#climate-transparency

#climate-transparency

This use of 'gold standard science' is deceptive. It sounds really good on its face. It's advocating for things that are normative in the scientific community.

Columbia's Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP) describes itself as an independent organization producing research on energy policy. But that representation is misleading, alleges the complaint to the New York City consumer protection bureau.

"While some battles have been won, this year's Forest 500 data shows that the fight against deforestation is still being needlessly lost. The year 2025 was at the heart of high-profile corporate targets to end deforestation - but these have now been missed. As in previous years, too few companies are acting with enough urgency."

Citizen Science Month is built around a goal of 2.5 million 'Acts of Science,' tying the annual event to America's 250th birthday through a simple but powerful idea: lots of small contributions can add up to something really meaningful.

In Europe, we have maybe six weeks or so (of) jet fuel left. If we are not able to open the Strait of Hormuz ... I can tell you soon we will hear the news that some of the flights from city A to city B might be canceled as a result of lack of jet fuel.

One of the key reasons for India's withdrawal appears to be the steadily declining relevance of COP in driving meaningful global climate action. The complete erosion of trust among countries at the Belem summit in Brazil, where several nations reneged on previously agreed commitments, seems to have contributed significantly to this decision.

At a young age, I learned quickly how oil wealth and power could burn the land while people struggled. I saw heat rise off the streets, the Nile strained, and the air thickened with injustice. In my teenage years, through Aotearoa, being on the edge of the Pacific, I felt the ocean breathing heavy, swallowing the shores of islands that have done the least to cause this harm.

The overarching message of The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review was that failing to invest in mitigating climate change would exact an alarmingly high price, estimated between 5% and 20% of global GDP per year.

But to environmental advocates, the announcement sounded less like relief and more like a bill for working people, one that would result in higher fuel costs, increased pollution, and a slower path to clean energy. Critics warn that the decision represents a blow to the energy transition and a significant setback in the fight against climate change overall.

Covering Climate Now was formed in 2019 in response to the climate silence that then prevailed in much of the press, especially in the United States. Over the years that followed, hundreds of newsrooms joined our effort, and press coverage of the story began to reflect the scale of the crisis. Newsrooms beefed up their climate reporting teams; they confronted misinformation that sought to play down the problem; they thought creatively about how to find the climate connection on every beat.

Because the past three years have shattered temperature records, researchers have been exploring whether global warming is accelerating, and if so, why. Many scientists agree that the rate at which it is increasing has picked up. This is mainly because of a reduction in air pollution following the introduction of fuel regulations for international shipping (which has resulted in fewer pollutant particles that reflect sunlight into space and seed insulating clouds).

The UN-run market allows companies and countries to offset their excess emissions by financing projects that cut greenhouse gases in other nations. The new initiative involves a clean cooking project in Myanmar, which distributes efficient cookstoves that reduce pressure on local forests. Implemented in partnership with a South Korean company, the project will generate credits that will count towards the climate targets of South Korea and Myanmar.

On Thursday, the Environmental Protection Agency is expected to roll back the endangerment finding, which underpins the US's ability to regulate the greenhouse gases that cause climate change. The rollback, the result of more than 15 years of work from right-wing special interest groups, represents the most aggressive move against climate regulation in the US to date-and will introduce a lengthy fight that's almost certain to wind up in front of the Supreme Court.