West Asia is no stranger to conflicts. But this time, they have a bigger challenge. As record high temperatures and generational droughts plague the region, Ghadi Francis takes a look at how climate change will threaten stability in West Asia. For more such stories, keep watching the West Asia post with Ghadi Francis every Friday at 8:30 PM IST, only on WION.

The West Asia Post: Conflicts & climate change | Saudi NEOM leads the way

Global warming may have already reached an irreversible tipping point, according to the scientist who conducted the largest-ever Arctic expedition.&nbsp;

"The disappearance of summer sea ice in the Arctic is one of the first landmines in this minefield, one of the tipping points that we set off first when we push warming too far," said Professor Markus Rex.

"And one can essentially ask if we haven't already stepped on this mine and already set off the beginning of the explosion."

Professor Rex was the leader of the world's largest trip to the North Pole, which included 300 scientists from 20 countries.

After 389 days drifting through the North Pole, the team returned to Germany in October, bearing heartbreaking proof of a vanishing Arctic Ocean and forecasts of ice-free summers in only a few decades.&nbsp;

The 140 million euro (US$165 million) expedition also brought back 150 terabytes of data and more than 1,000 ice samples.

Scientists discovered that the Arctic sea ice retreated "faster in the spring of 2020 than since the beginning of records," and that "the spread of the sea ice in the summer was only half as wide as decades ago," according to Rex.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

Global warming may have already reached an irreversible tipping point, according to the scientist who conducted the largest-ever Arctic expedition. "The disappearance of summer sea ice in the Arctic is one of the first landmines in this minefield, one of the tipping points that we set off first when we push warming too far," said Professor Markus Rex.

Global warming may have already reached an irreversible tipping point, according to the scientist who conducted the largest-ever Arctic expedition. "The disappearance of summer sea ice in the Arctic is one of the first landmines in this minefield, one of the tipping points that we set off first when we push warming too far," said Professor Markus Rex. "And one can essentially ask if we haven't already stepped on this mine and already set off the beginning of the explosion." Professor Rex was the leader of the world's largest trip to the North Pole, which included 300 scientists from 20 countries. After 389 days drifting through the North Pole, the team returned to Germany in October, bearing heartbreaking proof of a vanishing Arctic Ocean and forecasts of ice-free summers in only a few decades. The 140 million euro (US$165 million) expedition also brought back 150 terabytes of data and more than 1,000 ice samples. Scientists discovered that the Arctic sea ice retreated "faster in the spring of 2020 than since the beginning of records," and that "the spread of the sea ice in the summer was only half as wide as decades ago," according to Rex. (With inputs from agencies)

Global warming may have already passed irreversible tipping point: Arctic mission chief

A German researcher who headed the largest Artic expedition to date said that the Ice in the Arctic is receding more quickly than ever.

Arctic's ice recedes more quickly than ever before, says German head of int'l expedition

The leaders of the world's seven richest democracies—Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the United States—met at Carbis Bay Hotel, a seaside resort in Cornwall, from June 11-13.

G7 Summit 2021: COVID-19 vaccination, climate change and other key takeaways from the meeting

If the US&nbsp;military were a nation-state, it would be the world's 47th largest emitter of planet-warming greenhouse gases, a 2019 study found.

Though the British universities of Lancaster and Durham took account only of emissions from fuel usage in their study, it pointed to the huge impact that armed forces across the globe are having on the earth's climate.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/its-crunch-time-and-bidens-climate-gambit-faces-steep-hurdles-386960">It’s crunch time, and Biden’s climate gambit faces steep hurdles</a>

Facing a battle against global warming, NATO has for the first time made it a central focus of planning and strategy.

Leaders of the Western military alliance are set on Monday to agree on a climate action plan to make their armed forces carbon-neutral by 2050, and to adapt to threats posed by global warming.

NATO diplomats say efforts to focus on climate change were stymied during Donald Trump's US&nbsp;presidency. He called climate change a "hoax" and pulled the United States out of the international Paris Agreement to fight climate change.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/restoring-environmental-rules-rolled-back-by-trump-could-take-years-358684">Restoring environmental rules rolled back by Trump could take years</a>

Trump also expressed a lack of trust in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, and in 2018 threatened to withdraw the United States from the alliance formed in 1949 to contain a Soviet military threat.

Now, with US&nbsp;President Joe Biden prioritising climate action, the diplomats said NATO was able to act on concerns that climate change is a threat both to transatlantic security and to alliance personnel.

"This is a defining challenge of our time, and we must be an organisation that leads on it," a senior European NATO diplomat told Reuters.

Polluters

NATO member states' militaries have long been aware that climate change will have huge security implications, expected to include increased migration, flooding at coastal NATO bases and a larger Russian presence in the Arctic as sea ice melts.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/nine-things-the-biden-administration-could-do-quickly-on-the-environment-341877">Nine things the Biden administration could do quickly on the environment</a>

But, to reduce their own climate-warming emissions from fossil fuel use, the member states require reform at the centre of the alliance because NATO sets fuel standards across the organisation.

By committing to eliminating its net CO2 emissions by 2050, NATO's action plan would align the organisation with the pathway to deliver the Paris Agreement's goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (34.7°F).

Meeting that goal will mean reducing military emissions that are often exempted from countries' carbon emissions targets - no mean feat for the US&nbsp;Department of Defense, the world's single largest consumer of petroleum, according to research in 2019 by Neta Crawford at Boston University.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/pandemic-war-climate-change-fuel-fears-of-global-hunger-food-scarcity-383200">Pandemic, war, climate change fuel fears of global hunger, food scarcity</a>&nbsp;

While experts say EU countries under-report emissions from national militaries, a study commissioned by the European Parliament calculated in February that the carbon footprint of EU military expenditure in 2019 was about 24.8 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent - about the same as the CO2 emissions released by around 14 million cars.

A German defence expert, who declined to be named, said a main battle tank such as Germany's Leopard 2 guzzles 400 litres (106 gallons) of diesel in the field to cover just 100 km (62 miles). The average fuel consumption in the United States of a light-duty civilian vehicle was 9.4 litres per 100 km in 2018, according to a 2020 International Energy Agency report.

Tank warfare also risks being tougher under global warming. During a NATO exercise in Poland in 2019, temperatures in German Ozelot tanks rose above 40 degrees Celsius, and soldiers could spend only a few hours at a time inside, a military source said.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/climate-change-to-destroy-over-20-of-tea-growing-areas-in-kenya-by-2050-384100">Climate change to destroy over 20% of tea growing areas in Kenya by 2050</a>

Some NATO allies are working to reduce electricity use or are integrating climate prediction models into military missions. Germany has its first carbon-neutral barracks, producing energy almost completely from geothermal power and solar panels. The Dutch military can use solar panels instead of diesel generators during operations.

'Crisis Multiplier'

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg and UN&nbsp;Secretary-General Antonio Guterres have described climate change as a "crisis multiplier".

Militaries are also expecting more operations in climate-vulnerable regions, as troops are called on to help tackle climate-driven natural disasters. Such crisis management is one of NATO's fundamental tasks, because of its ability to provide food supplies and logistical and medical support quickly.

In 2018, eight of the 10 countries that host the largest number of personnel involved in multilateral peace operations were in areas highly exposed to climate change, according to a study by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

Allies are also testing more equipment to operate in extreme cold. The durability of assets on the battlefield has always been a priority, European defence sources told Reuters.

Stoltenberg, a former UN&nbsp;special envoy on climate change, began pushing for a NATO climate agreement before Biden replaced Trump, calling on the alliance to take action on climate in a speech in September 2020. Allies have yet to decide how much climate-related investment to fund jointly at NATO.

"The security policy community now sees more clearly that climate change is a driver of conflict," said Jamie Shea, a former senior NATO official now at the Friends of Europe think tank in Brussels.

Because military assets take decades to develop and have a longer life than civilian vehicles, one of NATO's biggest contributions in the medium term, experts say, will be in increased use of synthetic fuels instead of fossil fuels.

Produced from water, CO2 and renewable energy, synthetic fuels do not produce sulphur or nitrogen pollution and still have a high energy density. NATO's standard fuel to power planes or ships is kerosene, one of the more polluting fuels.

The German military, the Bundeswehr, may start adding synthetic fuel to traditional fuel in several years.

Electric tanks, however, are not an option.

"It will prove difficult to install charging stations on the battlefield in time before the fighting starts," said a German defence source who declined to be named.

If the US military were a nation-state, it would be the world's 47th largest emitter of planet-warming greenhouse gases, a 2019 study found. Though the British universities of Lancaster and Durham took account only of emissions from fuel usage in their study, it pointed to the huge impact that armed forces across the globe are having on the earth's climate.

If the US military were a nation-state, it would be the world's 47th largest emitter of planet-warming greenhouse gases, a 2019 study found. Though the British universities of Lancaster and Durham took account only of emissions from fuel usage in their study, it pointed to the huge impact that armed forces across the globe are having on the earth's climate. Also read | It’s crunch time, and Biden’s climate gambit faces steep hurdles Facing a battle against global warming, NATO has for the first time made it a central focus of planning and strategy. Leaders of the Western military alliance are set on Monday to agree on a climate action plan to make their armed forces carbon-neutral by 2050, and to adapt to threats posed by global warming. NATO diplomats say efforts to focus on climate change were stymied during Donald Trump's US presidency. He called climate change a "hoax" and pulled the United States out of the international Paris Agreement to fight climate change. Also read | Restoring environmental rules rolled back by Trump could take years Trump also expressed a lack of trust in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, and in 2018 threatened to withdraw the United States from the alliance formed in 1949 to contain a Soviet military threat. Now, with US President Joe Biden prioritising climate action, the diplomats said NATO was able to act on concerns that climate change is a threat both to transatlantic security and to alliance personnel. "This is a defining challenge of our time, and we must be an organisation that leads on it," a senior European NATO diplomat told Reuters. Polluters NATO member states' militaries have long been aware that climate change will have huge security implications, expected to include increased migration, flooding at coastal NATO bases and a larger Russian presence in the Arctic as sea ice melts. Also read | Nine things the Biden administration could do quickly on the environment But, to reduce their own climate-warming emissions from fossil fuel use, the member states require reform at the centre of the alliance because NATO sets fuel standards across the organisation. By committing to eliminating its net CO2 emissions by 2050, NATO's action plan would align the organisation with the pathway to deliver the Paris Agreement's goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (34.7°F). Meeting that goal will mean reducing military emissions that are often exempted from countries' carbon emissions targets - no mean feat for the US Department of Defense, the world's single largest consumer of petroleum, according to research in 2019 by Neta Crawford at Boston University. Also read | Pandemic, war, climate change fuel fears of global hunger, food scarcity While experts say EU countries under-report emissions from national militaries, a study commissioned by the European Parliament calculated in February that the carbon footprint of EU military expenditure in 2019 was about 24.8 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent - about the same as the CO2 emissions released by around 14 million cars. A German defence expert, who declined to be named, said a main battle tank such as Germany's Leopard 2 guzzles 400 litres (106 gallons) of diesel in the field to cover just 100 km (62 miles). The average fuel consumption in the United States of a light-duty civilian vehicle was 9.4 litres per 100 km in 2018, according to a 2020 International Energy Agency report. Tank warfare also risks being tougher under global warming. During a NATO exercise in Poland in 2019, temperatures in German Ozelot tanks rose above 40 degrees Celsius, and soldiers could spend only a few hours at a time inside, a military source said. Also read | Climate change to destroy over 20% of tea growing areas in Kenya by 2050 Some NATO allies are working to reduce electricity use or are integrating climate prediction models into military missions. Germany has its first carbon-neutral barracks, producing energy almost completely from geothermal power and solar panels. The Dutch military can use solar panels instead of diesel generators during operations. 'Crisis Multiplier' NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg and UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres have described climate change as a "crisis multiplier". Militaries are also expecting more operations in climate-vulnerable regions, as troops are called on to help tackle climate-driven natural disasters. Such crisis management is one of NATO's fundamental tasks, because of its ability to provide food supplies and logistical and medical support quickly. In 2018, eight of the 10 countries that host the largest number of personnel involved in multilateral peace operations were in areas highly exposed to climate change, according to a study by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Allies are also testing more equipment to operate in extreme cold. The durability of assets on the battlefield has always been a priority, European defence sources told Reuters. Stoltenberg, a former UN special envoy on climate change, began pushing for a NATO climate agreement before Biden replaced Trump, calling on the alliance to take action on climate in a speech in September 2020. Allies have yet to decide how much climate-related investment to fund jointly at NATO. "The security policy community now sees more clearly that climate change is a driver of conflict," said Jamie Shea, a former senior NATO official now at the Friends of Europe think tank in Brussels. Because military assets take decades to develop and have a longer life than civilian vehicles, one of NATO's biggest contributions in the medium term, experts say, will be in increased use of synthetic fuels instead of fossil fuels. Produced from water, CO2 and renewable energy, synthetic fuels do not produce sulphur or nitrogen pollution and still have a high energy density. NATO's standard fuel to power planes or ships is kerosene, one of the more polluting fuels. The German military, the Bundeswehr, may start adding synthetic fuel to traditional fuel in several years. Electric tanks, however, are not an option. "It will prove difficult to install charging stations on the battlefield in time before the fighting starts," said a German defence source who declined to be named.

With Trump gone, NATO wages war on climate threat

In an attempt to tackle climate change, G7 leaders are facing the most important decisions in human history, said naturalist Sir David Attenborough, who will be addressing world leaders gathered at Cornwall for the G7 summit.

In an attempt to tackle climate change, G7 leaders are facing the most important decisions in human history, said naturalist Sir David Attenborough, who will be addressing world leaders gathered at Cornwall for the G7 summit. Sir David has warned that humans could be "on the verge of destabilizing the entire planet". The group of seven countries, which includes, the UK, US, Canada, Japan, France, Germany, and Italy, are expected to increase their climate finance contributions. This will help in meeting an overdue spending pledge of $100 billion a year, in order to help poorer countries cut carbon emissions and cope with global warming. As quotes by BBC, Sir David said, "The natural world today is greatly diminished. That is undeniable. Our climate is warming fast. That is beyond doubt. Our societies and nations are unequal and that is sadly plain to see". Also Read | Our response to climate change is missing something big, scientists say He added, "But the question science forces us to address specifically in 2021 is whether as a result of these intertwined facts we are on the verge of destabilizing the entire planet. If that is so, then the decisions we make this decade - in particular, the decisions made by the most economically advanced nations - are the most important in human history". G7 leaders are also expected to make amends to cut carbon emissions. These will involve measures such as ending almost all direct government support for the fossil fuel energy sector overseas and ruling out parol and diesel cars. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who is the host of the summit has said the G7 wanted to "drive a global Green Industrial Revolution to transform the way we live". He further added, "There is a direct relationship between reducing emissions, restoring nature, creating jobs and ensuring long-term economic growth".

