Arguments
This article by Eric Nost, Associate Professor of Geography, University of Guelph and Alejandro Paz, Energy and Environment Librarian, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Information on the internet might seem like it’s there forever, but it’s only as permanent as people choose to make it.
That’s apparent as the second Trump administration “floods the zone” with efforts to dismantle science agencies and the data and websites they use to communicate with the public. The targets range from public health and demographics to climate science.
We are a research librarian and policy scholar who belong to a network called the Public Environmental Data Partners, a coalition of nonprofits, archivists and researchers who rely on federal data in our analysis, advocacy and litigation and are working to ensure that data remains available to the public.
In just the first three weeks of Trump’s term, we saw agencies remove access to at least a dozen climate and environmental justice analysis tools. The new administration also scrubbed the phrase “climate change” from government websites, as well as terms like “resilience.”
Here’s why and how Public Environmental Data Partners and others are making sure that the climate science the public depends on is available forever.
Why government websites and data matter
The internet and the availability of data are necessary for innovation, research and daily life.
Climate scientists analyze NASA satellite observations and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration weather records to understand changes underway in the Earth system, what’s causing them and how to protect the climates that economies were built on. Other researchers use these sources alongside Census Bureau data to understand who is most affected by climate change. And every day, people around the world log onto the Environmental Protection Agency’s website to learn how to protect themselves from hazards — and to find out what the government is or isn’t doing to help.
If the data and tools used to understand complex data are abruptly taken off the internet, the work of scientists, civil society organizations and government officials themselves can grind to a halt. The generation of scientific data and analysis by government scientists is also crucial. Many state governments run environmental protection and public health programs that depend on science and data collected by federal agencies.
Removing information from government websites also makes it harder for the public to effectively participate in key processes of democracy, including changes to regulations. When an agency proposes to repeal a rule, for example, it is required to solicit comments from the public, who often depend on government websites to find information relevant to the rule.
And when web resources are altered or taken offline, it breeds mistrust in both government and science. Government agencies have collected climate data, conducted complex analyses, provided funding and hosted data in a publicly accessible manner for years. People around the word understand climate change in large part because of U.S. federal data. Removing it deprives everyone of important information about their world.
Sabin 33 #20 - Is offshore wind development harmful to whales and other marine life?
Posted on 18 February 2025 by Ken Rice
On November 1, 2024 we announced the publication of 33 rebuttals based on the report "Rebutting 33 False Claims About Solar, Wind, and Electric Vehicles" written by Matthew Eisenson, Jacob Elkin, Andy Fitch, Matthew Ard, Kaya Sittinger & Samuel Lavine and published by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School in 2024. Below is the blog post version of rebuttal #20 based on Sabin's report.
When properly sited, offshore wind farms need not pose a serious risk of harm to whales or other marine life. During installation, the impact from construction noise can be mitigated by implementing seasonal restrictions on certain activities that coincide with whale migration. Once operational, wind turbines generate far less low-frequency sound than ships do, and there is no evidence that noise from turbines causes negative impacts to marine species populations (Tougaard et al. 2020).
There has been considerable attention to how offshore wind development, including noise from pile-driving during construction, affects the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale, which has a total population of roughly 360.1 But the main causes of mortality for right whales are vessel strikes (75% of anthropogenic deaths) and entanglements in fishing gear—not anything related to offshore wind development.2 Critically, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has also found no link between offshore wind surveys or development on whale deaths.3
Moreover, any impacts to the North Atlantic right whale can be avoided or greatly minimized through proper planning. For example, in 2019, the developer of the 800-MW Vineyard Wind project entered into an agreement with three environmental organizations, which established seasonal restrictions on pile-driving during construction (to avoid excessive noise when right whales are present), as well as strict limits on vessel speeds during the operational phase (to avoid vessel strikes), among other measures.4 In the final environmental impact statement for the project, the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) found that, “[g]iven the implementation of Project-specific measures, BOEM anticipates that vessel strikes as a result of [the project] alone are highly unlikely and that impacts on marine mammal individuals . . . would be expected to be minor; as such, no population-level impacts would be expected.”2 BOEM also found that project installation would be unlikely to cause noise-related impacts to right whales, due to the time of year during which construction activities would take place.2
Offshore wind development can have benefits for other marine species. For example, the base of an offshore wind turbine may function as an artificial reef, creating new habitats for native fish species (Degraer et al. 2020 and here).
By contrast, offshore oil and gas drilling routinely harms marine life, while posing a persistent risk of catastrophic outcomes. Sonar used for offshore oil and gas exploration emits much stronger pulses of sound than sonar used for wind farm surveying. The 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill killed millions of marine animals, including as many as 800,000 birds.5 More broadly, carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel use are making the ocean increasingly acidic, which inhibits shellfish and corals from developing and maintaining calcium carbonate shells and exoskeletons.6 Finally, climate change is expected to have “long-term, high-consequence impacts” on whales and other marine mammals, including “increased energetic costs associated with altered migration routes, reduction of suitable breeding and/or foraging habitat, and reduced individual fitness, particularly juveniles.”2
No, renewables don't need expensive backup power on today's grids
Posted on 17 February 2025 by Guest Author
This is a re-post from The Climate Brink by Andrew Dessler
“But what about when the sun doesn't shine?!”
Ah yes, the energy debate’s equivalent of “The Earth is flat!” Every time someone mentions solar or wind power, some self-proclaimed energy expert emerges from the woodwork to drop this supposedly devastating truth bomb: “Sure, renewables are cheap... until you need backup power for those cloudy, windless days. Factor in those costs, and suddenly fossil fuels are looking pretty sexy again!”
takes deep breath
Let me explain why this ironclad logic is as scientifically sound as claiming the Earth isn’t warming because it got cold last winter. Not only is the argument wrong — it's so fundamentally wrong that it reveals a complete misunderstanding of how modern power grids work.
Load vs. net load
Let’s start by imagining a grid that runs entirely on fossil fuels. As an example, here is the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) power load on Aug. 24, 2024:
On a fully fossil-fuel grid, fossil-fuel generators would continuously adjust their output to match total load, which rises in the morning as people wake up, increases through the day with air conditioning use, peaks in the early evening, and declines overnight.
2025 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #07
Posted on 16 February 2025 by BaerbelW, Doug Bostrom, John Hartz
This week's roundup is again published soleley by category. We are still interested in feedback to hone the categorization, so if you spot any clear misses and/or have suggestions for additional categories, please let us know in the comments. Thanks!
