective Republican politicians.
The Daily Beast reported how Kandiss Taylor – a Republican congressional candidate in Georgia – blamed the event on “fake weather” in a string of tweets. She wrote: “This isn’t just ‘climate change.’ It’s cloud seeding, geoengineering, & manipulation.”
Meanwhile, sitting Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene announced on Twitter that she had introduced a bill that “prohibits the injection, release, or dispersion of chemicals or substances into the atmosphere for the express purpose of altering weather, temperature, climate, or sunlight intensity”.
(This is not Taylor Greene’s first foray into weather manipulation conspiracies. In 2021, she postulated that Jewish bankers had started deadly fires in California in 2018 by firing a laser from space in order to benefit themselves financially.)
Meteorologists were quick to debunk the claims around cloud seeding. In a Facebook post, chief meteorologist for Texas news station ABC13 wrote:
“Cloud seeding cannot create a storm of this magnitude or size. In fact, cloud seeding cannot even create a single cloud. All it can do is take an existing cloud and enhance the rainfall by up to 20%.”
At a press conference on Monday, Texas senator Ted Cruz said there was “zero evidence of anything like weather modification”. He added:
“The internet can be a strange place. People can come up with all sorts of crazy theories.”
Theories about geoengineering were not the only form of misinformation to swirl online in the wake of the disaster.
Snopes reported how local outlet Kerr County Lead pulled a story about two girls rescued 30 metres up a tree two days after the flood event after the account was found to be false.
The story, which cited “sources on the ground”, was circulated widely on Twitter and replicated by other news outlets, including the Daily Mirror and Manchester Evening News in the UK. Both outlets subsequently deleted the articles.
In a retraction statement, the editor of Kerr County Lead said the story was a “classic tale of misinformation that consumes all of us during a natural disaster”.
Another widely-circulated story – debunked by Snopes – claimed that musician Eric Clapton would pay funeral expenses for the families of those killed.
How has the media responded?
The scale of flooding and the resulting death toll have prompted many news outlets to ask whether more could have been done to avoid the tragedy.
Newspapers in Texas highlighted perceived failures by local, state and federal authorities.
“Flash floods happen frequently enough in the Hill Country that many Texans rightly wonder whether at least some of the devastation and death…could have been prevented,” the Dallas Morning News said. “Answers must follow,” agreed the Austin American-Statesman.
An editorial in the San Antonio Express-News said there would likely be “plenty of finger-pointing”, arguing that “people will try to push narratives that serve political and personal agendas”. It added:
“The truth may reveal inevitability, failure or something in between.”
An editorial in the Houston Chronicle criticised “misguided decisions” by Trump to cut support for the “federal agencies that keep us safe from storms”. It stated:
“What will protect Texans is a fully staffed, fully supported weather service – with the scientists and infrastructure in place to warn us in time.”
While none of these Texan newspaper editorials pointed to a potential role for climate change in exacerbating the extreme rainfall, some of their wider reporting on the disaster did.
Other US news outlets, such as the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post emphasised this link in their coverage.
“We hope this tragedy will lead to renewed support for the systems we’ve devised over the years to help prepare for and respond to natural disasters,” Louisiana’s New Orleans Advocate stated in an editorial, adding that “we all are vulnerable to increasingly extreme weather events caused by climate change”.
In Pennsylvania, a Patriot-News editorial said that, following the floods, “government officials at all levels need to accept the reality of climate change. Too many do not.”
Writing in his news outlet, Bloomberg, businessman and former Democratic presidential nominee Michael Bloomberg made a direct link between the “climate denialism” of the Trump administration and the disaster in Texas.
The New York Times has an opinion piece on the floods by MaryAnn Tierney, former regional administrator at the FEMA. Besides making a clear link to climate change, Tierney stated that:
“The uncomfortable truth is this: With each passing day, the federal government is becoming less prepared to face the next big disaster.”
More overtly right-leaning and Trump-supporting media outlets in the US took aim at “left-wing critics” for linking the event to climate change and Trump administration cuts.
An article in Fox News, which has broadcast discussions of flood-related conspiracy theories, criticised “liberals” for “politicising the disastrous flooding”.
An editorial in the New York Post is headlined: “Lefty responses to the Texas flooding horror are demented and depraved.” It argued that Democrats had “wrongly suggest[ed] that Team Trump slowed the disaster response”.
Diana Furchtgott-Roth, from the climate-sceptic Heritage Foundation, wrote in the UK’s Daily Telegraph that Democrats were trying to “politicise mother nature” by linking weather-service cuts to the deaths in Texas.
Meanwhile, Guardian columnist Rebecca Solnit urged caution in definitively linking the floods to any specific political issue amid “the information onslaughts of this moment”. She concluded that “both the weather and the news require vigilance.”
The post Media reaction: The 2025 Texas floods and the role of climate change appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Media reaction: The 2025 Texas floods and the role of climate change
CCL Partners with Central Michigan University Students to Create Climate Change PSAs
What Is Fire Weather? Is it Preventable?
DeBriefed 11 July 2025: Texas floods; Global warming ‘tripled’ Europe heat deaths; Ireland exits coal
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
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 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 Footprint1 year agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Why airlines are perfect targets for anti-greenwashing legal action
-
Climate Change Videos1 year ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Some firms unaware of England’s new single-use plastic ban