G7 leaders face biggest climate change decisions, says naturalist Sir David Attenborough

G7 leaders were urged on Sunday to take immediate action to secure the future of the planet, as they finalized new conservation and emissions targets to curb climate change, and concluded a three-day summit where revived Western unity has been on the show.

G7 leaders confront biggest challenge on climate crisis, set to endorse nature compact

G7 leaders on Sunday vowed to start delivering one billion doses of Covid vaccines and to step up action on climate change, in a summit call to arms by a revived democratic alliance that also confronted China and Russia.

In a final communique issued at their first physical summit in nearly two years, the leaders of the elite club largely hewed to US President Joe Biden's push to regain the West's cohesion after the tumultuous era of his predecessor Donald Trump.

"We will harness the power of democracy, freedom, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights to answer the biggest questions and overcome the greatest challenges," the leaders said.

But the pledge on vaccines for poorer nations fell drastically short of the 11 billion doses that campaigners say are needed to end a pandemic that has claimed nearly four million lives and wrecked economies around the globe.

"I'm afraid there will be smiles (at the G7) but they are not solutions," former British prime minister Gordon Brown told Sky News, calling the summit "an unforgivable moral failure".&nbsp;

"Millions of people will go unvaccinated and thousands of people I'm afraid will die," said Brown, who helped coordinate international responses to the world's last major economic shock in 2008.

Likewise, the G7's pledges to deliver more aid for countries at the sharp end of climate change, and to phase out fossil fuel investments, were decried as too little, too late ahead of a UN summit in November.

"The G7 have failed to set us up for a successful COP26 as trust is sorely lacking between rich and developing countries," said Greenpeace International executive director Jennifer Morgan.

"We need authentic leadership and that means treating the pandemic and the climate crisis for what they are: an interconnected inequality emergency," she said.

'Green Industrial Revolution'

Nevertheless, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the summit's host, said the G7 wanted to "drive a global Green Industrial Revolution to transform the way we live".

"There is a direct relationship between reducing emissions, restoring nature, creating jobs and ensuring long-term economic growth," he said.

Johnson also touted a G7 pledge to get 40 million more girls into schools over the next five years, as part of the post-pandemic reconstruction.

A White House official agreed the three-day gathering in Cornwall, southwest England, had been an "unusually substantive and productive G7".&nbsp;

Angela Merkel, attending her last G7 as German chancellor, said Biden had brought "new momentum" to efforts to tackle the world's problems.

India and South Africa, who took part in the G7 talks as guests, had pressed for the gathering to waive intellectual property rights on Western vaccines. But Britain and Germany were notable holdouts on that.

Campaigners also complained the G7 had failed to flesh out how it will pay for a newly agreed "Nature Compact" -- to protect 30 percent of the world's land and oceans from despoliation by 2030.

The leaders committed to nearly halve their carbon emissions by 2030, relative to 2010, and to phase out the use of "unabated coal" -- fuel whose emissions have not gone through any filtering -- "as soon as possible".

They vowed to end most government support for the fossil fuel sector overseas, and to phase out petrol and diesel cars.

The G7 had sharp words for Beijing and Moscow, in the buildup to a NATO summit in Brussels on Monday and Biden's first sit-down with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Switzerland on Wednesday.

They demanded China end abuses including forced labour in Xinjiang, where activists say up to one million people from Uyghur and other Muslim minorities are interned in camps, and in Hong Kong.

And they pressed China to let experts from the World Health Organization (WHO) investigate further how Covid-19 first emerged, amid suspicions that the coronavirus may have escaped from a Chinese laboratory.

The allies adopted a US initiative to counter China in infrastructure funding for poorer nations, promising to "collectively catalyse" hundreds of billions of investment.

The "Build Back Better World" (B3W) project is aimed squarely at competing with Beijing's trillion-dollar Belt and Road infrastructure initiative, which has been widely criticised for saddling small countries with unmanageable debt.

And the G7 demanded that Russia "credibly explain" the use of chemical agents on its soil, end its "systematic crackdown" on opposition groups and media, and "hold to account" criminals waging ransomware attacks.

Royal blessing

A lingering row between Britain and the European Union over post-Brexit trading arrangements in Northern Ireland hung over the talks.

But London sought to bring all sides together using the "soft power" diplomacy of Queen Elizabeth II and her heir Prince Charles, at a Friday night reception for leaders and EU chiefs.

Joined Saturday by counterparts from Australia, South Africa and South Korea -- with India also taking part remotely -- they then enjoyed an evening beach barbecue around fire pits, featuring a sea shanty band and toasted marshmallows.&nbsp;

G7 leaders on Sunday vowed to start delivering one billion doses of Covid vaccines and to step up action on climate change, in a summit call to arms by a revived democratic alliance that also confronted China and Russia.

G7 leaders on Sunday vowed to start delivering one billion doses of Covid vaccines and to step up action on climate change, in a summit call to arms by a revived democratic alliance that also confronted China and Russia. In a final communique issued at their first physical summit in nearly two years, the leaders of the elite club largely hewed to US President Joe Biden's push to regain the West's cohesion after the tumultuous era of his predecessor Donald Trump. "We will harness the power of democracy, freedom, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights to answer the biggest questions and overcome the greatest challenges," the leaders said. But the pledge on vaccines for poorer nations fell drastically short of the 11 billion doses that campaigners say are needed to end a pandemic that has claimed nearly four million lives and wrecked economies around the globe. "I'm afraid there will be smiles (at the G7) but they are not solutions," former British prime minister Gordon Brown told Sky News, calling the summit "an unforgivable moral failure". "Millions of people will go unvaccinated and thousands of people I'm afraid will die," said Brown, who helped coordinate international responses to the world's last major economic shock in 2008. Likewise, the G7's pledges to deliver more aid for countries at the sharp end of climate change, and to phase out fossil fuel investments, were decried as too little, too late ahead of a UN summit in November. "The G7 have failed to set us up for a successful COP26 as trust is sorely lacking between rich and developing countries," said Greenpeace International executive director Jennifer Morgan. "We need authentic leadership and that means treating the pandemic and the climate crisis for what they are: an interconnected inequality emergency," she said. 'Green Industrial Revolution' Nevertheless, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the summit's host, said the G7 wanted to "drive a global Green Industrial Revolution to transform the way we live". "There is a direct relationship between reducing emissions, restoring nature, creating jobs and ensuring long-term economic growth," he said. Johnson also touted a G7 pledge to get 40 million more girls into schools over the next five years, as part of the post-pandemic reconstruction. A White House official agreed the three-day gathering in Cornwall, southwest England, had been an "unusually substantive and productive G7". Angela Merkel, attending her last G7 as German chancellor, said Biden had brought "new momentum" to efforts to tackle the world's problems. India and South Africa, who took part in the G7 talks as guests, had pressed for the gathering to waive intellectual property rights on Western vaccines. But Britain and Germany were notable holdouts on that. Campaigners also complained the G7 had failed to flesh out how it will pay for a newly agreed "Nature Compact" -- to protect 30 percent of the world's land and oceans from despoliation by 2030. The leaders committed to nearly halve their carbon emissions by 2030, relative to 2010, and to phase out the use of "unabated coal" -- fuel whose emissions have not gone through any filtering -- "as soon as possible". They vowed to end most government support for the fossil fuel sector overseas, and to phase out petrol and diesel cars. The G7 had sharp words for Beijing and Moscow, in the buildup to a NATO summit in Brussels on Monday and Biden's first sit-down with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Switzerland on Wednesday. They demanded China end abuses including forced labour in Xinjiang, where activists say up to one million people from Uyghur and other Muslim minorities are interned in camps, and in Hong Kong. And they pressed China to let experts from the World Health Organization (WHO) investigate further how Covid-19 first emerged, amid suspicions that the coronavirus may have escaped from a Chinese laboratory. The allies adopted a US initiative to counter China in infrastructure funding for poorer nations, promising to "collectively catalyse" hundreds of billions of investment. The "Build Back Better World" (B3W) project is aimed squarely at competing with Beijing's trillion-dollar Belt and Road infrastructure initiative, which has been widely criticised for saddling small countries with unmanageable debt. And the G7 demanded that Russia "credibly explain" the use of chemical agents on its soil, end its "systematic crackdown" on opposition groups and media, and "hold to account" criminals waging ransomware attacks. Royal blessing A lingering row between Britain and the European Union over post-Brexit trading arrangements in Northern Ireland hung over the talks. But London sought to bring all sides together using the "soft power" diplomacy of Queen Elizabeth II and her heir Prince Charles, at a Friday night reception for leaders and EU chiefs. Joined Saturday by counterparts from Australia, South Africa and South Korea -- with India also taking part remotely -- they then enjoyed an evening beach barbecue around fire pits, featuring a sea shanty band and toasted marshmallows.

G7 vows action on Covid vaccines, Climate Change

Some environmental solutions are win-win, helping to rein in global warming and protecting biodiversity, too. But others address one crisis at the expense of the other. Growing trees on grasslands, for example, can destroy the plant and animal life of a rich ecosystem, even if the new trees ultimately suck up carbon.

What to do?

Unless the world stops treating climate change and biodiversity collapse as separate issues, neither problem can be addressed effectively, according to a report issued Thursday by researchers from two leading international scientific panels.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/poland-faces-first-citizen-lawsuits-over-climate-change-390695">Poland faces first citizen lawsuits over climate change</a>

“These two topics are more deeply intertwined than originally thought,” said Hans-Otto Pörtner, co-chair of the scientific steering committee that produced the report. They are also inextricably tied to human well-being. But global policies usually target one or the other, leading to unintended consequences.

“If you look at just one single angle, you miss a lot of things,” said Yunne-Jai Shin, a marine biologist with the French National Research Institute for Sustainable Development and a co-author of the report. “Every action counts.”

How We Got Here

For years, one set of scientists and policymakers has studied and tried to tackle the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/climate-change">climate crisis</a>, warning the world of the dangers from greenhouse gases that have been building up in the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution. The lead culprit: burning fossil fuels.

Another group has studied and tried to tackle the biodiversity crisis, raising alarms about extinctions and ecosystem collapse. The lead culprits: habitat loss because of agriculture and, at sea, overfishing.

The two groups have operated largely in their own silos. But their subjects are connected by something elemental, literally: carbon itself.

The same element that makes up soot and heat-trapping carbon dioxide and methane is also a fundamental building block of the natural world. It helps form the very tissue of plants and animals on earth. It is stored in forests, wetlands, grasslands and on the ocean floor. In fact, land and water ecosystems are already stashing away half of the human-generated emissions.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/archaeologists-fear-climate-change-slowly-erasing-worlds-oldest-cave-painting-in-indonesia-390674/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Another connection between climate and biodiversity: People have created emergencies on both fronts by using the planet’s resources in unsustainable ways.

For the last couple of decades, the climate crisis has largely overshadowed the biodiversity crisis, perhaps because its threat seemed more dire. But the balance may be shifting. Scientists warn that declines in biodiversity can lead to ecosystem collapse, threatening humanity’s food and water supply.

“Climate change of 4 or 5 degrees is just such an existential threat to people, it’s hard to imagine,” said Paul Leadley, one of the authors and an ecologist at Paris-Saclay University.

And, he continued, “if we lose a really large fraction of species on earth, that’s an existential threat.”

What Is Not Working

Businesses and countries have increasingly looked to nature as a way to offset their emissions, for example, by planting trees to absorb carbon. But the science is clear: Nature cannot store enough carbon to let us keep on spewing greenhouse gases at our current rates.

“A clear first priority is emissions reductions, emissions reductions and emissions reductions,”&nbsp;Pörtner said.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/heres-an-idea-to-reverse-climate-change-alter-the-orbit-of-the-moon-390689">Here's an idea to reverse climate change: Alter the orbit of the Moon</a>

Just last month, the world’s leading energy agency declared that if the world wants to avoid the worst impacts of global warming, nations would need to stop approving new coal, oil and gas projects immediately.

To make matters worse, some measures being used or proposed to address climate change could devastate biodiversity.

“Some people are out there selling this message that if we cover the whole planet with trees, that will solve the climate problem,” Leadley said. “That’s a mistaken message on many levels.”

In Brazil, parts of the Cerrado, a biodiverse savanna that stores large amounts of carbon, have been planted with monocultures of eucalyptus and pine in an attempt to meet a global reforestation goal. The result, researchers have written separately, is an “impending ecological disaster” because they destroy the native ecosystem and the livelihoods of local communities, including Indigenous people.

Europe once hoped to lead the world in biofuels until realizing they led to deforestation and increased food prices. Another kind of bioenergy, wood pellets, is currently booming in the southeastern United States, despite concerns about pollution and biodiversity loss.

Climate interventions tend to hurt biodiversity more than the other way round, and some trade-offs must occur, the authors wrote. Solar farms, for example, eat up wildlife habitat, a particular concern for places with threatened species. But, critically, they generate clean energy.

The report highlights ways to mitigate the damage to biodiversity, for example, by grazing livestock around them, improving carbon soil stocks and avoiding intact habitat. Pollinator gardens on solar farms can help nurture insects and birds. While wind farms can hurt migrating birds, the authors note that modern turbines cause much less damage.

The Solutions

By protecting and restoring nature, the report said, we can safeguard biodiversity, help limit warming, improve human well-being and even find protection from the consequences of climate change, like intensified flooding and storms.

In the Casamance region of Senegal, for example, local communities restored mangroves and adopted sustainable fishing measures, improving their catch, bringing back dolphins and 20 species of fish, storing carbon and protecting their coastline, said Pamela McElwee, an environmental anthropologist at Rutgers University who was one of the authors.

“Mangroves are a really special type of ecosystem,” she said, “in that they do it all for humans.”

While mangroves are themselves vulnerable to climate change, McElwee said they appear less threatened than once thought, because restoration efforts are working.

In the Hindu Kush mountains of South Asia, a project has conserved an area about the size of Belgium, restoring high-altitude forests and rangelands and protecting threatened snow leopards and musk deer, the report says while keeping carbon out of the atmosphere. The 1.3 million people who live there, straddling Nepal, India and the Tibet Autonomous Region of China, have seen enhanced household incomes through tourism and sustainable farming.

Urban areas, too, can do their part with native trees, green spaces and coastal ecosystems, the researchers said.

The report was the first collaboration between the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.

John Holdren, an environmental scientist at Harvard University and a former White House science adviser who was not involved in the report, called it “a must-read for our time.”

Some environmental solutions are win-win, helping to rein in global warming and protecting biodiversity, too. But others address one crisis at the expense of the other.