Stories we promoted this week, by category:
Climate Change Impacts
- Climate change is worsening diabetes worldwide Heat waves exacerbate the danger of the disease. by Sanket Jain, Health, Inside Climate News, Feb 4, 2025
- New German Government Report Highlights Growing Climate Security Risks Climate-driven extreme weather disasters and resource conflicts can intensify social and political rifts both domestically and internationally, threatening global stability. by Bob Berwyn, Inside Climate News, Feb 12, 2025
- Women in Science: Climate and Wildfire Researcher Caroline Juang by Adrienne Day, State of the Planet, Feb 14, 2025
- Extreme weather is our new reality. We must accept it and begin planning | Gaia Vince As wildfires, floods, droughts and record-breaking temperatures have shown, the post-climate change era has arrived. Now we need honesty and action from our leaders by Gaia Vince, The Guardian, Feb 15, 2025
Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation
- Dollars in the dust: Is outback scrub really saving the planet? The nation (Australia) has made a multi-billion dollar bet that carbon locked in desert scrub will offset emissions elsewhere, but doubters are growing from scientists in the city to the farmers on the land. by by Michael Bachelard, Charlotte Grieve & the Visual Stories Team, Sydney Morning Herald, Feb87, 2025
- More Solar and Battery Storage Were Added to Texas’ Grid Than Any Other Power Source Last Year Texas has become one of the nation’s frontrunners in developing renewable energy. In recent years, the state’s reign came from wind power coupled with utility-scale solar. by Arcelia Martin, Clean Energy, Inside Climate News, Feb 10, 2025
Climate education and communication
- Solutions journalism can spur climate action, UO study finds By showing readers both the threats and ways to mitigate them, people are more willing to act by Leila Okahata, Oregon News, University of Oregon, Feb 10, 2025
Fact brief - Is sea level rise exaggerated?
Posted on 15 February 2025 by Sue Bin Park
Skeptical Science is partnering with Gigafact to produce fact briefs — bite-sized fact checks of trending claims. You can submit claims you think need checking via the tipline.
Is sea level rise exaggerated?
Sea levels are rising at an accelerating rate, not stagnating or decreasing.
Warming global temperatures cause land ice to melt and oceans to thermally expand, elevating sea levels. Since 1880, they’ve risen an estimated 8-9 inches (over 20 cm) based on historical data from coastal tide gauge stations.
In the 1990s, scientists began using satellites to measure sea levels. Since 1993, the global average sea level has risen 4 inches (10 cm).
These satellites send pulses to the ocean and measure the time it takes for the signal to return. Researchers account for factors like land height, resulting in highly accurate measurements with error margins of 1 millimeter. Short-term dips don’t contradict the overall rise, which is exceeding prior predictions.
Sea level rise has already submerged islands and atolls in places like The Solomon Islands and The Marshall Islands, while coasts worldwide have experienced flooding, infrastructure damage, and land loss.
Go to full rebuttal on Skeptical Science or to the fact brief on Gigafact
This fact brief is responsive to quotes such as the one highlighted here.
Sources
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Is sea-level rise exaggerated?
NASA Sea Level
IPCC AR6: Changes in global mean sea level
NOAA Is sea level rising?
Skeptical Science New Research for Week #7 2025
Posted on 13 February 2025 by Doug Bostrom, Marc Kodack
Open access notables
A year above 1.5 °C signals that Earth is most probably within the 20-year period that will reach the Paris Agreement limit, Bevacqua et al., Nature Climate Change:
The temperature goals of the Paris Agreement are measured as 20-year averages exceeding a pre-industrial baseline. The calendar year of 2024 was announced as the first above 1.5 °C relative to pre-industrial levels, but the implications for the corresponding temperature goal are unclear. Here we show that, without very stringent climate mitigation, the first year above 1.5 °C occurs within the first 20-year period with an average warming of 1.5 °C.
Twelve months at 1.5 °C signals earlier than expected breach of Paris Agreement threshold, Cannon, Nature Climate Change:
June 2024 was the twelfth month in a row with global mean surface temperatures at least 1.5 °C above pre-industrial conditions, but it is not clear if this implies a failure to meet the Paris Agreement goal of limiting long-term warming below this threshold. Here we show that in climate model simulations, the long-term Paris Agreement target is usually crossed well before such a string of unusually warm temperatures occurs.
Continued permafrost ecosystem carbon loss under net-zero and negative emissions, Park et al., Science Advances:
The loss of ecosystem carbon (the sum of vegetation, litter, and soil carbon) may occur in a permafrost region under mitigation pathways, which could reduce the efficiency of carbon dioxide removal. Here, we investigate changes in permafrost under net-zero and negative emissions, based on idealized emission-driven simulations using a state-of-the-art Earth system model. While acting as a net ecosystem carbon sink during most of the positive emission phase, permafrost becomes a net ecosystem carbon source just before reaching net-zero and negative emissions. Permafrost slowly recovers, especially in regions with high organic carbon content, and net ecosystem carbon loss persists until the end of simulations, resulting in a cumulative net ecosystem carbon loss of approximately 14 petagrams of carbon (PgC) in both scenarios. In addition, methane emissions increase under net-zero and negative emissions, due to the irreversibility of the inundated areas. We conclude that the permafrost ecosystem carbon loss may continue under net-zero and negative emissions, which could hinder climate change mitigation efforts.
Airspace restrictions due to conflicts increased global aviation’s carbon dioxide emissions in 2023, Dannet et al., Communications Earth & Environment:
As air traffic rebounds from its large drop during the Covid-19 crisis, civil aviation needs to continue addressing its climate impact. Knowledge of aircraft trajectories is essential for an accurate assessment of the CO2 (and non-CO2) climate impact of aviation. Here we combine an aircraft trajectory optimization algorithm and a global database of aircraft movements to quantify the impact of airspace restrictions due to conflict zones on CO2 emissions. Among current restrictions, we show that the Russian ban of its airspace to Western airlines following the invasion of Ukraine has the largest impact. Our analysis reveals an initial reduction of flights to and from East Asia that would have crossed the Russian territory. Routes then gradually reopened by making a detour, which led to an average increase in fuel consumption of 13% on the affected routes, with a greater impact for flights to and from Europe (14.8%) compared to flights to and from North America (9.8%). Although these flights represent only a small fraction of the daily flights, the large detours have increased global aviation CO2 emissions by 1% in 2023, equivalent to a quarter of the yet-to-be-achieved efficiency gain potential from improved air traffic management.
