Feed aggregator

2024-25 summer at 1.89C above long-term average ‘will be one of the coolest in the 21st century’, according to one expert

• Get our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcast

Last summer was Australia’s second-hottest on a record going back to 1910, at 1.89C above the long-term average, according to data from the Bureau of Meteorology.

The second-hottest summer – coming after the second-hottest winter and the hottest spring on record – included the second-hottest January and the third-hottest December.

Sign up for Guardian Australia’s breaking news email

Continue reading...

The resignations came a day after a wave of firings at the agency, a world center of climate research.

It’s almost the end of California’s wet season. California is in a Mediterranean climate zone, characterized by long, dry summers and short, wet winters. Snow is a crucial part of our year-round water supply, serving as a natural reservoir and providing up to a third of our water supply. Today, the California Department of Water Resources conducted a snow survey to determine how much snow we have stockpiled to date. Today’s survey shows we are at 85% of average levels, statewide. That could spell trouble given above average temperatures that the state is currently experiencing. In addition, significant regional differences reveal some of the ways climate change is shifting our water supplies.

StatewideNorthCentral SouthPercent of normal to date85%104%80%70%Snowpack as of 2/28/2025 SnowTrax – Home

While February saw a set of strong atmospheric rivers bring snow to Northern California, Southern California is still well below average for yearly precipitation. Indeed, drought conditions are present across Southern California and much of the American West. In addition, 2024 was the world’s warmest on record globally, and the first calendar year in which global temperatures exceeded 1.5°C above its pre-industrial levels. Recent wildfires in the Los Angeles (LA) region highlighted the sometimes-disastrous consequences of this combination of hot and dry conditions. Scientists have found that climate change made the conditions that drove the devastating fires some 35 percent more likely than they would have been had the fires occurred before humans began burning fossil fuels on a large scale.

Current drought conditions U.S. Drought Monitor Climate change is increasing the gap between water supply and water demand

Climate change is increasing the misalignment between when we get water from our snowpack and when we need it in our streams, fields, and cities. As climate change accelerates snowmelt and heats up spring temperatures, springtime runoff is projected to peak between 25 and 50 days earlier than it does now. That’s around a month added to California’s dry season when other stored water resources will need to meet demand. The Department of Water Resources noted that current above average temperatures mean snowpack is melting quickly.

Warming temperatures also amplify the risk of the water stored in snowpack coming down in massive, damaging, and hard-to-capture flood events rather than a more gradual steady stream. This can happen when lots of rain falls on top of snowpack, washing both the rainfall and the snowmelt into streams all at once—as in Oregon’s 1996 Willamette River flood, one of the worst natural disasters in that state’s history. The state of flooding emergency called for LA in 2017 and the devastating flooding in the US Midwest in 2019 was a similar situation.

Political stunts aren’t helping Levee breached in Pajaro River in 2023. California Department of Water Resources

What all this means is that there is more of a need to conserve our dwindling winter water supplies for the long, dry summer season. Despite this, President Trump unexpectedly ordered the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to release water from dams into the federal water supply system known as the Central Valley Project last month. This political stunt not only did not help anyone in Southern California fight fires but also wasted water that could have been stored for the summer. The sudden water release came without local and state coordination, threatening to undermine earthen levies that protect many farms and cities in the Central Valley. No one benefited— not farmers, not fish, not cities. 

The political theater didn’t stop there. A related Executive Order directed federal water projects to ignore legal protections like the endangered species act and water quality standards in order to pump more water South. Unfortunately, the reality is that exporting significantly more water out of the Delta actually threatens Southern California’s water supply. The Public Policy Institute of California explains: “If the Central Valley Project takes more water out of the Delta, the burden to meet water quality standards would fall on the State Water Project. This would likely lead to less water available for Southern California, not more.”

Currently, the federal Central Valley Project and the State Water Project share the burden of meeting state and federal water quality standards in the Bay Delta. These standards protect drinking water quality, requiring enough water to flow out through the Bay Delta and into San Francisco Bay to hold back seawater that would otherwise intrude and make the water too salty for human consumption.

Real solutions to climate-proof water supplies are available

Indeed, LA’s largest wholesale water provider, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, has shifted from an historic focus on increasing water imports to maximizing local water supplies, like water recycling, given climate impacts. That’s why the Metropolitan Water District, along with many other water agencies, supported the recent climate bond to invest in a range of smart water solutions.

These include climate-proof strategies, such as:

• increasing groundwater recharge and storage,
• modernizing water rights,
• strategically repurposing land to maximize water savings and community well-being,
• and conserving and reusing whenever possible.

Californians resoundingly support these solutions, as shown by the passage of the climate bond in November 2024. While we expect the federal political stunts to continue, states can chart their own path to real solutions. In red and blue states alike, people expect government to continue to provide essential services like safe and affordable drinking water. Now, more than ever, states must step up.