Some environmental solutions are win-win, helping to rein in global warming and protecting biodiversity, too. But others address one crisis at the expense of the other. Growing trees on grasslands, for example, can destroy the plant and animal life of a rich ecosystem, even if the new trees ultimately suck up carbon. What to do? Unless the world stops treating climate change and biodiversity collapse as separate issues, neither problem can be addressed effectively, according to a report issued Thursday by researchers from two leading international scientific panels. Also read | Poland faces first citizen lawsuits over climate change “These two topics are more deeply intertwined than originally thought,” said Hans-Otto Pörtner, co-chair of the scientific steering committee that produced the report. They are also inextricably tied to human well-being. But global policies usually target one or the other, leading to unintended consequences. “If you look at just one single angle, you miss a lot of things,” said Yunne-Jai Shin, a marine biologist with the French National Research Institute for Sustainable Development and a co-author of the report. “Every action counts.” How We Got Here For years, one set of scientists and policymakers has studied and tried to tackle the climate crisis, warning the world of the dangers from greenhouse gases that have been building up in the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution. The lead culprit: burning fossil fuels. Another group has studied and tried to tackle the biodiversity crisis, raising alarms about extinctions and ecosystem collapse. The lead culprits: habitat loss because of agriculture and, at sea, overfishing. The two groups have operated largely in their own silos. But their subjects are connected by something elemental, literally: carbon itself. The same element that makes up soot and heat-trapping carbon dioxide and methane is also a fundamental building block of the natural world. It helps form the very tissue of plants and animals on earth. It is stored in forests, wetlands, grasslands and on the ocean floor. In fact, land and water ecosystems are already stashing away half of the human-generated emissions. Another connection between climate and biodiversity: People have created emergencies on both fronts by using the planet’s resources in unsustainable ways. For the last couple of decades, the climate crisis has largely overshadowed the biodiversity crisis, perhaps because its threat seemed more dire. But the balance may be shifting. Scientists warn that declines in biodiversity can lead to ecosystem collapse, threatening humanity’s food and water supply. “Climate change of 4 or 5 degrees is just such an existential threat to people, it’s hard to imagine,” said Paul Leadley, one of the authors and an ecologist at Paris-Saclay University. And, he continued, “if we lose a really large fraction of species on earth, that’s an existential threat.” What Is Not Working Businesses and countries have increasingly looked to nature as a way to offset their emissions, for example, by planting trees to absorb carbon. But the science is clear: Nature cannot store enough carbon to let us keep on spewing greenhouse gases at our current rates. “A clear first priority is emissions reductions, emissions reductions and emissions reductions,” Pörtner said. Also read | Here's an idea to reverse climate change: Alter the orbit of the Moon Just last month, the world’s leading energy agency declared that if the world wants to avoid the worst impacts of global warming, nations would need to stop approving new coal, oil and gas projects immediately. To make matters worse, some measures being used or proposed to address climate change could devastate biodiversity. “Some people are out there selling this message that if we cover the whole planet with trees, that will solve the climate problem,” Leadley said. “That’s a mistaken message on many levels.” In Brazil, parts of the Cerrado, a biodiverse savanna that stores large amounts of carbon, have been planted with monocultures of eucalyptus and pine in an attempt to meet a global reforestation goal. The result, researchers have written separately, is an “impending ecological disaster” because they destroy the native ecosystem and the livelihoods of local communities, including Indigenous people. Europe once hoped to lead the world in biofuels until realizing they led to deforestation and increased food prices. Another kind of bioenergy, wood pellets, is currently booming in the southeastern United States, despite concerns about pollution and biodiversity loss. Climate interventions tend to hurt biodiversity more than the other way round, and some trade-offs must occur, the authors wrote. Solar farms, for example, eat up wildlife habitat, a particular concern for places with threatened species. But, critically, they generate clean energy. The report highlights ways to mitigate the damage to biodiversity, for example, by grazing livestock around them, improving carbon soil stocks and avoiding intact habitat. Pollinator gardens on solar farms can help nurture insects and birds. While wind farms can hurt migrating birds, the authors note that modern turbines cause much less damage. The Solutions By protecting and restoring nature, the report said, we can safeguard biodiversity, help limit warming, improve human well-being and even find protection from the consequences of climate change, like intensified flooding and storms. In the Casamance region of Senegal, for example, local communities restored mangroves and adopted sustainable fishing measures, improving their catch, bringing back dolphins and 20 species of fish, storing carbon and protecting their coastline, said Pamela McElwee, an environmental anthropologist at Rutgers University who was one of the authors. “Mangroves are a really special type of ecosystem,” she said, “in that they do it all for humans.” While mangroves are themselves vulnerable to climate change, McElwee said they appear less threatened than once thought, because restoration efforts are working. In the Hindu Kush mountains of South Asia, a project has conserved an area about the size of Belgium, restoring high-altitude forests and rangelands and protecting threatened snow leopards and musk deer, the report says while keeping carbon out of the atmosphere. The 1.3 million people who live there, straddling Nepal, India and the Tibet Autonomous Region of China, have seen enhanced household incomes through tourism and sustainable farming. Urban areas, too, can do their part with native trees, green spaces and coastal ecosystems, the researchers said. The report was the first collaboration between the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. John Holdren, an environmental scientist at Harvard University and a former White House science adviser who was not involved in the report, called it “a must-read for our time.”

Our response to climate change is missing something big, scientists say

A Republican member of the US&nbsp;House of Representatives inquired at a congressional hearing on Tuesday&nbsp;about what can only be considered a novel approach to reversing the effects of&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change.

At a hearing of the House Natural Resources Committee, Representative Louis Gohmert of Texas noted he had heard from a former official of NASA that the orbit of the Moon around the Earth and the orbit of the Earth around the Sun fluctuates slightly.

Indeed, variations in the celestial mechanics of the Moon's orbit had been known by the ancient Greeks. Astronomers today refer to these variations as an axial precession.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/archaeologists-fear-climate-change-slowly-erasing-worlds-oldest-cave-painting-in-indonesia-390674/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

But, Gohmert, in a hearing with an official of the National Forest System, a nook of the US&nbsp;federal government which, among other things, oversees the nation's timber supply, its management of wildfires, and the planting of undergrowth most beneficial to wildlife, expressed concern about the effects of&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change&nbsp;and asked whether the forest service bureaucracy might do something to reverse those effects by altering the orbit of the Moon.

"Is there anything that the National Forest Service or BLM (the Bureau of Land Management) can do to&nbsp;change&nbsp;the course of the Moon's orbit or the Earth's orbit around the Sun? he asked, noting that an orbital adjustment would have a profound effect of the&nbsp;climate.

Jennifer Eberlein, associate deputy chief of the National Forest System, nonplussed at a question widely outside of her usual running lane, was at her diplomatic best.

"I would have to follow-up with you on that one, Mr. Gohmert," she replied.

A Republican member of the US House of Representatives inquired at a congressional hearing on Tuesday about what can only be considered a novel approach to reversing the effects of climate change.

A Republican member of the US House of Representatives inquired at a congressional hearing on Tuesday about what can only be considered a novel approach to reversing the effects of climate change. At a hearing of the House Natural Resources Committee, Representative Louis Gohmert of Texas noted he had heard from a former official of NASA that the orbit of the Moon around the Earth and the orbit of the Earth around the Sun fluctuates slightly. Indeed, variations in the celestial mechanics of the Moon's orbit had been known by the ancient Greeks. Astronomers today refer to these variations as an axial precession. But, Gohmert, in a hearing with an official of the National Forest System, a nook of the US federal government which, among other things, oversees the nation's timber supply, its management of wildfires, and the planting of undergrowth most beneficial to wildlife, expressed concern about the effects of climate change and asked whether the forest service bureaucracy might do something to reverse those effects by altering the orbit of the Moon. "Is there anything that the National Forest Service or BLM (the Bureau of Land Management) can do to change the course of the Moon's orbit or the Earth's orbit around the Sun? he asked, noting that an orbital adjustment would have a profound effect of the climate. Jennifer Eberlein, associate deputy chief of the National Forest System, nonplussed at a question widely outside of her usual running lane, was at her diplomatic best. "I would have to follow-up with you on that one, Mr. Gohmert," she replied.

US lawmaker's idea to reverse climate change: Alter the orbit of the Moon

Five individuals in Poland are taking the government to court over its alleged failure to protect them from the impact of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/climate-change">climate change</a>, the first such litigation in the coal-reliant country, legal charity ClientEarth said on Thursday.

Poland plans huge investments in offshore wind power and wants to build its first nuclear power plant to cut carbon emissions, but activists have criticised Warsaw for being slow to phase out coal and improve air quality.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/carbon-dioxide-in-atmosphere-hits-record-high-despite-pandemic-dip-390148">Carbon dioxide in atmosphere hits record high despite pandemic dip</a>

It was the only European Union member state not to pledge to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 when the bloc set the target in 2019. Poland's conservative government has long courted political support from interests in the coal industry, which provides around 70 per cent&nbsp;of the country's energy.

"I can see climate change...There are three ponds on my farm, all three are practically dry already," said Piotr Romanowski, a farmer from Poland's northeast and one of the five litigants.

"I am filing this lawsuit because the&nbsp;Polish&nbsp;government is doing nothing to prevent this situation, to prevent climate change," he said in a statement.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/countries-failing-to-fund-climate-change-adaptation-measures-says-united-nations-357335">Countries failing to fund climate change adaptation measures, says United Nations</a>

The other litigants are an ecotourism business owner, parents from different families, and a young climate campaigner. Three of the cases were filed on Thursday with a further two to be filed later this month in regional courts.

The five will ask the courts to rule that Poland must commit to a 61 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by 2030, and climate neutrality by 2043.

"(These five) cases are the first to expose the emerging effects of climate change on people living in Poland," ClimateEarth said in a statement.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/archaeologists-fear-climate-change-slowly-erasing-worlds-oldest-cave-painting-in-indonesia-390674/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Officials at Poland's climate ministry did not immediately respond to a Reuters' request for comment.

Earlier this week local authorities said that the lignite-fired Belchatow power plant in central Poland, the worst single polluter of its kind in Europe, would be closed by 2036.

Poland has also been sued by the neighbouring Czech Republic at Europe's highest court over the current expansion of the&nbsp;Polish&nbsp;Turow open-pit brown coal mine near the two countries' border.

Five individuals in Poland are taking the government to court over its alleged failure to protect them from the impact of climate change, the first such litigation in the coal-reliant country, legal charity ClientEarth said on Thursday.

Five individuals in Poland are taking the government to court over its alleged failure to protect them from the impact of climate change, the first such litigation in the coal-reliant country, legal charity ClientEarth said on Thursday. Poland plans huge investments in offshore wind power and wants to build its first nuclear power plant to cut carbon emissions, but activists have criticised Warsaw for being slow to phase out coal and improve air quality. Also read | Carbon dioxide in atmosphere hits record high despite pandemic dip It was the only European Union member state not to pledge to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 when the bloc set the target in 2019. Poland's conservative government has long courted political support from interests in the coal industry, which provides around 70 per cent of the country's energy. "I can see climate change...There are three ponds on my farm, all three are practically dry already," said Piotr Romanowski, a farmer from Poland's northeast and one of the five litigants. "I am filing this lawsuit because the Polish government is doing nothing to prevent this situation, to prevent climate change," he said in a statement. Also read | Countries failing to fund climate change adaptation measures, says United Nations The other litigants are an ecotourism business owner, parents from different families, and a young climate campaigner. Three of the cases were filed on Thursday with a further two to be filed later this month in regional courts. The five will ask the courts to rule that Poland must commit to a 61 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by 2030, and climate neutrality by 2043. "(These five) cases are the first to expose the emerging effects of climate change on people living in Poland," ClimateEarth said in a statement. Officials at Poland's climate ministry did not immediately respond to a Reuters' request for comment. Earlier this week local authorities said that the lignite-fired Belchatow power plant in central Poland, the worst single polluter of its kind in Europe, would be closed by 2036. Poland has also been sued by the neighbouring Czech Republic at Europe's highest court over the current expansion of the Polish Turow open-pit brown coal mine near the two countries' border.

Poland faces first citizen lawsuits over climate change

The president of United Nations' upcoming global summit to tackle climate change said that the in-person summit must go ahead. He was quoted by AFP

The 26th edition of the UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties -- COP26 -- marks the biggest climate summit since the 2015 Paris negotiation.

COP26 will involve negotiators from 196 countries and the European Union, along with businesses, experts and world leaders, and is scheduled to start November 1 in the Scottish city of Glasgow.

"We need to have a physical event. We cannot allow any further delay," COP26 President Alok Sharma told AFP in Dhaka.

"We've already delayed COP by one year and I'm afraid that during that year climate change has not abated. In fact, last year was the hottest year on record, the last decade was the hottest on record."

Sharma said that governments around the world have backed a physical event. He added that every precaution was being taken to ensure safety of delegates and the local community

"We are looking at all Covid-secure measures, including vaccines, to deal with this particular issue."

Nations around the world committed under the 2015 Paris accord to keeping the global temperature increase to under two degrees Celsius, and ideally closer to 1.5 degrees by 2050.

The upcoming talks are crucial to meeting the target.

"This is going to be the decisive decade. And we have to act now," Sharma said.

"All countries need to come forward, set out ambitious plans to cut their emissions, but also to be carbon neutral, to be net zero emissions by the middle of the century."

(With inputs from agencies)

The president of United Nations' upcoming global summit to tackle climate change said that the in-person summit must go ahead. He was quoted by AFP The 26th edition of the UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties -- COP26 -- marks the biggest climate summit since the 2015 Paris negotiation.

The president of United Nations' upcoming global summit to tackle climate change said that the in-person summit must go ahead. He was quoted by AFP The 26th edition of the UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties -- COP26 -- marks the biggest climate summit since the 2015 Paris negotiation. COP26 will involve negotiators from 196 countries and the European Union, along with businesses, experts and world leaders, and is scheduled to start November 1 in the Scottish city of Glasgow. "We need to have a physical event. We cannot allow any further delay," COP26 President Alok Sharma told AFP in Dhaka. "We've already delayed COP by one year and I'm afraid that during that year climate change has not abated. In fact, last year was the hottest year on record, the last decade was the hottest on record." Sharma said that governments around the world have backed a physical event. He added that every precaution was being taken to ensure safety of delegates and the local community "We are looking at all Covid-secure measures, including vaccines, to deal with this particular issue." Nations around the world committed under the 2015 Paris accord to keeping the global temperature increase to under two degrees Celsius, and ideally closer to 1.5 degrees by 2050. The upcoming talks are crucial to meeting the target. "This is going to be the decisive decade. And we have to act now," Sharma said. "All countries need to come forward, set out ambitious plans to cut their emissions, but also to be carbon neutral, to be net zero emissions by the middle of the century." (With inputs from agencies)

In-person UN summit termed 'key to addressing climate concerns'

Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan on Saturday urged the rich nations to take responsibility for climate change, reduce their carbon emissions and help poor countries to face the challenge.

Khan spoke at an event held virtually on the occasion of World Environment Day, hosted by Pakistan this year in partnership with the United Nations Environment Program.

"This is a chance for the world to correct its course. Now we have the next decade for ecosystem restoration," Khan said.

He said although Pakistan's contribution to global carbon emissions was quite low as compared to advanced nations, yet the country was one of the most vulnerable to changing climate patterns.

"Pakistan's contribution to global warming and climate change is minimal. Rich countries, which contribute significantly more, have a greater responsibility to provide funds to ones like ours so that we can fight climate change," he said.