Interactions Between Climate Mean and Variability Drive Future Agroecosystem Vulnerability, Sinha et al., Global Change Biology:
Agriculture is crucial for global food supply and dominates the Earth's land surface. It is unknown, however, how slow but relentless changes in climate mean state, versus random extreme conditions arising from changing variability, will affect agroecosystems' carbon fluxes, energy fluxes, and crop production. We used an advanced weather generator to partition changes in mean climate state versus variability for both temperature and precipitation, producing forcing data to drive factorial-design simulations of US Midwest agricultural regions in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model. We found that an increase in temperature mean lowers stored carbon, plant productivity, and crop yield, and tends to convert agroecosystems from a carbon sink to a source, as expected; it also can cause local to regional cooling in the earth system model through its effects on the Bowen Ratio. The combined effect of mean and variability changes on carbon fluxes and pools was nonlinear, that is, greater than each individual case. For instance, gross primary production reduces by 9%, 1%, and 13% due to change in mean temperature, change in temperature variability, and change in both temperature mean and variability, respectively. Overall, the scenario with change in both temperature and precipitation means leads to the largest reduction in carbon fluxes (−16% gross primary production), carbon pools (−35% vegetation carbon), and crop yields (−33% and −22% median reduction in yield for corn and soybean, respectively).
How will we prepare for an uncertain future? The value of open data and code for unborn generations facing climate change, Gomes, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
As the impacts of climate change continue to intensify, humans face new challenges to long-term survival. Humans will likely be battling these problems long after 2100, when many climate projections currently end. A more forward-thinking view on our science and its direction may help better prepare for the future of our species. Researchers may consider datasets the basic units of knowledge, whose preservation is arguably more important than the articles that are written about them. Storing data and code in long-term repositories offers insurance against our uncertain future. To ensure open data are useful, data must be FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable) and be complete with all appropriate metadata. By embracing open science practices, contemporary scientists give the future of humanity the information to make better decisions, save time and other valuable resources, and increase global equity as access to information is made free. This, in turn, could enable and inspire a diversity of solutions, to the benefit of many. Imagine the collective science conducted, the models built, and the questions answered if all of the data researchers have collectively gathered were organized and immediately accessible and usable by everyone. Investing in open science today may ensure a brighter future for unborn generations.
From this week's government/NGO section:
Carbon Capture, Usage, and Storage, Committee of Public Accounts, House of Commons, United Kingdom
The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (the Department) considers carbon capture, use, and storage (CCUS) as essential for the UK to meet its net-zero targets. In introducing its current CCUS program, it has learned lessons from two previous failed attempts. Progress in introducing the new program has been slow. The Department will need to find alternative ways of reducing emissions if there are further delays in agreeing support for more projects, or if the technology’s performance is not as good as it expects. If the projects are successful, the Department has not considered how it could maximize the financial benefits for taxpayers and consumers. The Department will need to revisit its value–for–money case for supporting CCUS regularly, taking account of changes in the scientific understanding of carbon capture and storage and the impact this may have on the assumptions underpinning its program.
Climate Obstruction. The State and Spread of Climate Disinformation in Canada, Solomun et al., The Centre for Media, Technology, and Democracy
While climate denial historically defined opposition to climate action, the discourse is increasingly shifting into new territory online: climate delayism. These delay tactics leverage discourses that accept the existence of climate change, but downplay its urgency and sow doubt in potential solutions. What’s more, the rapid spread of mis- and disinformation online—and platforms’ inability and recent overt unwillingness to regulate it has supercharged these climate delay narratives. But climate disinformation is not just a social media problem. It operates through a complex and historically situated network of powerful actors with vested interests and is woven into the fabric of Canadian nationhood and identity itself. We need to understand how climate delay and disinformation narratives circulate and find resonance in our broader information ecosystem. To that end, the authors analyze Canadians’ response to prominent climate delay narratives and presents key findings and policy implications for the burgeoning problem of climate disinformation in Canada.
127 articles in 55 journals by 843 contributing authors
Physical science of climate change, effects
Can the Marked Arctic Ocean Freshwater Content Increases of the Last Two Decades Be Explained Within Observational Uncertainty?, Le Bras & Timmermans, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 10.1029/2024jc021061
Deciphering the role of evapotranspiration in declining relative humidity trends over land, Kim & Johnson Johnson, Communications Earth & Environment Open Access 10.1038/s43247-025-02076-9
Long-term variations in pH in coastal waters along the Korean Peninsula, Lee et al., Biogeosciences Open Access 10.5194/bg-22-675-2025
How big insurance’s investment in fossil fuels came back to bite it
Posted on 12 February 2025 by Guest Author
This story was originally published by Capital & Main and is part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration strengthening coverage of the climate story.
Within just a week, the sheer devastation of the Los Angeles wildfires has pushed to the fore fundamental questions about the impact of the climate crisis that have been largely avoided by lawmakers, influencers and the public.
Among them: What is the future of insurance when people’s homes are increasingly located in areas of climate risk — whether wildfires, hurricanes, flooding or the rising sea levels?
Those questions have bedeviled policy makers in California — where insurance giants like State Farm, Farmers, and Allstate announced last year that they were no longer writing new policies in the state due to the surge in wildfires (in 2024 alone, firefighters across the state battled 8,024 wildfires that burned more than 1 million acres and destroyed 2,148 houses and other structures).
Insurers have long been aware of the risk of climate change — rising premiums, increasing losses. In 1973, the German insurance firm Munich Re published a brochure on flooding that it claims was the first use of the term “climate change” in the industry, warning of the growing risk of rising temperatures and increased carbon dioxide in the air. Some 40 years later, the CEO of French insurance giant AXA said it would be impossible to insure a world that is 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 Fahrenheit) warmer.
Nonetheless, insurance companies have become some of the biggest financiers of fossil fuels, which are the primary cause of climate change — the extraction and burning of oil, gas, and coal are responsible for over 75% of greenhouse gas emissions and nearly 90% of carbon dioxide emissions.
Fossil fuel companies made up 4.4% of the investment portfolio of the insurance industry in 2023, up from 3.8% nine years earlier. Two insurance giants, Berkshire Hathaway and State Farm, increased their fossil fuel positions by around $200 billion in that period. Overall, however, more than half of the country’s 238 property and casualty insurers recently surveyed by the Wall Street Journal have reduced their investments in oil, gas, and coal over the past decade. But while insurers around the world have restricted their coverage of fossil fuel projects, U.S. companies continue to write policies for conventional oil and gas projects.
Spokespersons for State Farm and Berkshire Hathaway did not respond to requests for comment.
Sabin 33 #15 - Does EM radiation from wind turbines pose a threat to human health?