A spending freeze could disrupt systems that warn communities when eruptions appear imminent.

Last year, the state passed a law to tackle a major barrier to cleaner energy: the long bureaucratic delays to get basic permits.

The nuclear plan handily leapfrogs the next 10 years – when a Dutton government might actually hold office – a critical time for emissions reduction

• Get our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcast

I don’t often agree with Matt Canavan on matters to do with global heating. But when the senator labelled the Coalition’s nuclear plan a “political fix” last year, I think he was speaking the truth.

For 15 gruelling years the Coalition has been trying to distract a voting public, ever more aware of the climate crisis, from its inability to get a credible climate and energy policy past the climate sceptics and do-nothing-much-to-reduce-emissions exponents in its own ranks (including the Queensland senator).

Sign up for Guardian Australia’s breaking news email

Continue reading...

Tucked away near the White House is a tribute to the environmental agency and its history — for the time being, anyway.

Floods, whale strandings and coral bleaching all more likely, say researchers, as 10% of ocean hits record high temperatures in 2023-24

The world’s oceans experienced three-and-a-half times as many marine heatwave days last year and in 2023 compared with any other year on record, a study has found.

The sustained spike in ocean temperatures cost lives and caused billions of dollars in storm damage, increased whale and dolphin stranding risks, harmed commercial fishing and sparked a global coral bleaching, according to the paper published on Friday in Nature Climate Change.

Continue reading...

Favourites such as cod, haddock and salmon could be replaced as UK waters warm up, scientists warn

UK waters, particularly the southern North Sea, are warming fast, making the North Atlantic one of the world’s marine “hot spots”. Scientists have been asked by the UK government to forecast what this means for British food supply and predict potentially dangerous tipping points that lie ahead.

While the UK already has milder winters because of warmer seas and heavier rain because of extra moisture in the atmosphere, this investigation is about what is happening under the waves. Already fishers are travelling ever further north to catch British favourites such as cod and haddock, and some salmon stocks face extinction.

Continue reading...

The cuts came just before a separate wave of departures was expected under the Trump administration’s so-called deferred resignation program.

Employees informed by email that their jobs would be cut off at end of day in move a worker called ‘wrong all around’

• Don’t let a billionaire’s algorithm control what you read. Download our free app to get trusted reporting.

The Trump administration has fired hundreds of workers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa), the US’s pre-eminent climate research agency housed within the Department of Commerce, the Guardian has learned.

On Thursday afternoon, the commerce department sent emails to employees saying their jobs would be cut off at the end of the day. Other government agencies have also seen huge staffing cuts in recent days.

Continue reading...

Along with about 1,000 rank-and-file workers, FEMA is losing some of the managers most experienced in handling emergency efforts.

Indigenous activists behind protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline say a lawsuit against Greenpeace is trying to rewrite their role and history.

As the president pressures countries to buy more American energy, Asian officials and investors are reconsidering a hugely expensive plan stalled for decades.

By my count, representatives from roughly 190 countries are currently gathered in Hangzhou, China, to advance the current cycle of scientific assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). However, one country is notably absent: the United States. Just as I boarded my flight to China to attend the IPCC meeting as an observer, news broke that the Trump administration’s “work stop” order would prevent any US federal scientists from participating in this crucial IPCC meeting.  

This raises urgent questions: How does this decision impact international climate collaboration, and what can we expect moving forward? The US has historically played a critical role in the IPCC in three main ways: providing scientific expertise, participating in negotiations, and helping to fund the process. The current de facto withdrawal affects all three. 

Absence of Federal Scientific Expertise 

One of the most immediate and significant consequences of the US withdrawal is the absence of US federal scientists at the IPCC plenary. US scientists from federal agencies such as NASA and NOAA have long played an important role. In this cycle, they have a prominent role in Working Group III (WG3), which focuses on climate change mitigation—assessing methods for reducing heat-trapping emissions and removing them from the atmosphere. 

The impact of this absence is particularly severe because NASA’s chief scientist, Kate Calvin, is currently the co-chair of WG3. Without her leadership, the group loses an essential voice in shaping climate mitigation strategies. 

Additionally, each working group relies on a Technical Support Unit (TSU) to provide scientific, technical, and organizational assistance. The WG3 TSU is staffed almost entirely by US personnel (9 of 10 people), and its contributions are substantial: just last cycle, the WG3 report spanned over 2,000 pages. Compounding the challenge, the NOAA Assessment Technical Support Unit, which provides editorial, data visualization, IT, and production services, is also sidelined by the work stoppage and anticipated attempts to dismantle NOAA.  

While this stoppage is technically temporary, if federal experts continue to be barred from participating, it would represent a major loss to the IPCC’s ability to produce rigorous and comprehensive reports. 