"The countries which contribute the most towards pollution and have the resources should support those trying to combat climate change," he said.

Khan also lauded UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres for reiterating the message that the developed world has to take responsibility and help countries which do not have the resources when it comes to fighting global warming.

Talking about the steps being taken by Pakistan to tackle the challenge, he said the country was aiming to produce 60 per cent clean energy by 2030.

Khan said one billion trees had been planted in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the government would achieve the target of planting 10 billion trees in the next five years.

"If we are successful in our goal of planting 10 billion trees, it will have a major impact on the people, the country and the economy," he said, urging the people to take part in the campaign.

Chinese President Xi Jinping, whose message was read out by the country's ambassador to Pakistan Nong Rong, commended the strides made by Pakistan to cope with climate change.

Xi Jinping said his country stands ready to work with Pakistan and other countries to inject new impetus into global environmental governance and contribute to a clean and beautiful world.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson virtually delivering his message appreciated Prime Minister Khan for undertaking the project of planting ten billion trees and termed it a huge campaign for forestation.

UN Secretary General Guterres in his virtual address said the next ten years will be the final chance to avert a climate catastrophe, turn back the deadly tide of pollution and end species loss.

"We should finally make peace with nature and secure a better future for all," he said. 
Earlier, Khan in a tweet urged the "world to join hands to protect the environment and reset relationship with Nature".

He said Pakistan was fully committed to play a leadership role in restoration of the ecosystem.

Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan on Saturday urged the rich nations to take responsibility for climate change, reduce their carbon emissions and help poor countries to face the challenge.

Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan on Saturday urged the rich nations to take responsibility for climate change, reduce their carbon emissions and help poor countries to face the challenge. Khan spoke at an event held virtually on the occasion of World Environment Day, hosted by Pakistan this year in partnership with the United Nations Environment Program. "This is a chance for the world to correct its course. Now we have the next decade for ecosystem restoration," Khan said. He said although Pakistan's contribution to global carbon emissions was quite low as compared to advanced nations, yet the country was one of the most vulnerable to changing climate patterns. "Pakistan's contribution to global warming and climate change is minimal. Rich countries, which contribute significantly more, have a greater responsibility to provide funds to ones like ours so that we can fight climate change," he said. "The countries which contribute the most towards pollution and have the resources should support those trying to combat climate change," he said. Khan also lauded UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres for reiterating the message that the developed world has to take responsibility and help countries which do not have the resources when it comes to fighting global warming. Talking about the steps being taken by Pakistan to tackle the challenge, he said the country was aiming to produce 60 per cent clean energy by 2030. Khan said one billion trees had been planted in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the government would achieve the target of planting 10 billion trees in the next five years. "If we are successful in our goal of planting 10 billion trees, it will have a major impact on the people, the country and the economy," he said, urging the people to take part in the campaign. Chinese President Xi Jinping, whose message was read out by the country's ambassador to Pakistan Nong Rong, commended the strides made by Pakistan to cope with climate change. Xi Jinping said his country stands ready to work with Pakistan and other countries to inject new impetus into global environmental governance and contribute to a clean and beautiful world. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson virtually delivering his message appreciated Prime Minister Khan for undertaking the project of planting ten billion trees and termed it a huge campaign for forestation. UN Secretary General Guterres in his virtual address said the next ten years will be the final chance to avert a climate catastrophe, turn back the deadly tide of pollution and end species loss. "We should finally make peace with nature and secure a better future for all," he said. Earlier, Khan in a tweet urged the "world to join hands to protect the environment and reset relationship with Nature". He said Pakistan was fully committed to play a leadership role in restoration of the ecosystem.

Rich nations should help poor countries tackle climate change: Imran Khan

The risks posed by climate change encompass immediate disasters like earthquakes and floods. The crisis is essentially a slow killer, which has now picked up pace owing to the rising temperatures across the globe. If current goals of keeping global temperatures 1.5 degree Celsius above pre-industrial levels fail, we could lose a lot of cherished animal species globally.

Coral systems which are responsible for building reefs are already disappearing from the oceans, threatening life in the ocean as we know it. If temperatures continue to rise, polar animals will lose their habitat, including penguins in Antarctica. The consequences are far-reaching in scope, threatening species like puffins in the UK and the black-headed squirrel monkey in the Amazon.

The devastation to ecosystems and species could become even more massive if temperatures rise above 1.5 degree Celsius, depriving many species of food and survival, a new report by the WWF reveals. The report assessed the effects of climate change on 12 key species in the world.

According to WWF, protecting animal habitats around the world remains key to prevent warming from exceeding 1.5 degree Celsius.&nbsp; The report adds that quicker degradation of vegetation and complex ecologies would accentuate the devastating effects of climate change. For example - the more dirty our oceans become, the less carbon it can absorb.&nbsp;

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/science/climate-change-will-shoot-up-cases-of-brain-eating-amoeba-heres-how-388610" hreflang="en">Climate change will shoot up cases of brain-eating amoeba. Here's how</a>

Even a surge of 0.5 degree Celsius could be devastating to many species on Earth including snow leopards, hippopotamuses, monkeys, sea turtles, frogs and corals.&nbsp; Many of these species are dependent on stable and consistent changes in weather for survival, but as patterns become erratic they could lose their edge over predators and even the ability to reproduce.

The cost of climate change is already too high! Since 1970, 68 per cent of global wildlife populations have plummeted. If governments around the world don’t pull up their socks soon, we may lose a lot of species over the next few decades.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/science/uk-will-suck-out-carbon-dioxide-from-air-to-fight-climate-change-387097" hreflang="en">UK will 'suck out' carbon dioxide from air to fight climate change</a>

The risks posed by climate change encompass immediate disasters like earthquakes and floods. The crisis is essentially a slow killer, which has now picked up pace owing to the rising temperatures across the globe.

The risks posed by climate change encompass immediate disasters like earthquakes and floods. The crisis is essentially a slow killer, which has now picked up pace owing to the rising temperatures across the globe. If current goals of keeping global temperatures 1.5 degree Celsius above pre-industrial levels fail, we could lose a lot of cherished animal species globally. Coral systems which are responsible for building reefs are already disappearing from the oceans, threatening life in the ocean as we know it. If temperatures continue to rise, polar animals will lose their habitat, including penguins in Antarctica. The consequences are far-reaching in scope, threatening species like puffins in the UK and the black-headed squirrel monkey in the Amazon. The devastation to ecosystems and species could become even more massive if temperatures rise above 1.5 degree Celsius, depriving many species of food and survival, a new report by the WWF reveals. The report assessed the effects of climate change on 12 key species in the world. According to WWF, protecting animal habitats around the world remains key to prevent warming from exceeding 1.5 degree Celsius. The report adds that quicker degradation of vegetation and complex ecologies would accentuate the devastating effects of climate change. For example - the more dirty our oceans become, the less carbon it can absorb. Also read: Climate change will shoot up cases of brain-eating amoeba. Here's how Even a surge of 0.5 degree Celsius could be devastating to many species on Earth including snow leopards, hippopotamuses, monkeys, sea turtles, frogs and corals. Many of these species are dependent on stable and consistent changes in weather for survival, but as patterns become erratic they could lose their edge over predators and even the ability to reproduce. The cost of climate change is already too high! Since 1970, 68 per cent of global wildlife populations have plummeted. If governments around the world don’t pull up their socks soon, we may lose a lot of species over the next few decades. Also read: UK will 'suck out' carbon dioxide from air to fight climate change

We could lose these species if climate change heats Earth by over 1.5° Celsius

Social distancing has become the new norm. In fact, the pandemic-driven changes in society&nbsp;are expected to leave a long-lasting imprint on our modes of interactions in the near future. While many were relieved at the scope of limited contact with others, the indefinite distance became a challenge for many in a civilisation heavily dependent on social capital.

Now, a study sheds light on why a rare parrot species may have migrated to the mountains.

Alpine parrots are a rare and highly endangered species found in New Zealand and researchers believe the parrots’ ability to adapt could tremendously help them as the climate crisis deepens. Turns out, the parrots adjusted to a life in the mountains to simply escape the hustle and bustle caused by human societies.

Colloquially known as “the kea”, they are considered the only alpine parrots in the world, even though research suggests the birds were earlier found in different parts of the country.

Climate change’s long-term consequences on the alpine parrots are diverse and dire. The kea could perish in the face of competition to survive! Scientists are therefore pleased that the bird left for other territories, calling it a hallmark of its adaptability, for if the bird was able to move to the mountains to simply escape humans, it could continue to migrate suitably as warming sets in.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/australias-greta-thunberg-steps-up-climate-change-activism-388693" hreflang="en">'Australia's Greta Thunberg' steps up climate change activism</a>

Due to heating induced by climate change, alpine environments will retreat, with many species facing the threat of extinction.

In the study, which was published in the journal called Molecular Ecology, scientists compared bird's DNA to the kākā, a sister parrot species that lives in the forests. They found that there wasn’t much difference between them, suggesting that the birds &nbsp;"adapted to using such an open habitat&nbsp;because it was least disturbed by human activity".

European researchers have&nbsp;warned against the ill-effects of warming on Alpine species, claiming that 22 per cent of glacial species in the Italian Alps would disappear after the melting of glaciers. But even then, scientists worry about the future of the species solely on the grounds that it may have nowhere to go once the glaciers melt.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/science/climate-change-will-shoot-up-cases-of-brain-eating-amoeba-heres-how-388610" hreflang="en">Climate change will shoot up cases of brain-eating amoeba. Here's how</a>

Social distancing has become the new norm. In fact, the pandemic-driven changes in society are expected to leave a long-lasting imprint on our modes of interactions in the near future.

Social distancing has become the new norm. In fact, the pandemic-driven changes in society are expected to leave a long-lasting imprint on our modes of interactions in the near future. While many were relieved at the scope of limited contact with others, the indefinite distance became a challenge for many in a civilisation heavily dependent on social capital. Now, a study sheds light on why a rare parrot species may have migrated to the mountains. Alpine parrots are a rare and highly endangered species found in New Zealand and researchers believe the parrots’ ability to adapt could tremendously help them as the climate crisis deepens. Turns out, the parrots adjusted to a life in the mountains to simply escape the hustle and bustle caused by human societies. Colloquially known as “the kea”, they are considered the only alpine parrots in the world, even though research suggests the birds were earlier found in different parts of the country. Climate change’s long-term consequences on the alpine parrots are diverse and dire. The kea could perish in the face of competition to survive! Scientists are therefore pleased that the bird left for other territories, calling it a hallmark of its adaptability, for if the bird was able to move to the mountains to simply escape humans, it could continue to migrate suitably as warming sets in. Also read: 'Australia's Greta Thunberg' steps up climate change activism Due to heating induced by climate change, alpine environments will retreat, with many species facing the threat of extinction. In the study, which was published in the journal called Molecular Ecology, scientists compared bird's DNA to the kākā, a sister parrot species that lives in the forests. They found that there wasn’t much difference between them, suggesting that the birds "adapted to using such an open habitat because it was least disturbed by human activity". European researchers have warned against the ill-effects of warming on Alpine species, claiming that 22 per cent of glacial species in the Italian Alps would disappear after the melting of glaciers. But even then, scientists worry about the future of the species solely on the grounds that it may have nowhere to go once the glaciers melt. Also read: Climate change will shoot up cases of brain-eating amoeba. Here's how

World's only alpine parrot species actually left for the mountains to avoid humans

More than one-third of all deaths in the world are caused due to global warming. According to a new study, 37 percent of all heat-related deaths in the recent summer periods were caused due to global warming.

Study: Global warming leads to 1 in 3 heat-related deaths worldwide

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Monday that the world was in "the make or break decade' with respect to the climate change. She was delivering a virtual speech at the 2021 Partnering for Green growth and the Global Goals 2030, or P4G, summit

"Change is never easy but Europe has taken the decision because mankind can't wait any longer. And we have to do this together," von der Leyen said.

"The next six months are crucial for the health and well-being of our people and our planet. Let's work together."

The EU's new target is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 from 1990 levels. Agreed last month, the goal is more ambitious than the previous plan for a 40% cut.

Organisers of the summit are calling for participating countries to take action to implement emissions targets made at other climate summits.

(With inputs from agencies)

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Monday that the world was in "the make or break decade' with respect to the climate change. She was delivering a virtual speech at the 2021 Partnering for Green growth and the Global Goals 2030, or P4G, summit "Change is never easy but Europe has taken the decision because mankind can't wait any longer.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Monday that the world was in "the make or break decade' with respect to the climate change. She was delivering a virtual speech at the 2021 Partnering for Green growth and the Global Goals 2030, or P4G, summit "Change is never easy but Europe has taken the decision because mankind can't wait any longer. And we have to do this together," von der Leyen said. "The next six months are crucial for the health and well-being of our people and our planet. Let's work together." The EU's new target is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 from 1990 levels. Agreed last month, the goal is more ambitious than the previous plan for a 40% cut. Organisers of the summit are calling for participating countries to take action to implement emissions targets made at other climate summits. (With inputs from agencies)

EU chief calls current decade 'make or break' for climate change

World&nbsp;leaders&nbsp;on Sunday called for more&nbsp;action&nbsp;and&nbsp;inclusion&nbsp;of all countries in the global drive towards a cleaner and greener planet at a&nbsp;climate&nbsp;summit&nbsp;hosted virtually by South Korea.

Climate&nbsp;change is a major threat to global growth, with perils ranging from declines in crop yields, extreme weather that devastates tourist economies, disease outbreaks and other catastrophes that would sap productivity.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/california-already-in-throes-of-drought-as-summer-looms-388370">California already in throes of drought as summer looms</a>

South Korea, which recently announced plans to cut finance for international coal projects, is seeking a bigger role in the global initiative to go green.

"South Korea will play a responsible role as a bridging nation between developing and advanced nations," said President Moon Jae-in as he opened the 2021 Partnering for Green Growth and the Global Goals 2030, or P4G,&nbsp;summit.

The two-day&nbsp;summit&nbsp;is the second of its kind following the inaugural meeting held in Copenhagen in 2018 and is focused on public-private partnerships, especially in developing countries.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/climate-change-likely-contributed-to-one-of-the-oldest-examples-of-human-warfare-388094">Climate change likely contributed to one of the oldest examples of human warfare</a>

Advanced nations have laid out ambitious emissions-cutting goals in recent months, as well as plans to ultimately go carbon neutral by 2050.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel called on the countries to phase out their dependence on fossil fuels, warning&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change is threatening people's lives and the economy as much as the Covid-19 pandemic.

Earlier this month Germany tightened its targets to reduce CO2 emissions,&nbsp;including a 65 per cent cut in emissions by 2030, after a landmark ruling by the country's top court declared a flagship&nbsp;climate&nbsp;protection law "insufficient".

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-in-nudge-to-us-makes-a-new-promise-to-tackle-global-warming-349485">China, in nudge to US, makes a new promise to tackle global warming</a>

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said countries must now deliver on their green pledges.