Posted on 11 February 2025 by BaerbelW
On November 1, 2024 we announced the publication of 33 rebuttals based on the report "Rebutting 33 False Claims About Solar, Wind, and Electric Vehicles" written by Matthew Eisenson, Jacob Elkin, Andy Fitch, Matthew Ard, Kaya Sittinger & Samuel Lavine and published by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School in 2024. Below is the blog post version of rebuttal #15 based on Sabin's report.
Multiple studies have found that the electromagnetic fields (EMFs) generated by wind turbines are lower than those generated by most common household appliances and that they easily meet rigorous international safety standards (McCallum et al. 2014, Alexias et al. 2020, Karanakis et al. 2021). For context, the average home that is not located near power lines has a background level EMF of roughly 0.2 µT1. However, this value varies greatly depending on proximity to certain household appliances1. For example, from a distance of 4 feet, an electric can opener’s EMF is 0.2 µT, but this value increases to 60 µT from a distance of 6 inches2. A 2020 academic study found that the EMF generated by turbines are approximately 0.44 µT at a distance of 1 meter but less than 0.1 µT at a distance of 4 meters, as shown below (Alexias et al. 2020).
Figure 10: The EMF level, measured in microtesla (µT), is shown to drop dramatically with increase in distance from source. Source: Alexias et al. (2020)
These EMF levels are not dependent on wind speeds.
Climate Adam: Is it Game Over for the 1.5 Degree Climate Limit?
Posted on 10 February 2025 by Guest Author
This video includes personal musings and conclusions of the creator climate scientist Dr. Adam Levy. It is presented to our readers as an informed perspective. Please see video description for references (if any).
Wherever you look, you'll hear headlines claiming we've passed 1.5 degrees of global warming. And while 2024 saw record breaking climate change, this might not actually be true. So what does the 1.5 degree limit actual mean for the climate? Have we already passed this global warming threshold? And what do we do now, to combat climate change?
Support ClimateAdam on patreon: https://patreon.com/climateadam
2025 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #06
Posted on 9 February 2025 by BaerbelW, Doug Bostrom, John Hartz
This week's roundup is again published soleley by category. We are still interested in feedback to hone the categorization, so if you spot any clear misses and/or have suggestions for additional categories, please let us know in the comments. Thanks!
Stories we promoted this week, by category:
Climate Change Impacts
- Marshall Islands` vanishing kit for a team under threat from climate crisis The isolated Pacific nation is trying to build its first football team amid a battle for survival against rising sea levels by Niall McVeigh, The Guardian, Feb 02, 2025
- January sets an unexpected temperature record Despite long-faded El Niño conditions, 2025 saw the warmest January on record by Zeke Hausfather, The Climate Brink, Feb 02, 2025
- Climate change puts African cocoa production under pressure by Wageningen University, Phys.org, Feb 03, 2025
- Half a degree rise in global warming will triple area of Earth too hot for humans, scientists warn by King's College London, Phys.org, Feb 04, 2025
- Guest post: How climate change is causing `ecological grief` for farmers in Ghana Mental health problems induced, in part, by climate change are becoming increasingly common as the world warms, including the number of people experiencing “ecological grief”. by Carbon Brief Staff, Carbon Brief, Feb 04, 2025
- Deaths of 30,000 fish off WA coast made more likely by climate change, research finds Analysis drawing on satellite data and 13 climate models concludes that global heating makes marine heatwaves 20 times more likely by Petra Stock, The Guardian, Feb 04, 2025
- Mapped: How `natural` world heritage sites are threatened by climate extremes “Natural” world heritage sites, such as the Galápagos Islands, Serengeti national park and Great Barrier Reef, could be exposed to multiple climate extremes by the end of the century, researchers warn. by Ayesha Tandon, Carbon Brief, Feb 05, 2025
- Third of Earth's Landmass Could Soon Be Too Hot For Over 60s by Kelly McNamara, Environment, AFP/Science Alert. Feb 5, 2025, Feb 5, 2025
- New Research Led by James Hansen Documents Global Warming Acceleration The rapid meltdown of polar ice could shut down a key ocean current by 2050, triggering catastrophic surges of sea level rise along the U.S. East Coast and dangerous climate shifts in northwestern Europe. by Bob Berwyn, Science, Inside Climate News, Feb 4, 2025
Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation
- What's the deal with enhanced rock weathering to store CO2? A conversation with scientist Zeke Hausfather. by David Roberts, Volt, Feb 7, 2025
Fact brief - Is methane the largest driver of recent global warming?
Posted on 8 February 2025 by Guest Author
Skeptical Science is partnering with Gigafact to produce fact briefs — bite-sized fact checks of trending claims. This fact brief was written by Sue Bin Park from the Gigafact team in collaboration with members from our team. You can submit claims you think need checking via the tipline.
Is methane the largest driver of recent global warming?
Methane only accounts for 20-30% of recent warming, while human-made CO2 remains the dominant driver of recent climate change.
Methane is a potent greenhouse gas significantly more effective at trapping heat than CO2; however, there is approximately 220 times more CO2 than methane in our atmosphere. Methane is also significantly shorter-lived, with an atmospheric lifetime of around a decade in comparison to CO2 lasting for centuries.
Human activity contributes over two-thirds of methane emissions, mainly via agriculture and livestock, fossil fuel extraction, and landfills. Methane levels have risen 2.7 times above pre-industrial levels.
Large amounts of methane are also trapped in permafrost. As permafrost thaws in rising temperatures, the released methane’s greenhouse effect creates a feedback loop that melts more permafrost and further accelerates warming.
While methane plays a role in global warming, CO2 remains the primary driver of current climate change.
Go to full rebuttal on Skeptical Science or to the fact brief on Gigafact
This fact brief is responsive to quotes such as the one highlighted here.
Sources
International Energy Agency Methane and Climate Change
NASA Methane
Copernicus Greenhouse gas concentrations
The Salata Institute at Harvard University Thawing permafrost: what does it mean? And what can be done?
Skeptical Science New Research for Week #6 2025
Posted on 6 February 2025 by Doug Bostrom, Marc Kodack
Open access notables
Doing better rather than promising more: A basic principle applicable to both climate modelling and climate policies, Douville, PLOS Climate:
A growing number of scientists are expressing concerns about the inadequacy of climate change policies. Fewer are questionning the dominant climate modelling paradigm and the IPCC’s success to prevent humanity from venturing unprepared into hitherto unknown territories. However, in view of an urgent need to provide readily available data on constraining uncertainty in local and regional climate change impacts in the next few years, there is a debate on the most suitable path to inform both mitigation and adaptation strategies. Examples are given how both common statistical methods and emerging technologies can be readily used to exploit the wealth of existing knowledge to drive adaptation policy. Parsimonious and equitable approaches on constraining uncertainty are promoted that combine various lines of evidence, including model diversity, large ensembles, storylines, and novel statistical methods applied on well-calibrated, global and regional, Earth System simulations, to deliver more reliable climate information. As examplified by the Paris agreement on desirable global warming targets, it is argued that the display of unrealistic ambitions may not be the best way for climate modellers to accomplish their long-term objectives, especially given the growing consensus on climate emergency and the allocated short time for the knowledge to be delivered and applied.