No US Negotiators at the Table 

IPCC plenary meetings are where representatives from participating countries review, discuss, and make key decisions to advance the IPCC’s work. During the meeting this week, countries are debating outlines for all the major IPCC reports. This is an important moment that sets the stage for work over the next few years. While country negotiators do not author the reports themselves, the IPCC’s influence stems in part from its consensus-based approach—ensuring that governments accept and commit the science and its conclusions. The absence of US negotiators means that the US has effectively removed itself from this process. 

Why does this matter? Without US participation, other countries will shape the discussions without US input, reducing the nation’s influence in shaping global climate assessments. This might be an overall benefit to the IPCC based on Trump’s public anti-science rhetoric on climate change, but historically the US has been a value-add to the process.  

Loss of US Funding for the IPCC 

Countries make voluntary contributions to support the IPCC’s work. The Biden administration had pledged approximately $1.5 million for this year’s IPCC budget, but those funds have not been delivered. Given Trump’s past actions—he pulled US funding from the IPCC during his previous term—there is little expectation that his administration will reinstate financial support. 

The loss of US funding, while not crippling, creates additional financial strain for the IPCC. Other nations or philanthropists (Bloomberg stepped in to cover UNFCCC funding) may step in to fill the gap, but the de facto withdrawal reinforces the message that the US is abdicating from its commitments to international climate cooperation. 

What This Means for the Future of the IPCC 

Climate change is a global challenge that requires global solutions. The IPCC was founded to foster international collaboration on climate science—science that is not policy-prescriptive, but rather provides world leaders with information crucial to crafting policy decisions. While this week’s IPCC plenary is proceeding, the absence of the United States signals a retreat from international climate leadership at a time when the worsening climate crisis demands stronger global cooperation.  

In the face of these restrictions, it’s important to remember that the IPCC’s structure allows for continued participation from non-federal scientists in the US—scientists like me. The IPCC’s strength lies in its ability to convene voluntary experts from universities, NGOs, research institutions, and government agencies worldwide. The last cycle included thousands of authors, most of whom are independent researchers unaffected by the federal work stoppage.  

However, the withdrawal of US federal support weakens the IPCC’s collective ability to provide the science the world needs to help tackle the climate crisis. In a moment when urgent, coordinated action is needed, this step back from collaboration could have long-term consequences. The path forward may not be easy, but the IPCC will continue its work and adapt to these challenges. As an observer organization, the Union of Concerned Scientists will continue to actively engage in this important scientific process. The real question now is how long the US will remain on the sidelines, and at what cost to the global effort and US communities? 

In Sierra Nevada del Cocuy, people have watched the ice fields turn to exposed rock and experts predict these vital water sources could be lost in 30 years

• Words and photographs by Euan Wallace in the Sierra Nevada del Cocuy, Colombia

At an altitude of 4,200 metres in the Sierra Nevada del Cocuy, Colombia, Edilsa Ibañéz Ibañéz lowers a cupped hand into the water of a glacial stream. A local guide and mountaineer, she has grown up drinking water that runs down from the snowy peaks above. As she stands up, however, the landscape that greets her is markedly different from that of her childhood.

“We used to think the ice would be eternal,” says Ibañéz, 45. “Now it is not so eternal. Our glaciers are dying.”

Continue reading...

Synechococcus elongatusis soaks up carbon dioxide for its photosynthesis and stores more than other strains

Chonkus may sound like a champion Sumo wrestler but it is the nickname for a superpower strain of microbe that absorbs lots of CO2 relative to its size and stores it in its large cells.

Chonkus’s real name is Synechococcus elongatus, and it is a large and heavy strain of blue-green alga that soaks up CO2 for its photosynthesis, grows fast in dense colonies and stores more carbon than other strains of this microbe.

Continue reading...

Energy Transfer, which owns the Dakota Access Pipeline, is seeking $300 million, a sum that Greenpeace says could bankrupt the storied environmental group.

Attempts to discredit the Climate Change Authority risk undermining public trust in both politicians and our government

Taking a wrecking ball to science and public institutions might sound distinctly Trumpian, but as the Climate Change Authority announced their latest findings into the impact of delaying our energy transition to accommodate nuclear earlier this week, we all found ourselves with a front-row seat to see how this may play right here at home.

“Political appointments” to peak statutory bodies, or plum diplomatic postings, are frequently a topic of discussion within both the media and general population. But what happens when this conversation is flipped on its head and a senior bureaucrat is threatened with being terminated because they are seemingly actually allowing the independent institution they oversee to do its job?

Continue reading...

The president said Lee Zeldin, the E.P.A. administrator, was planning mass layoffs. Several hours later, White House officials said the president was referring to budget cuts.