"It's a great start, but let's not pat ourselves on the back just yet because our planet and our people need more," he said.

"We need governments that will not just make promises on&nbsp;climate&nbsp;and nature but match those words with deeds."

Falling behind

World&nbsp;leaders&nbsp;committed under the 2015 Paris accord to keeping the global temperature increase to under two degrees Celsius, and ideally closer to 1.5C, by 2050.&nbsp;

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/arctic-sea-ice-likely-to-vanish-in-summers-even-if-paris-accord-target-met-study-13113">Arctic sea ice likely to vanish in summers even if Paris accord target met: Study</a>

Yet many of the largest emitters have so far failed to keep up their commitments and countries have not even agreed on a unified rulebook governing how the Paris agreement works in practice.&nbsp;

The UN says that emissions must fall nearly eight per cent annually to keep 1.5C in play, equivalent to the emissions saved during the pandemic every single year through 2030.

World&nbsp;leaders&nbsp;also stressed the importance of making sure that poorer countries are not left out in the global initiative to go green.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/creation-is-groaning-pope-francis-urges-countries-to-follow-paris-climate-agreement-324509">'Creation is groaning': Pope Francis urges countries to follow Paris Climate Agreement</a>

African countries should not be "locked up" in fossil fuels and be able to advance with the rest of the&nbsp;world, said French President Emmanuel Macron, calling for ways to draw large-scale investments in renewable energy.

"It is not a global partnership if some are left struggling to survive," added UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres.&nbsp;

"Tackling&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change head-on will help protect the most vulnerable people from the next crisis while sustaining a job-rich recovery from the pandemic," he said.

The&nbsp;World&nbsp;Bank estimates that between 32 million and 132 million additional people could fall into extreme poverty by 2030 due to the effects of&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change.

World leaders on Sunday called for more action and inclusion of all countries in the global drive towards a cleaner and greener planet at a climate summit hosted virtually by South Korea.

World leaders on Sunday called for more action and inclusion of all countries in the global drive towards a cleaner and greener planet at a climate summit hosted virtually by South Korea. Climate change is a major threat to global growth, with perils ranging from declines in crop yields, extreme weather that devastates tourist economies, disease outbreaks and other catastrophes that would sap productivity. Also Read | California already in throes of drought as summer looms South Korea, which recently announced plans to cut finance for international coal projects, is seeking a bigger role in the global initiative to go green. "South Korea will play a responsible role as a bridging nation between developing and advanced nations," said President Moon Jae-in as he opened the 2021 Partnering for Green Growth and the Global Goals 2030, or P4G, summit. The two-day summit is the second of its kind following the inaugural meeting held in Copenhagen in 2018 and is focused on public-private partnerships, especially in developing countries. Also Read | Climate change likely contributed to one of the oldest examples of human warfare Advanced nations have laid out ambitious emissions-cutting goals in recent months, as well as plans to ultimately go carbon neutral by 2050. German Chancellor Angela Merkel called on the countries to phase out their dependence on fossil fuels, warning climate change is threatening people's lives and the economy as much as the Covid-19 pandemic. Earlier this month Germany tightened its targets to reduce CO2 emissions, including a 65 per cent cut in emissions by 2030, after a landmark ruling by the country's top court declared a flagship climate protection law "insufficient". Also Read | China, in nudge to US, makes a new promise to tackle global warming British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said countries must now deliver on their green pledges. "It's a great start, but let's not pat ourselves on the back just yet because our planet and our people need more," he said. "We need governments that will not just make promises on climate and nature but match those words with deeds." Falling behind World leaders committed under the 2015 Paris accord to keeping the global temperature increase to under two degrees Celsius, and ideally closer to 1.5C, by 2050. Also Read | Arctic sea ice likely to vanish in summers even if Paris accord target met: Study Yet many of the largest emitters have so far failed to keep up their commitments and countries have not even agreed on a unified rulebook governing how the Paris agreement works in practice. The UN says that emissions must fall nearly eight per cent annually to keep 1.5C in play, equivalent to the emissions saved during the pandemic every single year through 2030. World leaders also stressed the importance of making sure that poorer countries are not left out in the global initiative to go green. Also Read | 'Creation is groaning': Pope Francis urges countries to follow Paris Climate Agreement African countries should not be "locked up" in fossil fuels and be able to advance with the rest of the world, said French President Emmanuel Macron, calling for ways to draw large-scale investments in renewable energy. "It is not a global partnership if some are left struggling to survive," added UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres. "Tackling climate change head-on will help protect the most vulnerable people from the next crisis while sustaining a job-rich recovery from the pandemic," he said. The World Bank estimates that between 32 million and 132 million additional people could fall into extreme poverty by 2030 due to the effects of climate change.

World leaders call for action, inclusion at Seoul climate summit

Rapidly growing population=declining biodiversity. How can the world tackle the biodiversity crisis? Watch 'Mission Sustainability - Population vs Planet'

Deforestation, species extinction: A global concern

All was not well among the peoples who inhabited the east bank of the Nile River in northern Sudan some 13,400 years ago, as revealed by the battered bodies buried in a cemetery at one of the world's oldest sites showing human&nbsp;warfare.

Researchers said&nbsp;a re-examination of remains from the Jebel Sahaba cemetery excavated in the 1960s provides new insight into this prehistoric bloodshed, including evidence that there had been a succession of violent encounters rather than a single deadly showdown as previously believed.

Of the skeletal remains of 61 men, women and children, 41 bore signs of at least one injury, mainly from projectile weapons including spears and arrows. Some wounds had healed, indicating the person survived the fighting.

Sixteen of them had both healed and unhealed wounds, indicating they survived one fight only to die in another. A microscopic examination identified wounds with remnants of stone weapons embedded in the bone.

The original 1960s analysis had identified only 20 people with any wounds and none with healed injuries.

The extensive and indiscriminate violence affected men and women equally, with children as young as 4 also wounded, said paleoanthropologist Isabelle Crevecoeur of the French National Centre for Scientific Research at the University of Bordeaux, lead author of the study published in the journal Scientific Reports.

"It appears that one of the main lethal properties sought was to slash and cause blood loss," Crevecoeur said.

While spears and arrows can be delivered from a distance, there also was evidence of close combat with numerous instances of parry fractures,&nbsp;blows to the forearm sustained when the arm is raised to protect the head - and broken hand bones.

Hunter-gatherers lived in the Nile Valley at the time, before the advent of agriculture. They hunted mammals such as antelope, caught fish and collected plants and roots. Their groups were small, perhaps not exceeding a hundred.

While it is difficult to know why they fought, it came during a time of climate change in the region from a dry period to a wetter one along with severe Nile flooding episodes, possibly triggering competition among rival clans for resources and territory.

"Unlike a specific battle or short&nbsp;war, violence appears to have unfortunately been a regular occurrence and part of the daily fabric of their lives," said study co-author Daniel Antoine, acting head of the Department of Egypt and Sudan and curator of bioarchaeology at the British Museum in London.

Crevecoeur said the archeological evidence indicated "recurrent, small-scale clashes probably in the form of raids, skirmishes, ambush attacks among hunter-gatherer groups, rather than one single conflict." Unknown cultural differences between groups also could have been at play, Crevecoeur added.

The site, now submerged under the large human-made reservoir called Lake Nasser, is the Nile Valley's earliest-known funerary complex and one of Africa's oldest. The human remains have been stored at the British Museum.

Philosophers long have pondered the contradictions of human nature. Our species has forged magnificent intellectual, technological and artistic achievements and has engaged in ghastly&nbsp;warfare. Archeological evidence has shown interpersonal violence in the human evolutionary lineage even predating the appearance of Homo sapiens more than 300,000 years ago.

"We believe our findings have important implications to the debate about the causes and form of&nbsp;warfare," Crevecoeur said. "What is certain is that acts of violence are recorded since hundreds of thousands of years ago, and are not restricted to our species - for example, also Neanderthals. But their motives are probably as complex and varied as we can imagine."

All was not well among the peoples who inhabited the east bank of the Nile River in northern Sudan some 13,400 years ago, as revealed by the battered bodies buried in a cemetery at one of the world's oldest sites showing human warfare.

All was not well among the peoples who inhabited the east bank of the Nile River in northern Sudan some 13,400 years ago, as revealed by the battered bodies buried in a cemetery at one of the world's oldest sites showing human warfare. Researchers said a re-examination of remains from the Jebel Sahaba cemetery excavated in the 1960s provides new insight into this prehistoric bloodshed, including evidence that there had been a succession of violent encounters rather than a single deadly showdown as previously believed. Of the skeletal remains of 61 men, women and children, 41 bore signs of at least one injury, mainly from projectile weapons including spears and arrows. Some wounds had healed, indicating the person survived the fighting. Sixteen of them had both healed and unhealed wounds, indicating they survived one fight only to die in another. A microscopic examination identified wounds with remnants of stone weapons embedded in the bone. The original 1960s analysis had identified only 20 people with any wounds and none with healed injuries. The extensive and indiscriminate violence affected men and women equally, with children as young as 4 also wounded, said paleoanthropologist Isabelle Crevecoeur of the French National Centre for Scientific Research at the University of Bordeaux, lead author of the study published in the journal Scientific Reports. "It appears that one of the main lethal properties sought was to slash and cause blood loss," Crevecoeur said. While spears and arrows can be delivered from a distance, there also was evidence of close combat with numerous instances of parry fractures, blows to the forearm sustained when the arm is raised to protect the head - and broken hand bones. Hunter-gatherers lived in the Nile Valley at the time, before the advent of agriculture. They hunted mammals such as antelope, caught fish and collected plants and roots. Their groups were small, perhaps not exceeding a hundred. While it is difficult to know why they fought, it came during a time of climate change in the region from a dry period to a wetter one along with severe Nile flooding episodes, possibly triggering competition among rival clans for resources and territory. "Unlike a specific battle or short war, violence appears to have unfortunately been a regular occurrence and part of the daily fabric of their lives," said study co-author Daniel Antoine, acting head of the Department of Egypt and Sudan and curator of bioarchaeology at the British Museum in London. Crevecoeur said the archeological evidence indicated "recurrent, small-scale clashes probably in the form of raids, skirmishes, ambush attacks among hunter-gatherer groups, rather than one single conflict." Unknown cultural differences between groups also could have been at play, Crevecoeur added. The site, now submerged under the large human-made reservoir called Lake Nasser, is the Nile Valley's earliest-known funerary complex and one of Africa's oldest. The human remains have been stored at the British Museum. Philosophers long have pondered the contradictions of human nature. Our species has forged magnificent intellectual, technological and artistic achievements and has engaged in ghastly warfare. Archeological evidence has shown interpersonal violence in the human evolutionary lineage even predating the appearance of Homo sapiens more than 300,000 years ago. "We believe our findings have important implications to the debate about the causes and form of warfare," Crevecoeur said. "What is certain is that acts of violence are recorded since hundreds of thousands of years ago, and are not restricted to our species - for example, also Neanderthals. But their motives are probably as complex and varied as we can imagine."

Climate change likely contributed to one of the oldest examples of human warfare

An Australian court held that the environment minister is morally responsible to the next generation for the effects of climate change. Is climate litigation the only way to hold governments accountable? Palki Sharma gets you a report.

Gravitas: Australian court pulls up government for climate change

A Dutch court ordered oil giant Shell on Wednesday to slash its greenhouse gas emissions in a landmark victory for climate activists with implications for energy firms worldwide.

Shell must reduce its carbon emissions by 45 percent by 2030 as it is contributing to the "dire" effects of climate change, the district court in The Hague ruled.

Campaigners hailed the "historic" verdict as the first time that a company had been made to align its policy with the 2015 Paris climate accords.

Also read |&nbsp;<a data-ctorig="https://www.wionews.com/world/dutch-court-to-rule-in-shell-climate-case-387472" data-cturl="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/dutch-court-to-rule-in-shell-climate-case-387472&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwidzZrRqOnwAhVAHTQIHRiLDsUQFjABegQIAhAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw01D4mqJgj4cgawpMKhz_fZ" dir="ltr" href="https://www.wionews.com/world/dutch-court-to-rule-in-shell-climate-case-387472" target="_blank">Dutch court to rule in&nbsp;Shell&nbsp;climate case</a>

Dubbed "the People versus Shell", the case was backed by seven environmental groups and more than 17,000 Dutch citizens.

Judge Larisa Alwin said in the verdict that Anglo-Dutch multinational Shell has an "enormous CO2 emission for which it is responsible".&nbsp;

Shell "is contributing to the dire consequences of climate change for the population" and must implement the decision "at once".

Shell said it "fully expects to appeal today's disappointing court decision".

"Urgent action is needed on climate change which is why we have accelerated our efforts to become a net-zero emissions energy company by 2050, in step with society," a Shell spokesman said in a statement.

With energy firms around the world facing growing pressure over climate change, Shell set new targets in February to reduce its net carbon footprint compared to a 2016 baseline by 20 percent by 2030, 45 percent by 2035 and 100 percent by 2050.&nbsp;

'Historical day'

Dozens of campaigners hugged, clapped and shouted "climate justice" outside the court as the verdict was announced, an AFP reporter said.

In a show of solidarity, a group of around 50 Dutch cyclists had also cycled from the north of the Netherlands to mark the judgment.

"This is a historical day," said Donald Pols, director of the Dutch branch of Friends of the Earth, which originally brought the case.

"It's the first time in history that the judge has decided that a large polluter, Royal Dutch Shell, should stop causing dangerous climate change," Pols told AFP outside the court.

"This will have an enormous impact, not only on Shell itself, but on major polluters throughout the Netherlands and globally."

The 2015 Paris accords committed all nations to cut carbon emissions to limit warming to two degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels and encouraged them to go down to 1.5 degrees.

Greenpeace Netherlands interim chief Andy Palmen said it was a "historic victory for the climate and everyone facing the consequences of the climate crisis."

"Shell cannot continue to violate human rights and put profit over people and the planet... We can hold multinational corporations worldwide accountable for the climate crisis," he said in a statement.

The case is one of a series around the world in which citizens and campaigners frustrated with inaction on climate change have hauled governments and big polluters before the courts.

'Full of reservations'

Dozens of climate marchers handed in the lawsuit to Shell's headquarters in the Netherlands in The Hague in April 2019 in what organisers said was the first case of its kind.

Shell had argued that it is making serious efforts to cut gas emissions, but that there is no legal basis for the case and that governments are responsible for meeting Paris targets.

It said it was investing billions of dollars in low-carbon energy such as electric vehicle charging, hydrogen, renewables and biofuels.

The judge acknowledged that Shell had "already tightened up its goals" but said its climate policy was "not concrete and is full of reservations."

Shell's emissions were "greater than those of many countries" and the resulting climate change effects pose "serious risks to human rights, such as the right to life and an undisturbed family life," the judge said.

She ordered Shell to make the emissions cut based on its 2019 levels.

Campaigners have repeated the success of a case brought by the green group Urgenda in which the Dutch Supreme Court in 2019 ordered the state to slash emissions by at least 25 percent of 1990 levels by the end of 2020.