Mortality impacts of the most extreme heat events, Matthews et al., Nature Reviews Earth & Environment
In this Review, we link physical climate science with heat mortality risk, including crossings of uncompensable thresholds (beyond which human core body temperature rises uncontrollably) and unsurvivable thresholds (lethal core temperature increase within 6 h). Uncompensable thresholds (wet-bulb temperatures ~19–32 °C) depend strongly on age and the combination of air temperature and relative humidity. These thresholds have been breached rarely for younger adults (~2.2% of land area over 1994–2023) but more widely for older adults (~21%). Unsurvivable thresholds (wet-bulb temperatures ~20–34 °C) were only exceeded for older adults (~1.8% of land area). Anthropogenic warming will lead to more frequent threshold crossings, including tripling of the uncompensable land area for young adults if warming reaches 2 °C above preindustrial levels. Interdisciplinary work must improve the understanding of the deadly potential of unprecedented heat and how it can be reduced. Ensuring reliable access for all to cool refugia is an urgent priority as the atmosphere threatens to increasingly overwhelm human physiology under climate warming.
Global water gaps under future warming levels, Rosa & Sangiorgio, Nature Communications:
Understanding the impacts of climate change on water resources is crucial for developing effective adaptation strategies. We quantify “water gaps”, or unsustainable water use – the shortfall where water demand exceeds supply, resulting in scarcity. We quantify baseline and future water gaps using a multi-model analysis that incorporates two plausible future warming scenarios. The baseline global water gap stands at 457.9 km3/yr, with projections indicating an increase of 26.5 km3/yr (+5.8%) and 67.4 km3/yr (+14.7%) under 1.5 °C and 3 °C warming scenarios, respectively. These projections highlight the uneven impact of warming levels on water gaps, emphasizing the need for continued climate change mitigation to alleviate stress on water resources. Our results also underscore the unequal adaptation needs across countries and basins, influenced by varying warming scenarios, with important regional differences and model variability complicating future projections. Robust water management strategies are needed to tackle the escalating water scarcity caused by global warming.
Email outreach attracts the US policymakers’ attention to climate change but common advocacy techniques do not improve engagement, Loria et al., Communications Earth & Environment:
One of the most challenging aspects of climate change mitigation today is not identifying solutions but reaching political leaders with climate scientists’ existing solutions. Although there is substantial research on climate change communication, research rarely focuses on one of the most impactful groups: policymakers. It is essential to test theoretically sound methods to increase lawmakers’ attention to research evidence. In a series of four rapid-cycle randomized controlled email trials (N = 6642–7620 per trial), we test three common and theoretically derived advocacy tactics to increase U.S. policymaker engagement with a climate change fact sheet sent via email (i.e., a norms manipulation, a number focused manipulation, and emotional language manipulation). In all four trials, the control message increased engagement more than messages using advocacy tactics, measured by fact sheet clicks. This demonstrates the importance of testing communication methods within the appropriate populations, especially a population with considerable influence over climate policy.
Calculations of extreme sea level rise scenarios are strongly dependent on ice sheet model resolution, Williams et al., Communications Earth & Environment:
The West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) is losing ice and its annual contribution to sea level is increasing. The future behaviour of WAIS will impact societies worldwide, yet deep uncertainty remains in the expected rate of ice loss. High-impact low-likelihood scenarios of sea-level rise are needed by risk-averse stakeholders but are particularly difficult to constrain. Here, we combine traditional model simulations of the Amundsen Sea sector of WAIS with Gaussian process emulation to show that ice-sheet models capable of resolving kilometre-scale basal topography will be needed to assess the probability of extreme scenarios of sea-level rise. This resolution exceeds many state-of-the-art continent-scale simulations. Our ice-sheet model simulations show that coarser resolutions tend to project a larger range of sea-level contributions than finer resolutions, inflating the tails of the distribution. We therefore caution against relying purely upon simulations 5 km or coarser when assessing the potential for societally important high-impact sea-level rise.
Increased crevassing across accelerating Greenland Ice Sheet margins, Chudley et al., Nature Geoscience:
Here we use high-resolution digital elevation models to map the three-dimensional volume of crevasse fields across the Greenland Ice Sheet in 2016 and 2021. We show that, between the two years, large and significant increases in crevasse volume occurred at marine-terminating sectors with accelerating flow (up to +25.3 ± 10.1% in the southeast sector), while the change in total ice-sheet-wide crevasse volume was within measurement error (+4.3 ± 5.9%). The sectoral increases were offset by a reduction in crevasse volume in the central west sector (−14.2 ± 3.2%), particularly at Sermeq Kujalleq (Jakobshavn Isbræ), which exhibited slowdown and thickening over the study period. Changes in crevasse volume correlate strongly with antecedent discharge changes, indicating that the acceleration of ice flow in Greenland forces significant increases in crevassing on a timescale of less than five years. This response provides a mechanism for mass-loss-promoting feedbacks on sub-decadal timescales, including increased calving, faster flow and accelerated water transfer to the bed.
From this week's government/NGO section:
Drill, Baby, Drill? The Well of Public Opinion Is Drying Up on Trump’s Climate Policy, Eva Brungard, Data for Progress
In response to Trump’s reversal of federal climate policy, the author surveyed likely voters about their opinion of Trump’s executive orders and support for fossil fuels versus renewable energy. The findings reveal little support for the shift in energy policy, with the majority of voters hoping to preserve existing climate policies and to continue to develop renewables. Overall, an overwhelming majority (70%) of voters support taking action to address climate change. This includes a majority of both Republicans (54%) and Independents (74%). The highest support is among young voters (81%) – those under 35 – and Democrats (87%). Majorities across every demographic group tested support taking action to address climate change.