The Netherlands, particularly vulnerable to climate change as a third of the country is below sea level, has pledged to reduce CO2 emissions by 49 percent by 2030.

It is sixth biggest emitter of greenhouse gases per capita in the EU, according to the bloc's figures.

A Dutch court ordered oil giant Shell on Wednesday to slash its greenhouse gas emissions in a landmark victory for climate activists with implications for energy firms worldwide.

A Dutch court ordered oil giant Shell on Wednesday to slash its greenhouse gas emissions in a landmark victory for climate activists with implications for energy firms worldwide. Shell must reduce its carbon emissions by 45 percent by 2030 as it is contributing to the "dire" effects of climate change, the district court in The Hague ruled. Campaigners hailed the "historic" verdict as the first time that a company had been made to align its policy with the 2015 Paris climate accords. Also read | Dutch court to rule in Shell climate case Dubbed "the People versus Shell", the case was backed by seven environmental groups and more than 17,000 Dutch citizens. Judge Larisa Alwin said in the verdict that Anglo-Dutch multinational Shell has an "enormous CO2 emission for which it is responsible". Shell "is contributing to the dire consequences of climate change for the population" and must implement the decision "at once". Shell said it "fully expects to appeal today's disappointing court decision". "Urgent action is needed on climate change which is why we have accelerated our efforts to become a net-zero emissions energy company by 2050, in step with society," a Shell spokesman said in a statement. With energy firms around the world facing growing pressure over climate change, Shell set new targets in February to reduce its net carbon footprint compared to a 2016 baseline by 20 percent by 2030, 45 percent by 2035 and 100 percent by 2050. 'Historical day' Dozens of campaigners hugged, clapped and shouted "climate justice" outside the court as the verdict was announced, an AFP reporter said. In a show of solidarity, a group of around 50 Dutch cyclists had also cycled from the north of the Netherlands to mark the judgment. "This is a historical day," said Donald Pols, director of the Dutch branch of Friends of the Earth, which originally brought the case. "It's the first time in history that the judge has decided that a large polluter, Royal Dutch Shell, should stop causing dangerous climate change," Pols told AFP outside the court. "This will have an enormous impact, not only on Shell itself, but on major polluters throughout the Netherlands and globally." The 2015 Paris accords committed all nations to cut carbon emissions to limit warming to two degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels and encouraged them to go down to 1.5 degrees. Greenpeace Netherlands interim chief Andy Palmen said it was a "historic victory for the climate and everyone facing the consequences of the climate crisis." "Shell cannot continue to violate human rights and put profit over people and the planet... We can hold multinational corporations worldwide accountable for the climate crisis," he said in a statement. The case is one of a series around the world in which citizens and campaigners frustrated with inaction on climate change have hauled governments and big polluters before the courts. 'Full of reservations' Dozens of climate marchers handed in the lawsuit to Shell's headquarters in the Netherlands in The Hague in April 2019 in what organisers said was the first case of its kind. Shell had argued that it is making serious efforts to cut gas emissions, but that there is no legal basis for the case and that governments are responsible for meeting Paris targets. It said it was investing billions of dollars in low-carbon energy such as electric vehicle charging, hydrogen, renewables and biofuels. The judge acknowledged that Shell had "already tightened up its goals" but said its climate policy was "not concrete and is full of reservations." Shell's emissions were "greater than those of many countries" and the resulting climate change effects pose "serious risks to human rights, such as the right to life and an undisturbed family life," the judge said. She ordered Shell to make the emissions cut based on its 2019 levels. Campaigners have repeated the success of a case brought by the green group Urgenda in which the Dutch Supreme Court in 2019 ordered the state to slash emissions by at least 25 percent of 1990 levels by the end of 2020. The Netherlands, particularly vulnerable to climate change as a third of the country is below sea level, has pledged to reduce CO2 emissions by 49 percent by 2030. It is sixth biggest emitter of greenhouse gases per capita in the EU, according to the bloc's figures.

Shell ordered to cut emissions in landmark Dutch climate case

Investors rejected the responses of US oil giants to climate change Wednesday, installing activist board members at ExxonMobil and directing Chevron to deepen emissions cuts.&nbsp;

The dual decisions at the two biggest US oil giants' annual meetings are clear evidence that addressing climate change has moved from being an environmentalist cause to one championed by mainstream investors.

At ExxonMobil, two board nominees from activist group Engine No. 1 won enough votes to secure board seats. Shareholders also backed a proposal requiring a report on the oil giant's lobbying activities on climate change.&nbsp;

At Chevron, a majority of investors approved an activist proposal calling on the company to reduce "scope 3" emissions, which encompass energy products.

Earlier in the day, a Dutch court ordered oil giant Shell to slash its greenhouse gas emissions by a net of 45 percent by the end of 2030 following a challenge launched by environmental group Friends of the Earth.

"Today's Exxon vote sends the unmistakable signal that climate action is a financial imperative," said Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense Fund.&nbsp;

"Now Exxon's board has an important responsibility to help the company transform its approach to the climate crisis and energy transition."

Counting continues

Engine No. 1's Gregory Goff and Kaisa Hietala secured enough votes to join ExxonMobil's board, along with Chief Executive Darren Woods and seven other incumbent directors who were reelected, said ExxonMobil corporate secretary Stephen Littleton.

A third Engine No. 1 nominee, Alexander Karsner, was still in contention for a board seat, along with four incumbent board members. Engine No. 1's fourth nominee, Anders Runevad, was not elected, ExxonMobil said.

The final outcome is "too close too call," pending further counting of votes, ExxonMobil said in a statement following the meeting.

In an unusual move, ExxonMobil halted the meeting for an hour after the shareholder proposals were presented.&nbsp;

Engine No. 1 released a statement during the pause blasting the interruption as part of the company's "last-ditch attempt to entrench (the) board and preserve the status quo."

After the results were announced, Woods congratulated the Engine No. 1 candidates and pledged to work with them to meet shareholder expectations.&nbsp;

The company had launched a lobbying offensive to re-elect its incumbent board, arguing it was taking meaningful action to address climate change.

Those steps were announced after Engine No. 1 launched its campaign in late 2020, making Wednesday's election contest unpredictable.

"We've heard from shareholders about their desire to catalyze further progress at ExxonMobil and we are well prepared to deliver," Woods said after the vote.

'Change is coming'

Engine No. 1's Charlie Penner expressed uncertainty about the vote during remarks at the outset of the meeting.

"No matter what the outcome of this vote, change is coming," said Penner, who noted ExxonMobil "cannot easily walk away from" its promises made after the insurgent campaign launched.

The oil company in January established a new "low carbon solutions" business to commercialize carbon capture technology and announced two new board members in March in a move intended to signal openness to change.

Earlier this week, it pledged to appoint two more board members in the next 12 months, one with energy industry experience and one with climate experience.

ExxonMobil has faced battles at annual meetings over climate change for decades, with shareholders pushing resolutions to make it take stronger action.

Oil majors worldwide are under intensifying pressure to develop more aggressive policies on climate change and embrace renewable energy. &nbsp;

Critics had characterized ExxonMobil's carbon capture plan as a public relations-driven rebranding of existing initiatives that requires significant new laws to become widespread and economically viable.

European rivals such as BP, Royal Dutch Shell and Total have undertaken renewable investments and pledged to attain net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) earlier this month said all future fossil fuel projects should be scrapped if the world is to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 and stand any chance of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit).&nbsp;

The IEA report goes well beyond existing policies adopted by the United States and other governments.&nbsp;

US President Joe Biden's administration, for example, has endorsed renewable energy investment, but has not supported an immediate phase-out of new fossil fuel investment.

Both ExxonMobil and Chevron have insisted on the need for continued investment in oil and gas development while announcing new environmental initiatives in recent months.&nbsp;

Woods called the recent IEA analysis a "helpful" contribution, saying reducing emissions is a "complex problem and a challenging one" that will require new technology and government policies.

Shares of ExxonMobil rose 1.2 percent to close at $58.94, while Chevron added 0.2 percent at $104.12.

Investors rejected the responses of US oil giants to climate change Wednesday, installing activist board members at ExxonMobil and directing Chevron to deepen emissions cuts.

Investors rejected the responses of US oil giants to climate change Wednesday, installing activist board members at ExxonMobil and directing Chevron to deepen emissions cuts. The dual decisions at the two biggest US oil giants' annual meetings are clear evidence that addressing climate change has moved from being an environmentalist cause to one championed by mainstream investors. At ExxonMobil, two board nominees from activist group Engine No. 1 won enough votes to secure board seats. Shareholders also backed a proposal requiring a report on the oil giant's lobbying activities on climate change. At Chevron, a majority of investors approved an activist proposal calling on the company to reduce "scope 3" emissions, which encompass energy products. Earlier in the day, a Dutch court ordered oil giant Shell to slash its greenhouse gas emissions by a net of 45 percent by the end of 2030 following a challenge launched by environmental group Friends of the Earth. "Today's Exxon vote sends the unmistakable signal that climate action is a financial imperative," said Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense Fund. "Now Exxon's board has an important responsibility to help the company transform its approach to the climate crisis and energy transition." Counting continues Engine No. 1's Gregory Goff and Kaisa Hietala secured enough votes to join ExxonMobil's board, along with Chief Executive Darren Woods and seven other incumbent directors who were reelected, said ExxonMobil corporate secretary Stephen Littleton. A third Engine No. 1 nominee, Alexander Karsner, was still in contention for a board seat, along with four incumbent board members. Engine No. 1's fourth nominee, Anders Runevad, was not elected, ExxonMobil said. The final outcome is "too close too call," pending further counting of votes, ExxonMobil said in a statement following the meeting. In an unusual move, ExxonMobil halted the meeting for an hour after the shareholder proposals were presented. Engine No. 1 released a statement during the pause blasting the interruption as part of the company's "last-ditch attempt to entrench (the) board and preserve the status quo." After the results were announced, Woods congratulated the Engine No. 1 candidates and pledged to work with them to meet shareholder expectations. The company had launched a lobbying offensive to re-elect its incumbent board, arguing it was taking meaningful action to address climate change. Those steps were announced after Engine No. 1 launched its campaign in late 2020, making Wednesday's election contest unpredictable. "We've heard from shareholders about their desire to catalyze further progress at ExxonMobil and we are well prepared to deliver," Woods said after the vote. 'Change is coming' Engine No. 1's Charlie Penner expressed uncertainty about the vote during remarks at the outset of the meeting. "No matter what the outcome of this vote, change is coming," said Penner, who noted ExxonMobil "cannot easily walk away from" its promises made after the insurgent campaign launched. The oil company in January established a new "low carbon solutions" business to commercialize carbon capture technology and announced two new board members in March in a move intended to signal openness to change. Earlier this week, it pledged to appoint two more board members in the next 12 months, one with energy industry experience and one with climate experience. ExxonMobil has faced battles at annual meetings over climate change for decades, with shareholders pushing resolutions to make it take stronger action. Oil majors worldwide are under intensifying pressure to develop more aggressive policies on climate change and embrace renewable energy. Critics had characterized ExxonMobil's carbon capture plan as a public relations-driven rebranding of existing initiatives that requires significant new laws to become widespread and economically viable. European rivals such as BP, Royal Dutch Shell and Total have undertaken renewable investments and pledged to attain net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. The International Energy Agency (IEA) earlier this month said all future fossil fuel projects should be scrapped if the world is to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 and stand any chance of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit). The IEA report goes well beyond existing policies adopted by the United States and other governments. US President Joe Biden's administration, for example, has endorsed renewable energy investment, but has not supported an immediate phase-out of new fossil fuel investment. Both ExxonMobil and Chevron have insisted on the need for continued investment in oil and gas development while announcing new environmental initiatives in recent months. Woods called the recent IEA analysis a "helpful" contribution, saying reducing emissions is a "complex problem and a challenging one" that will require new technology and government policies. Shares of ExxonMobil rose 1.2 percent to close at $58.94, while Chevron added 0.2 percent at $104.12.

ExxonMobil, Chevron investors vote for more action on climate change

The effects of climate change on the collective mental health of people around the world have not been recorded so far. But a recent study sheds light on how changes in climate affect the mental health of people, especially those directly affected by its disastrous consequences.

Scientists warn that climate change is wrecking the mental health of people around the world, while noting that its costs remain hidden.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/as-climate-changes-study-finds-worlds-glaciers-melting-faster-381399/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

In a new report, scientists attempted to understand how climate change is driving up mental health issues among people. The report posits that heatwaves are causing suicide rates to rise globally, while adding how loss of food security is causing depression among many. The young are especially affected by anxiety over what the future holds for planet Earth, the scientists said.

The study was led at Imperial College London by Emma Lawrance, who told The Guardian that “mental health is the unseen impact” of climate climate in current times. Over a billion people already face the disastrous consequences of mental health issues. The researchers believe the easiest way to take the burden off is by fixing climate change itself.&nbsp;

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/science/uk-will-suck-out-carbon-dioxide-from-air-to-fight-climate-change-387097" hreflang="en">UK will 'suck out' carbon dioxide from air to fight climate change</a>

Providing a sense of wellbeing by collective efforts to limit the ill effects of climate change could hold the key to limiting mental health issues.

Climate change creates a disastrous impact on the environment causing adverse weather events leading to natural disasters. Most common disasters are heat waves, floods, droughts. Researchers believe such disasters put people at immense risk of PTSD, depression, anxiety along with the added risk of suicide.

But the risks don’t end here. Even if climate change is not directly affecting your surroundings, it still has a lasting impact on mental health of people owing to anxieties about the future. The report concludes by referring to the effects of climate change on mental health as “hidden costs”, implying that one’s mental well-being remained ignored in policy and planning.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/science/meet-climate-changes-latest-offering-to-earth-zombie-wildfires-386102" hreflang="en">Meet climate change's latest offering to Earth - 'Zombie wildfires'</a>

The effects of climate change on the collective mental health of people around the world have not been recorded so far. But a recent study sheds light on how changes in climate affect the mental health of people, especially those directly affected by its disastrous consequences.

The effects of climate change on the collective mental health of people around the world have not been recorded so far. But a recent study sheds light on how changes in climate affect the mental health of people, especially those directly affected by its disastrous consequences. Scientists warn that climate change is wrecking the mental health of people around the world, while noting that its costs remain hidden. In a new report, scientists attempted to understand how climate change is driving up mental health issues among people. The report posits that heatwaves are causing suicide rates to rise globally, while adding how loss of food security is causing depression among many. The young are especially affected by anxiety over what the future holds for planet Earth, the scientists said. The study was led at Imperial College London by Emma Lawrance, who told The Guardian that “mental health is the unseen impact” of climate climate in current times. Over a billion people already face the disastrous consequences of mental health issues. The researchers believe the easiest way to take the burden off is by fixing climate change itself. Also read: UK will 'suck out' carbon dioxide from air to fight climate change Providing a sense of wellbeing by collective efforts to limit the ill effects of climate change could hold the key to limiting mental health issues. Climate change creates a disastrous impact on the environment causing adverse weather events leading to natural disasters. Most common disasters are heat waves, floods, droughts. Researchers believe such disasters put people at immense risk of PTSD, depression, anxiety along with the added risk of suicide. But the risks don’t end here. Even if climate change is not directly affecting your surroundings, it still has a lasting impact on mental health of people owing to anxieties about the future. The report concludes by referring to the effects of climate change on mental health as “hidden costs”, implying that one’s mental well-being remained ignored in policy and planning. Also read: Meet climate change's latest offering to Earth - 'Zombie wildfires'

New report sheds light on 'hidden cost' of mental health issues caused by climate change

A Dutch court will give its verdict on Wednesday on a landmark bid by environmental groups to force oil giant Shell to meet greenhouse gas emissions targets in the Paris climate accords.

Dubbed "the People versus Shell", the case was launched in 2019 by the Netherlands branch of Friends of the Earth, and is backed by six other groups and more than 17,000 Dutch citizens.

Anglo-Dutch multinational Shell says it is making serious efforts to cut gas emissions, but argues that there is no legal basis for the case and that governments are responsible for meeting Paris targets.

"The climate case against Shell is unique because it is the first time in history that judges have been asked to order a company to emit less CO2 by changing its policy," Friends of the Earth Netherlands said in a statement.

Judges at the district court in The Hague will start reading the verdict at 1300 GMT.

The case is one of a series around the world in which citizens and campaigners frustrated with inaction on climate change have hauled governments and big polluters before the courts.

The 2015 Paris accords committed all nations to cut carbon emissions to limit warming to two degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels and encouraged them to go down to 1.5 degrees.

The campaigners asked the court during hearings in December to order Anglo-Dutch multinational Shell to reduce emissions by 45 per cent by 2030 in order to help achieve that goal.

Shell has said it will reduce the "net carbon footprint" of the products it sells by 30 percent by 2035, and reach 65 percent by 2050.

'Historic opportunity'

But ActionAid Netherlands executive director Marit Maij said that "big polluters like Shell have an outsized responsibility to help tackle climate change."

"We hope the judge will take this historic opportunity to hold Shell accountable for its actions and ensure it cuts its emissions in line with the Paris Agreement," Maij said.

The group said Shell's "strategy is to keep polluting while offsetting their emissions with vast tree plantations."&nbsp;

"This will require land the equivalent of three times the size of the Netherlands, which risks driving conflicts over food and land in the Global South", she added.

Dozens of climate marchers handed in the lawsuit to Shell's headquarters in the Netherlands in The Hague in April 2019 in what organisers said was the first case of its kind.

Shell's lawyers told the court in December that the company was already taking "serious steps" to support the global transition away from the fossil fuels, and that the ultimate decision rested with governments.

It said there was no legal basis for the case, and no legal rule that made Shell's emissions unlawful.

Campaigners are hoping to repeat the success of a case brought by the green group Urgenda in which the Dutch Supreme Court in 2019 ordered the state to slash emissions by at least 25 &nbsp;of 1990 levels by the end of 2020.

The Netherlands, particularly vulnerable to climate change as a third of the country is below sea level, has pledged to reduce CO2 emissions by 49 percent by 2030.

A Dutch court will give its verdict on Wednesday on a landmark bid by environmental groups to force oil giant Shell to meet greenhouse gas emissions targets in the Paris climate accords.

A Dutch court will give its verdict on Wednesday on a landmark bid by environmental groups to force oil giant Shell to meet greenhouse gas emissions targets in the Paris climate accords. Dubbed "the People versus Shell", the case was launched in 2019 by the Netherlands branch of Friends of the Earth, and is backed by six other groups and more than 17,000 Dutch citizens. Anglo-Dutch multinational Shell says it is making serious efforts to cut gas emissions, but argues that there is no legal basis for the case and that governments are responsible for meeting Paris targets. "The climate case against Shell is unique because it is the first time in history that judges have been asked to order a company to emit less CO2 by changing its policy," Friends of the Earth Netherlands said in a statement. Judges at the district court in The Hague will start reading the verdict at 1300 GMT. The case is one of a series around the world in which citizens and campaigners frustrated with inaction on climate change have hauled governments and big polluters before the courts. The 2015 Paris accords committed all nations to cut carbon emissions to limit warming to two degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels and encouraged them to go down to 1.5 degrees. The campaigners asked the court during hearings in December to order Anglo-Dutch multinational Shell to reduce emissions by 45 per cent by 2030 in order to help achieve that goal. Shell has said it will reduce the "net carbon footprint" of the products it sells by 30 percent by 2035, and reach 65 percent by 2050. 'Historic opportunity' But ActionAid Netherlands executive director Marit Maij said that "big polluters like Shell have an outsized responsibility to help tackle climate change." "We hope the judge will take this historic opportunity to hold Shell accountable for its actions and ensure it cuts its emissions in line with the Paris Agreement," Maij said. The group said Shell's "strategy is to keep polluting while offsetting their emissions with vast tree plantations." "This will require land the equivalent of three times the size of the Netherlands, which risks driving conflicts over food and land in the Global South", she added. Dozens of climate marchers handed in the lawsuit to Shell's headquarters in the Netherlands in The Hague in April 2019 in what organisers said was the first case of its kind. Shell's lawyers told the court in December that the company was already taking "serious steps" to support the global transition away from the fossil fuels, and that the ultimate decision rested with governments. It said there was no legal basis for the case, and no legal rule that made Shell's emissions unlawful. Campaigners are hoping to repeat the success of a case brought by the green group Urgenda in which the Dutch Supreme Court in 2019 ordered the state to slash emissions by at least 25 of 1990 levels by the end of 2020. The Netherlands, particularly vulnerable to climate change as a third of the country is below sea level, has pledged to reduce CO2 emissions by 49 percent by 2030.

Dutch court to rule in Shell climate case

In an exclusive conversation with WION, Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda Gaston Browne says that climate change is a problem for all humanity and it requires global cooperation and global solidarity.

Global solidarity and cooperation required in fighting climate change says Gaston Browne

Mission Sustainability: Population vs Planet- Biggest sustainability challenges climate change and air pollution.

Mission Sustainability: Population vs Planet | What are the biggest sustainability challenges?

The United Kingdom is going to try something new to beat the ill effects of climate change. Carbon dioxide, one of the key heating agents on Earth, will be sucked out of the air across the country. Scientists intend to use trees, rock chips, charcoal and peat in the groundbreaking trials which could change mitigation modules across the world.

The project was funded by UK Research and Innovation and intends to cover gaps caused by previous failures in limiting CO2 emissions. The goal is to reach net zero levels by 2050 in a bid to halt climate change. This is one of the largest trials of its kind in the world and will look at ways to do this effectively across 100 hectares (247 acres) of land.

As part of this, peatlands that have degraded will be re-wetted and replanted in the Pennines and west Wales, The Guardian reported. In addition, CO2 absorbing rock chips will be tested across farms in mid-Wakes, Devon, and Hertfordshire.

Biochar, a special type of charcoal will be put to use as well. It will be buried at multiple sewage disposal sites, former mining sites as well as railway embankments. In addition, the trials will attempt to ascertain ways to use trees to capture carbon across the United Kingdom.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/science/meet-climate-changes-latest-offering-to-earth-zombie-wildfires-386102" hreflang="en">Meet climate change's latest offering to Earth - 'Zombie wildfires'</a>

During the final trial, scientists will study the potential of energy crops like miscanthus and willow at a commercial scale for the first time.

Professor Cameron Hepburn, from the University of Oxford who is leading the trials told The Guardian that the trials are “pretty much world leading”. Hepburn added how nobody wanted to suck out CO2 from the world’s atmosphere but “that’s where we are”, claiming that climate action has been delayed for too long.

Even then, he emphasised how CO2 removal is not an effective substitute to cutting down emissions and that cutting down on fossil fuel burning remains key to tackling climate change.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/climate-change-is-killing-worlds-oldest-animal-cave-painting-in-sulawesi-386069" hreflang="en">Climate change is killing world's oldest animal cave painting in Sulawesi</a>

The United Kingdom is going to try something new to beat the ill effects of climate change. Carbon dioxide, one of the key heating agents on Earth, will be sucked out of the air across the country.

The United Kingdom is going to try something new to beat the ill effects of climate change. Carbon dioxide, one of the key heating agents on Earth, will be sucked out of the air across the country. Scientists intend to use trees, rock chips, charcoal and peat in the groundbreaking trials which could change mitigation modules across the world. The project was funded by UK Research and Innovation and intends to cover gaps caused by previous failures in limiting CO2 emissions. The goal is to reach net zero levels by 2050 in a bid to halt climate change. This is one of the largest trials of its kind in the world and will look at ways to do this effectively across 100 hectares (247 acres) of land. As part of this, peatlands that have degraded will be re-wetted and replanted in the Pennines and west Wales, The Guardian reported. In addition, CO2 absorbing rock chips will be tested across farms in mid-Wakes, Devon, and Hertfordshire. Biochar, a special type of charcoal will be put to use as well. It will be buried at multiple sewage disposal sites, former mining sites as well as railway embankments. In addition, the trials will attempt to ascertain ways to use trees to capture carbon across the United Kingdom. Also read: Meet climate change's latest offering to Earth - 'Zombie wildfires' During the final trial, scientists will study the potential of energy crops like miscanthus and willow at a commercial scale for the first time. Professor Cameron Hepburn, from the University of Oxford who is leading the trials told The Guardian that the trials are “pretty much world leading”. Hepburn added how nobody wanted to suck out CO2 from the world’s atmosphere but “that’s where we are”, claiming that climate action has been delayed for too long. Even then, he emphasised how CO2 removal is not an effective substitute to cutting down emissions and that cutting down on fossil fuel burning remains key to tackling climate change. Also read: Climate change is killing world's oldest animal cave painting in Sulawesi

UK will 'suck out' carbon dioxide from air to fight climate change

<article>
The linchpin of President Joe Biden’s climate plan faces a perilous path through Congress, as scientists say nations must move now to aggressively reduce the pollution that is heating the planet, and the United States is trying to reassert a leadership role in that global effort.

The central tool of Biden’s plan, known as a clean electricity standard, would require power companies to gradually ratchet up the amount of electricity they generate from wind, solar and other sources until they’re no longer emitting carbon dioxide.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-unveils-2-trillion-climate-plan-in-new-contrast-with-trump-313335">Biden unveils $2 trillion climate plan in new contrast with Trump</a>

On paper, it seems a no-brainer. Some version of it has been approved by 29 states from Washington to Virginia. The idea is popular among Democratic and Republican voters. And experts say it is one of the most effective ways to cut the pollution from burning oil, gas and coal that is driving climate change.

But in trying to push a nationwide standard through a bitterly divided Congress, Democrats are considering a politically risky move: attaching it to a fast-track maneuver known as budget reconciliation, which allows some bills to pass with a simple majority. That would require the support of all 50 Democrats, including Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, the state second only to Wyoming in coal production.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-democratic-party-irked-by-councils-insurgent-climate-plan-306022">US Democratic Party irked by council's 'insurgent' climate plan</a>

Manchin, who chairs the Senate Energy Committee, has been noncommittal when it comes to a clean electricity standard. Republican leaders on Capitol Hill say forcing utilities to turn away from coal, oil and gas will mean higher electric bills. The fossil fuel industry says it will harm reliability of the power grid.

Even supporters of the idea are at odds over how to design a national standard. And some Democrats question whether it’s aggressive enough.

Much is at stake. Without meaningful climate legislation this year, Biden will be left with executive action, some of it sure to be challenged in court, to meet his ambitious goals to pivot the country away from fossil fuels and prove to the world the United States is serious about global warming.

This year is “the last best chance for the world to get on a legitimate track,” said former Secretary of State John Kerry, Biden’s global climate envoy, during a recent interview in Rome, where he was meeting with European counterparts. A clean electricity standard is the best way at the moment to “make up for lost time” under former President Donald Trump, Kerry said.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/joe-biden-unveils-17-trillion-climate-plan-to-end-us-carbon-emissions-by-2050-224374">Joe Biden unveils $1.7 trillion climate plan to end US carbon emissions by 2050</a>

In recent weeks, 13 publicly owned utilities announced support for an aggressive measure that would eliminate 80 per cent&nbsp;of fossil fuel emissions from the sector by 2030. The American Public Power Association, which represents about 2,000 other public utilities, hasn’t taken a stand. But the Edison Electric Institute, which represents privately owned utilities and whose former president opposed a renewable energy standard in 2007, said it now supports a “well-designed” policy.

“That is different than it has ever been before,” said Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., who has been pushing for a national clean energy standard for more than a decade and is drafting a new version.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/climate-change-the-action-is-missing-despite-the-high-profile-summits-379354">Climate change: The action is missing despite the high-profile summits</a>

Edison Electric Institute has opted to support a clean electricity standard, in part because its members so quickly met an objective set by the Obama administration to cut power plant emissions, said Emily Fisher, general counsel for the group. That goal, of cutting the sector’s emissions 32 per cent below 2005 levels, was accomplished by 2020 — a decade ahead of schedule.

“I often wish that I could get in a time machine and talk to myself in 2010,” Fisher said. “I think I would have told her to be more excited about the future. Sometimes in those early conversations it seemed like the future was going to be really hard to accomplish. We don’t feel that way anymore.”

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/republicans-reject-biden-infrastructure-bill-despite-reduced-cost-386738">Republicans reject Biden infrastructure bill despite reduced cost</a>

Republican leaders, however, shrugged off signs of growing industry support and indicated they intend to fight Biden’s plan.

“We all want to make energy as clean as we can as fast as we can, and do it in ways that don’t raise costs for American families,” said Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., adding that he is focused on energy prices and jobs in energy industries for his constituents. “But what the president is proposing is raising energy costs significantly.”

The White House has called for a clean electricity standard as part of its $2.3 trillion infrastructure package. It has preferred that approach over a tax on carbon emissions, a method that many economists say would be the most efficient way reduce emissions but is unpopular among many Republicans and some progressive Democrats.

Negotiations between the White House and Republican congressional leaders over the infrastructure package are continuing. Meanwhile, Democrats are debating the best strategy to pass a clean electricity standard, several House and Senate aides said.

One of the most consequential questions to be decided by lawmakers is whether to characterize natural gas as a “clean energy,” something the gas industry wants. When burned, natural gas produces half the carbon dioxide of coal. But it releases methane, a greenhouse gas far more potent than carbon dioxide (though it has shorter staying power in the atmosphere). Much of that gas has been extracted through the controversial method known as fracking. Progressives have indicated they will fight any measure that includes anything other than renewable energy like wind, solar and geothermal power.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/arctic-nations-pledge-to-fight-global-warming-despite-rising-tensions-386486">Arctic nations pledge to fight global warming despite rising tensions</a>

While some Republicans have supported clean electricity standards in the past, environmental activists said they don’t believe Democrats can win over 10 GOP senators, the number needed to break a filibuster.