Climate Change in the American Mind: Politics & Policy, Fall 2024, Leiserowitz et al., Yale University and George Mason University
Drawing on a representative sample of the U.S. adult population (n = 1,013; including the 890 registered voters whose data are used), these findings describe how registered voters view a variety of domestic climate and energy policies. The survey was conducted from December 11 – 22, 2024, after the 2024 U.S. Presidential election. 54% of registered voters think global warming should be a high or very high priority for the president and Congress. 63% of registered voters think developing sources of clean energy should be a high or very high priority for the president and Congress. Majorities of registered voters support a range of policies to reduce carbon pollution and promote clean energy such as 88% support federal funding to help farmers improve practices to protect and restore the soil so it absorbs and stores more carbon, 67% support requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a carbon tax and using the money to reduce other taxes by an equal amount and 63% support transitioning the U.S. economy from fossil fuels to 100% clean energy by 2050.
136 articles in 56 journals by 741 contributing authors
Physical science of climate change, effects
Dynamics of salt intrusion in complex estuarine networks: an idealised model applied to the Rhine–Meuse Delta, Biemond et al., Ocean Science Open Access 10.5194/os-21-261-2025
Moist convective scaling: Insights from an idealised model, Agasthya et al., Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society Open Access 10.1002/qj.4902
Sensitivity of the Energy Conversion Efficiency of Tropical Cyclones During Intensification to Sea Surface Temperature and Static Stability, Lai & Toumi, Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society Open Access pdf 10.1002/qj.4895
The fossil fuel industry spent $219 million to elect the new U.S. government
Posted on 5 February 2025 by Guest Author
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Karin Kirk
The 119th Congress comes with a price tag.
The oil and gas industry gave about $24 million in campaign contributions to the members of the U.S. House and Senate expected to be sworn in January 3, 2025, according to a Yale Climate Connections review of campaign donations. The industry gave an additional $2 million to President-elect Donald Trump’s campaign, bringing the total spending on the winning candidates to over $26 million, 88% of which went to Republicans.
The fossil fuel industry exerts substantial financial power within the U.S. political system, and these contributions are only the tip of the (melting) iceberg.
Sabin 33 #14 - Do we have sufficient mineral resources for solar development?
Posted on 4 February 2025 by BaerbelW
On November 1, 2024 we announced the publication of 33 rebuttals based on the report "Rebutting 33 False Claims About Solar, Wind, and Electric Vehicles" written by Matthew Eisenson, Jacob Elkin, Andy Fitch, Matthew Ard, Kaya Sittinger & Samuel Lavine and published by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School in 2024. Below is the blog post version of rebuttal #14 based on Sabin's report.
A 2023 study that examined 75 emissions-reduction scenarios concluded that global reserves of critical materials are likely adequate to meet future demand for electricity generation infrastructure1 (also Wang et al. 2023). According to that study, production rates for many critical materials will need to grow substantially, but “[g]lobal mineral reserves should adequately meet needs posed by power sector material demand (Wang et al. 2023).” The United States Department of the Interior has likewise concluded that “[o]ther than perhaps short term interruptions resulting from market forces or geopolitical events, it is not anticipated that there will be any long term material constraints that would prevent the development of a significant amount of energy from photoelectric cells2.” Other analyses suggest that global mineral resources are likely sufficient to meet long-term demand across all energy transition sectors, including EVs and transmission.
In addition, as noted previously, innovations in recycling solar panels4 can potentially reduce future requirements for individual raw materials (Wang et al. 2023 at 320). Valuable materials in solar panels, including silver, copper, and crystalline silicon, are actively sought for the development of other products, including the next generation of solar panels5. Furthermore, the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, include provisions to identify and develop domestic sources of rare earth materials and other critical minerals required for our energy transition6. In tandem with the rollout of these incentives, a Department of the Interior interagency working group has likewise issued more than 60 concrete recommendations for responsibly overhauling an administrative framework still largely shaped by the Mining Law of 18727. These recommendations include substantial research investments, permitting reform, and proactive public and Tribal engagement. The Department of Energy, in turn, recently announced a $150 million initiative “to advance cost effective and environmentally responsible processes” for producing critical minerals and materials in the United States9.
January sets an unexpected temperature record
Posted on 3 February 2025 by Zeke Hausfather
This is a re-post from The Climate Brink
Both 2023 and 2024 were exceptionally warm years, at just below and above 1.5C relative to preindustrial in the WMO composite of surface temperature records, respectively. While we are still working to assess the full set of drivers of this warmth, it is clear that a sizable portion of 2024’s elevated temperatures were driven by a moderately strong El Niño event that peaked in November 2023.1
For this reason many of us expect that 2025 will be cooler than both 2023 and 2024, and is unlikely to be the warmest year in the instrumental record (though it will very likely be in the top three warmest years).
However, at least at the start of the year nature seems not to be following our expectations. Global temperatures were in record territory for the first three weeks of the year in the Copernicus/ECMWF ERA5 dataset, only falling out of record territory over the past few days.
2025 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #05
Posted on 2 February 2025 by BaerbelW, Doug Bostrom
This week's roundup is again published soleley by category. We are still interested in feedback to hone the categorization, so if you spot any clear misses and/or have suggestions for additional categories, please let us know in the comments. Thanks!
Stories we promoted this week, by category:
Climate Change Impacts
- Dangerous temperatures could kill 50% more Europeans by 2100, study finds Net increase of 80,000 deaths a year projected in hottest scenario, with milder winters failing to redress balance by Ajit Niranjan, Environment The Guardian, Jan 27, 2025
- Climate change made deadly Los Angeles wildfires 35% more likely: new attribution study The fires, likely to be the costliest in world history, were made about 35% more likely due to the 1.3°C of global warming that has occurred since preindustrial times. by Jeff Masters, Yale Climate Connections, Jan 28, 2025
- Climate triple whammy boosted risk of LA fires, study shows Hot, dry conditions, a lack of rain and a longer fire-risk season are all more likely in today’s hotter climate by Damian Carrington Environment editor, The Guardian, Jan 28, 2025
- Climate change poses 'security threat' to Irish economy and society by Irishexaminer.com, IrishExaminer.com, Jan 30, 2025
- Polar bears are struggling to get enough to eat as sea ice dwindles due to climate change, study finds by University of Toronto, Phys.org, Jan 30, 2025
Climate Policy and Politics
- Reset or Purge? Trump EPA Dismisses Agency Science Advisers Critics fear the unusual clean sweep of panels is meant to ease the planned rollback of climate and environmental policy. by Marianne Lavelle, Inside Climate News, Jan 30, 2025
- USDA ordered to scrub climate change from websites The directive could affect information across dozens of programs including climate-smart agriculture initiatives. by Zack Colman and Marcia Brown, Politico, Jan 31, 2025
Climate Science and Research
- Skeptical Science New Research for Week #4 2025 A weekly survey of freshly published peer reviewed and government/NGO reports on human-caused climate change, and what we can do to fix this problem. by Doug Bostrom & Marc Kodack, Skeptical Science, Jan 23, 2025
- The AMOC is slowing, it`s stable, it`s slowing, no, yes, … There’s been a bit of media whiplash on the issue of AMOC slowing lately – ranging from the AMOC being “on the brink of collapse” to it being “more stable than previously thought”. by Stefan Rahmstorf, RealClimate, Jan 26, 2025
- Comparison Update 2024 One more dot on the graphs for our annual model-observations comparisons updates. Given how extraordinary the last two years have been, there are a few highlights to note. by Gavin Schmidt, RealClimate, Jan 27, 2025
- Skeptical Science New Research for Week #5 2025 A weekly survey of newly published climate research, including academic peer reviewed reports as well as government and NGO publications. by Doug Bostrom & Marc Kodack, Skeptical Science, Jan 30, 2025
Fact brief - Is global warming promoting biodiversity?