In a recent interview, Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said he is “looking at” a clean electricity standard but believes a tax on carbon pollution is a better approach. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said she was willing to “review” a federal standard but also made no commitment.

Without Republican help, Democrats would have to try to pass a clean electricity standard through budget reconciliation. That approach requires only a simple Senate majority, but the legislation must be crafted in a way that changes federal spending or revenue. And they would have to win over Manchin, who has expressed concern both about using the reconciliation process as well as a clean energy standard.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-and-democrats-detail-plans-to-raise-taxes-on-multinational-firms-375686">Biden and Democrats detail plans to raise taxes on multinational firms</a>

Scott Segal, a senior partner at Bracewell LLP, which represents utilities and other energy industry clients, said Democrats could undermine their efforts on climate change by pushing legislation through without bipartisan support.

“If they try to jam a clean electricity standard through on reconciliation, I think they would likely lose a strong handful of moderate Democrats, and they’d have no chance to pick up moderate Republicans,” he said.

Kerry said he recently dined with “an unnamed Republican senator who told me outright that he is intending to try to pass a clean electricity standard and believes that there is a critical mass of colleagues who will try to do this because it makes sense.” None, however, has come forward publicly.
</article>

The linchpin of President Joe Biden’s climate plan faces a perilous path through Congress, as scientists say nations must move now to aggressively reduce the pollution that is heating the planet, and the United States is trying to reassert a leadership role in that global effort.

The linchpin of President Joe Biden’s climate plan faces a perilous path through Congress, as scientists say nations must move now to aggressively reduce the pollution that is heating the planet, and the United States is trying to reassert a leadership role in that global effort. The central tool of Biden’s plan, known as a clean electricity standard, would require power companies to gradually ratchet up the amount of electricity they generate from wind, solar and other sources until they’re no longer emitting carbon dioxide. Also Read | Biden unveils $2 trillion climate plan in new contrast with Trump On paper, it seems a no-brainer. Some version of it has been approved by 29 states from Washington to Virginia. The idea is popular among Democratic and Republican voters. And experts say it is one of the most effective ways to cut the pollution from burning oil, gas and coal that is driving climate change. But in trying to push a nationwide standard through a bitterly divided Congress, Democrats are considering a politically risky move: attaching it to a fast-track maneuver known as budget reconciliation, which allows some bills to pass with a simple majority. That would require the support of all 50 Democrats, including Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, the state second only to Wyoming in coal production. Also Read | US Democratic Party irked by council's 'insurgent' climate plan Manchin, who chairs the Senate Energy Committee, has been noncommittal when it comes to a clean electricity standard. Republican leaders on Capitol Hill say forcing utilities to turn away from coal, oil and gas will mean higher electric bills. The fossil fuel industry says it will harm reliability of the power grid. Even supporters of the idea are at odds over how to design a national standard. And some Democrats question whether it’s aggressive enough. Much is at stake. Without meaningful climate legislation this year, Biden will be left with executive action, some of it sure to be challenged in court, to meet his ambitious goals to pivot the country away from fossil fuels and prove to the world the United States is serious about global warming. This year is “the last best chance for the world to get on a legitimate track,” said former Secretary of State John Kerry, Biden’s global climate envoy, during a recent interview in Rome, where he was meeting with European counterparts. A clean electricity standard is the best way at the moment to “make up for lost time” under former President Donald Trump, Kerry said. Also Read | Joe Biden unveils $1.7 trillion climate plan to end US carbon emissions by 2050 In recent weeks, 13 publicly owned utilities announced support for an aggressive measure that would eliminate 80 per cent of fossil fuel emissions from the sector by 2030. The American Public Power Association, which represents about 2,000 other public utilities, hasn’t taken a stand. But the Edison Electric Institute, which represents privately owned utilities and whose former president opposed a renewable energy standard in 2007, said it now supports a “well-designed” policy. “That is different than it has ever been before,” said Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., who has been pushing for a national clean energy standard for more than a decade and is drafting a new version. Also Read | Climate change: The action is missing despite the high-profile summits Edison Electric Institute has opted to support a clean electricity standard, in part because its members so quickly met an objective set by the Obama administration to cut power plant emissions, said Emily Fisher, general counsel for the group. That goal, of cutting the sector’s emissions 32 per cent below 2005 levels, was accomplished by 2020 — a decade ahead of schedule. “I often wish that I could get in a time machine and talk to myself in 2010,” Fisher said. “I think I would have told her to be more excited about the future. Sometimes in those early conversations it seemed like the future was going to be really hard to accomplish. We don’t feel that way anymore.” Also Read | Republicans reject Biden infrastructure bill despite reduced cost Republican leaders, however, shrugged off signs of growing industry support and indicated they intend to fight Biden’s plan. “We all want to make energy as clean as we can as fast as we can, and do it in ways that don’t raise costs for American families,” said Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., adding that he is focused on energy prices and jobs in energy industries for his constituents. “But what the president is proposing is raising energy costs significantly.” The White House has called for a clean electricity standard as part of its $2.3 trillion infrastructure package. It has preferred that approach over a tax on carbon emissions, a method that many economists say would be the most efficient way reduce emissions but is unpopular among many Republicans and some progressive Democrats. Negotiations between the White House and Republican congressional leaders over the infrastructure package are continuing. Meanwhile, Democrats are debating the best strategy to pass a clean electricity standard, several House and Senate aides said. One of the most consequential questions to be decided by lawmakers is whether to characterize natural gas as a “clean energy,” something the gas industry wants. When burned, natural gas produces half the carbon dioxide of coal. But it releases methane, a greenhouse gas far more potent than carbon dioxide (though it has shorter staying power in the atmosphere). Much of that gas has been extracted through the controversial method known as fracking. Progressives have indicated they will fight any measure that includes anything other than renewable energy like wind, solar and geothermal power. Also Read | Arctic nations pledge to fight global warming despite rising tensions While some Republicans have supported clean electricity standards in the past, environmental activists said they don’t believe Democrats can win over 10 GOP senators, the number needed to break a filibuster. In a recent interview, Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said he is “looking at” a clean electricity standard but believes a tax on carbon pollution is a better approach. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said she was willing to “review” a federal standard but also made no commitment. Without Republican help, Democrats would have to try to pass a clean electricity standard through budget reconciliation. That approach requires only a simple Senate majority, but the legislation must be crafted in a way that changes federal spending or revenue. And they would have to win over Manchin, who has expressed concern both about using the reconciliation process as well as a clean energy standard. Also Read | Biden and Democrats detail plans to raise taxes on multinational firms Scott Segal, a senior partner at Bracewell LLP, which represents utilities and other energy industry clients, said Democrats could undermine their efforts on climate change by pushing legislation through without bipartisan support. “If they try to jam a clean electricity standard through on reconciliation, I think they would likely lose a strong handful of moderate Democrats, and they’d have no chance to pick up moderate Republicans,” he said. Kerry said he recently dined with “an unnamed Republican senator who told me outright that he is intending to try to pass a clean electricity standard and believes that there is a critical mass of colleagues who will try to do this because it makes sense.” None, however, has come forward publicly.

It’s crunch time, and Biden’s climate gambit faces steep hurdles

Arctic countries on Thursday pledged to fight global warming, which is happening three times faster in the Far North, and to preserve peace in the region as its geopolitical importance rises.

Accelerated global warming, untapped resources, new maritime routes opened up by retreating sea ice, and the future of local populations all topped the agenda as foreign ministers of countries bordering the Arctic gathered in Reykjavik in Iceland.

"We are committed to advancing a peaceful Arctic region where cooperation prevails on climate, the environment, science and safety," US Secretary of State Antony Blinken told his Arctic Council counterparts from Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia and Sweden.

Have a look |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/world-is-on-fire-australian-school-children-skip-school-to-protest-against-climate-change-386485" hreflang="en">'World is on fire': Australian school children skip school to protest against climate change</a>

"The Arctic as a region for strategic competition has seized the world's attention" but "rule of law" must be ensured so that it remains "a region free of conflict where countries act responsibly," he added.

The statements were thinly-veiled warnings to China, which although only an observer on the Council has made no secret of its interest in the vast territory rich in natural resources and where retreating sea ice has opened up new maritime routes.

Blinken was also certainly targeting Russia, after tense exchanges that preceded Thursday's meeting about the risk of a "militarisation" of the Arctic.

Military manoeuvres

Russia has steadily beefed up its military presence in the Arctic in recent years, reopening and modernising several bases and airfields abandoned since the end of the Soviet era.

But Sergei Lavrov, foreign minister for Russia -- which succeeded Iceland as rotating chair of the Arctic Council on Thursday -- also accused NATO of using a "play on words" to justify setting up a military presence on Russia's doorstep.

In order to circumvent an agreement between Russia and NATO, deployments in Norway were called a "rotational presence instead of permanent presence," Lavrov said.&nbsp;

"Today, we have highlighted at the meeting that we see no grounds for conflict here. Even more so for any development of military programs of some blocks here," Lavrov told reporters.

The Russian envoy also said his country supported the idea of hosting a summit of Arctic nations during its two-year presidency of the Council.

Lavrov has also called for a resumption of regular meetings between the chiefs of staff of the Council's member countries.

Russia has been excluded from these meetings since 2014, after the annexation of Crimea.

The Arctic Council was set up 25 years ago to deal with issues like the environment and areas of international cooperation, and its mandate explicitly excludes military security.

With the departure of Donald Trump, who sparked agitation by proposing to buy Greenland in 2019 and repeated opposition to Russian and Chinese ambitions in the region, eyes have been on the line adopted by President Joe Biden's administration.

Blinken, who on Wednesday met with Lavrov in their first face-to-face meeting which was described as "constructive" by both countries, ostensibly emphasised "cooperation" rather than tensions.

On Thursday, Blinken also ended his four day tour, which started in Denmark, by visiting Greenland directly, where he told reporters that the US wished to make their partnership with Greenland "even stronger" and that he could "confirm" the US was no longer attempting to buy Greenland.&nbsp;

Climate change

The US top diplomat also focused on the fight against global warming, much in line with his counterparts who have rejoiced in recent days at the "return" of America to the international community consensus on the climate issue.

"The climate crisis is our most serious long term threat with the Arctic warming three times faster than anywhere else on the planet," Canadian Foreign Minister Marc Garneau told the Council.

The alarming data was part of a report published Thursday by the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), which also warned of an increased risk of the region's sea ice disappearing completely in summer, before reforming in winter.

"We have a duty to strengthen our cooperation for the benefit of the people inhabiting the Arctic," Danish Foreign Minister Jeppe Kofod said.

At the previous Council meeting in 2019 in Finland, the Trump administration blocked the signing of a joint declaration for the first time since the Council's creation 25 years ago, as it refused to include climate change in the final statement.

The adoption of a joint statement on Thursday went without a hitch, as did the agreement of a 10-year strategic plan for the first time in the Council's history.

In addition to the countries bordering the Arctic, the Council also includes six organisations representing the indigenous peoples of the region and 13 observer countries.

Arctic countries on Thursday pledged to fight global warming, which is happening three times faster in the Far North, and to preserve peace in the region as its geopolitical importance rises.

Arctic countries on Thursday pledged to fight global warming, which is happening three times faster in the Far North, and to preserve peace in the region as its geopolitical importance rises. Accelerated global warming, untapped resources, new maritime routes opened up by retreating sea ice, and the future of local populations all topped the agenda as foreign ministers of countries bordering the Arctic gathered in Reykjavik in Iceland. "We are committed to advancing a peaceful Arctic region where cooperation prevails on climate, the environment, science and safety," US Secretary of State Antony Blinken told his Arctic Council counterparts from Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia and Sweden. Have a look | 'World is on fire': Australian school children skip school to protest against climate change "The Arctic as a region for strategic competition has seized the world's attention" but "rule of law" must be ensured so that it remains "a region free of conflict where countries act responsibly," he added. The statements were thinly-veiled warnings to China, which although only an observer on the Council has made no secret of its interest in the vast territory rich in natural resources and where retreating sea ice has opened up new maritime routes. Blinken was also certainly targeting Russia, after tense exchanges that preceded Thursday's meeting about the risk of a "militarisation" of the Arctic. Military manoeuvres Russia has steadily beefed up its military presence in the Arctic in recent years, reopening and modernising several bases and airfields abandoned since the end of the Soviet era. But Sergei Lavrov, foreign minister for Russia -- which succeeded Iceland as rotating chair of the Arctic Council on Thursday -- also accused NATO of using a "play on words" to justify setting up a military presence on Russia's doorstep. In order to circumvent an agreement between Russia and NATO, deployments in Norway were called a "rotational presence instead of permanent presence," Lavrov said. "Today, we have highlighted at the meeting that we see no grounds for conflict here. Even more so for any development of military programs of some blocks here," Lavrov told reporters. The Russian envoy also said his country supported the idea of hosting a summit of Arctic nations during its two-year presidency of the Council. Lavrov has also called for a resumption of regular meetings between the chiefs of staff of the Council's member countries. Russia has been excluded from these meetings since 2014, after the annexation of Crimea. The Arctic Council was set up 25 years ago to deal with issues like the environment and areas of international cooperation, and its mandate explicitly excludes military security. With the departure of Donald Trump, who sparked agitation by proposing to buy Greenland in 2019 and repeated opposition to Russian and Chinese ambitions in the region, eyes have been on the line adopted by President Joe Biden's administration. Blinken, who on Wednesday met with Lavrov in their first face-to-face meeting which was described as "constructive" by both countries, ostensibly emphasised "cooperation" rather than tensions. On Thursday, Blinken also ended his four day tour, which started in Denmark, by visiting Greenland directly, where he told reporters that the US wished to make their partnership with Greenland "even stronger" and that he could "confirm" the US was no longer attempting to buy Greenland. Climate change The US top diplomat also focused on the fight against global warming, much in line with his counterparts who have rejoiced in recent days at the "return" of America to the international community consensus on the climate issue. "The climate crisis is our most serious long term threat with the Arctic warming three times faster than anywhere else on the planet," Canadian Foreign Minister Marc Garneau told the Council. The alarming data was part of a report published Thursday by the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), which also warned of an increased risk of the region's sea ice disappearing completely in summer, before reforming in winter. "We have a duty to strengthen our cooperation for the benefit of the people inhabiting the Arctic," Danish Foreign Minister Jeppe Kofod said. At the previous Council meeting in 2019 in Finland, the Trump administration blocked the signing of a joint declaration for the first time since the Council's creation 25 years ago, as it refused to include climate change in the final statement. The adoption of a joint statement on Thursday went without a hitch, as did the agreement of a 10-year strategic plan for the first time in the Council's history. In addition to the countries bordering the Arctic, the Council also includes six organisations representing the indigenous peoples of the region and 13 observer countries.

Arctic nations pledge to fight global warming despite rising tensions

'World is on fire': Australian school children skip school to protest against climate change

climate-change

Climate Change, News on Climate Change, stories on Climate Change, articles on Climate Change, Climate Change stories at Wion, Climate Change news, Climate Change latest news