Posted on 1 February 2025 by Guest Author
Skeptical Science is partnering with Gigafact to produce fact briefs — bite-sized fact checks of trending claims. This fact brief was written by Sue Bin Park from the Gigafact team in collaboration with members from our team. You can submit claims you think need checking via the tipline.
Is global warming promoting biodiversity?
Biodiversity is declining, and global warming is a contributing factor.
Some species can adapt to environmental change, but many cannot evolve quickly enough, or at all. As habitats degrade and migration paths are blocked, many species have already disappeared, while more face extinction.
Adaptation often requires migration to better conditions, but human-made barriers like cities and dams block these paths. Climate change also disrupts migration cues, such as air or water temperature. Many species cannot migrate fast enough, like immobile coral reefs, or survive without specific habitats, like the now-extinct golden toad, confined to high-altitude Costa Rican forests made uninhabitable by human-induced climate changes.
Since 1970, mammal, bird, fish, reptile, and amphibian populations have declined by an average of 68%. Scientists estimate current extinction rates are hundreds to thousands of times higher than natural.
Climate change, habitat destruction, pollution, and overexploitation are all driving biodiversity loss, threatening ecosystems’ balance worldwide.
Go to full rebuttal on Skeptical Science or to the fact brief on Gigafact
This fact brief is responsive to quotes such as the one highlighted here.
Sources
WWF A warning sign: where biodiversity loss is happening around the world
AKSIK Fragility of Coral Reefs in Hawaii
ifaw Golden toads
Nature Food web rewiring in a changing world
CMS Major New UN Report Finds Climate Change is Severely Impacting Migratory Species of Wild Animals
WWF What is the sixth mass extinction and what can we do about it?
NOAA Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
Skeptical Science New Research for Week #5 2025
Posted on 30 January 2025 by Doug Bostrom, Marc Kodack
Open access notables
Revisiting the Last Ice Area projections from a high-resolution Global Earth System Model, Fol et al., Communications Earth & Environment:
The Last Ice Area—located to the north of Greenland and the northern Canadian Arctic Archipelago—is expected to persist as the central Arctic Ocean becomes seasonally ice-free within a few decades. Projections of the Last Ice Area, however, have come from relatively low resolution Global Climate Models that do not resolve sea ice export through the waterways of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago and Nares Strait. Here we revisit Last Ice Area projections using high-resolution numerical simulations from the Community Earth System Model, which resolves these narrow waterways. Under a high-end forcing scenario, the sea ice of the Last Ice Area thins and becomes more mobile, resulting in a large export southward. Under this potentially worst-case scenario, sea ice of the Last Ice Area could disappear a little more than one decade after the central Arctic Ocean has reached seasonally ice-free conditions. This loss would have profound impacts on ice-obligate species.
Between inflated expectations and inherent distrust: How publics see the role of experts in governing climate intervention technologies, Fritz et al., Environmental Science & Policy:
Novel technologies for removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and proposals around solar radiation modification, known also as solar geoengineering, display key features of complex problems. These climate intervention technologies are characterized by high uncertainties, value disputes, high stakes and urgency. Such features create wicked conundrums in climate governance. Addressing questions around more effective governance of these technologies necessitates reflections on how different kinds of expertise, normative judgments and democratic decision-making (should) interact. Based on a survey (N?=?22,222) and 44 focus groups (N?=?323) in 22 countries, we show (i) who publics see as an expert in the field of climate intervention technologies, (ii) what roles they envision for experts in governing climate intervention technologies and (iii) how trust and distrust in scientists unfolds in the context of these novel, partly controversial, technologies.
A scoping review on climate change education, Muccione et al., PLOS Climate:
The growing urgency of the climate crisis necessitates innovative educational approaches to equip people with the knowledge and skills to address climate challenges and be able to influence policy effectively. Education can be a central asset to promoting climate action, yet the importance of climate change education has been underexposed in large and influential assessment reports such as those from the IPCC. This study provides a comprehensive mapping of the literature on climate change education with a particular focus on the time period 2008-2023. By combining human coding and natural language processing (NLP) techniques, we examined a diverse corpus of over 6’000 publications from the peer reviewed literature. The findings highlight the pivotal role of climate education across various disciplines and its alignment with critical climate research themes such as adaptation, mitigation, disaster risk management, and sustainability. Our analysis reveals three predominant topics within the literature which are related to effective learning methodologies, sustainable development education, and the importance of education in adaptation and resilience. Additionally, we identified emerging themes emphasizing the role of youth as change agents, the necessity of transformative educational practices and the importance of energy literacy.
Power price stability and the insurance value of renewable technologies, Navia Simon & Diaz Anadon, Nature Energy:
To understand if renewables stabilize or destabilize electricity prices, we simulate European power markets as projected by the National Energy and Climate Plans for 2030 but replicating the historical variability in electricity demand, the prices of fossil fuels and weather. We propose a β-sensitivity metric, defined as the projected increase in the average annual price of electricity when the price of natural gas increases by 1 euro. We show that annual power prices spikes would be more moderate because the β-sensitivity would fall from 1.4 euros to 1 euro. Deployment of solar photovoltaic and wind technologies exceeding 30% of the 2030 target would lower it further, below 0.5 euros. Our framework shows that this stabilization of prices would produce social welfare gains, that is, we find an insurance value of renewables. Because market mechanisms do not internalize this value, we argue that it should be explicitly considered in energy policy decisions
The polarization of energy preferences – A study on social acceptance of wind and nuclear power in Sweden, Lindvall et al., Energy Policy:
Using Sweden as a study case, this article explores the polarized opinions to wind and nuclear energy, two low carbon energy options that have been shown to be politically controversial. In a wide-scale survey (N = 5200), general attitudes to wind and nuclear energy are captured, as well as to projects in the proximity of people's homes. The study demonstrates a deep polarization of energy preferences in Sweden, finding strong associations between worldviews, political orientation, environmental concern, and support for or resistance to wind and nuclear energy. The study concludes that support for both energy options is reduced when wind or nuclear power is constructed near people's home, but also suggests that the proximity effect is particularly strong for individuals with strong TAN (traditional, authoritarian, nationalistic) values and right leaning political ideology. The article argues that politically motivated reasoning might explain the polarization of attitudes, yet this effect seems to become less relevant when people are asked to judge potential energy infrastructure located close them.
Climate change and migration dynamics in Somalia: a time series analysis of environmental displacement, Mohamed et al., Frontiers in Climate:
Climate change is a significant driver of human migration, especially in vulnerable regions like Somalia. This study investigates the relationship between climate variables—average annual precipitation, temperature, and CO? emissions—and net migration in Somalia, using time series data from 1990 to 2020. Additionally, it examines the role of population growth as a factor influencing migration. Applying the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) model, this research captures both short- and long-term dynamics, providing insights into how environmental and demographic factors impact migration in this climate-sensitive region. The results indicate that favorable rainfall conditions positively influence net migration, as improved agricultural productivity stabilizes livelihoods, reducing pressures to migrate. In contrast, increased CO? emissions, associated with environmental degradation, negatively impact migration by limiting financial capacity, creating a “trapped population” effect. Population growth also intensifies migration pressures by increasing competition for limited resources. Interestingly, temperature variations do not significantly influence migration, possibly due to adaptive strategies or resilience to temperature fluctuations in the region. These findings underscore the need for policies focused on enhancing agricultural resilience, restoring degraded environments, and creating economic opportunities to reduce migration pressures in Somalia. Investments in sustainable land use, climate adaptation, and population management strategies are essential to address the complex challenges of climate-induced migration.
Optimal life-cycle adaptation of coastal infrastructure under climate change, Bhattacharya et al., Nature Communications:
Climate change-related risk mitigation is typically addressed using cost-benefit analysis that evaluates mitigation strategies against a wide range of simulated scenarios and identifies a static policy to be implemented, without considering future observations. Due to the substantial uncertainties inherent in climate projections, this identified policy will likely be sub-optimal with respect to the actual climate trajectory that evolves in time. In this work, we thus formulate climate risk management as a dynamic decision-making problem based on Markov Decision Processes (MDPs) and Partially Observable MDPs (POMDPs), taking real-time data into account for evaluating the evolving conditions and related model uncertainties, in order to select the best possible life-cycle actions in time, with global optimality guarantees for the formulated optimization problem.
From this week's government/NGO section:
Climate change and news audiences report 2024: Analysis of news use and attitudes in eight countries, Ejaz et al., Reuters Institute and Oxford University
The authors collected data from an online survey of people in eight countries: Brazil, France, Germany, India, Japan, Pakistan, the UK, and the USA. The data were collected in November 2024. The data collection is part of an ongoing project to explore public engagement with news and information about climate change, and how people perceive, experience, and respond to its escalating impacts. The authors found that on average across the eight countries, half (50%) see, read, or hear news or information about climate change every week – showing little change from 2022 (51%). Climate news and information consumption is highest in France (60%), with lower numbers in the USA (34%) where, against the backdrop of the presidential election, there was a 16 percentage point (pp) fall from 2023. The news media continues to be the primary way people access climate change information – ahead of documentaries, social media, and interpersonal communication – with television news (31%) and online news websites/apps (24%) as the most widely used media. Video is people’s preferred format, ahead of text.
Ho'okele Mua II, a Wargame About Climate Change and Operational Risk in INDOPACOM, Rooney et al., Rand
The authors describe the development and execution of a climate change game for the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM). The game was intended to support planning by allowing players to explore the extent of operational risk that climate change could impose on the joint force in the Indo-Pacific region in the 2040s.
Good for your Pocket. How renewable energy helps Irish electricity consumers, Alec Granville-Willett and Mark Turner, Baringa
The development of wind and solar farms has reduced the cost burden on Irish consumers by €840 million between 2000 and 2023. This saving, equivalent to €165 per person, has been realized on the power bills of all consumers by the low cost of renewable electricity. Wind and solar farms have no fuel cost and undercut more expensive gas- and coal-fired generators, displacing them from the wholesale power market.
121 articles in 50 journals by 724 contributing authors
Physical science of climate change, effects
Characteristics and potential drivers of extreme high-temperature event frequency in Eurasia, Xie et al., Dynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans 10.1016/j.dynatmoce.2025.101536
Impact of Climate Change on the Dynamics of the Southern Senegal Upwelling Center, Ndoye et al., Geophysical Research Letters Open Access 10.1029/2024gl112582
Slowed Response of Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation Not a Robust Signal of Collapse, Zimmerman et al., Geophysical Research Letters Open Access 10.1029/2024gl112415
An explanation of how renewable energy saves you money
Posted on 29 January 2025 by Guest Author
This is a re-post from the Climate Brink by Andrew Dessler
Climate denial is dead. Renewable energy denial is here. As “alternative facts” become the norm, it’s worth looking at what actual facts tell us about how renewable energy sources like solar and wind are lowering the price of electricity.
As an example that’s close to home (for me), I’ll focus on the Texas electricity market, which is run by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, known as ERCOT.
How ERCOT sets the price of electricity
At all times, ERCOT must balance electricity supply and demand, while keeping costs as low as possible. Let’s walk through a simplified example of how they do this.
First, ERCOT forecasts tomorrow’s electricity demand based on factors like forecast weather, historical usage patterns, and expected industrial activity. Let’s imagine that ERCOT predicts a need for 100 megawatts (MW)1 of power tomorrow.
ERCOT then asks generators to make bids for how much power each one can produce and what it will cost. Let’s assume there are six different generators that bid into the market:
ERCOT sorts the bids by price, producing what’s known as the merit stack. ERCOT then moves down the merit stack, using generators that produce the required power (100 MW) at the lowest price.
This means generator C is out of luck — ERCOT will not be buying power from that generator.
So what is the resulting price of electricity? Rather than paying each plant a different price based on their bids, ERCOT employs what’s known as marginal pricing, in which all of the generators get paid the cost of generating the last unit of energy.
Generator B is the last generator on the stack — sometimes referred to as the marginal generator — so it produces the last unit of power. The price of that last unit is $55 per MW, so that’s what the wholesale price of electricity on this day will be. All of the generators get paid that amount regardless of how much it costs for them to produce the energy.
