Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

A Solar Panel Standoff Threatens U.S. Climate Plans

News Feed
Friday, April 26, 2024

CLIMATEWIRE | A flood of Chinese solar components is casting a shadow on President Joe Biden's climate priorities.That's creating deep divisions in the U.S. solar industry and causing political headaches for the president. American manufacturers are calling for additional trade restrictions on Asian imports amid what they say are market-flooding practices by China that are undermining U.S. plans to build a fleet of solar factories.But those calls are colliding with the interests of some renewable energy developers that rely on China-linked companies for components that are fueling a solar building spree in the U.S. They contend new trade barriers could hinder U.S. efforts to eliminate climate pollution in the electricity sector — a pillar of Biden's environmental agenda.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.The solar standoff underscores Biden's precarious balancing act as he races toward the presidential election.The Inflation Reduction Act, the sweeping climate law signed by Biden in 2022, lavishes tax breaks on companies to build the solar supply chain in the United States. Slowing foreign imports could help create demand for domestic components. But it could also hurt Biden's other priority: achieving 100 percent carbon-free power by 2035 — a promise that analysts say can't be met without a full-speed buildout of renewable energy.That might not be possible without imported solar products.“There’s numerous examples of the conflict between President Biden’s decarbonization agenda and his deglobalization agenda,” said Tim Fox, an analyst who tracks the industry at ClearView Energy Partners. “You want to decarbonize with available and cheap solar panels. But you also want to develop solar here at home. There is tension between those two efforts."The situation came to a head this week when seven U.S. solar manufacturers filed petitions with the federal government requesting an investigation into whether the budding U.S. industry is being harmed by what they say are unfair trade practices from China-linked companies operating in Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam.The manufacturers argued that companies in Southeast Asia are benefiting from foreign subsidies, and exporting below-cost solar components into the U.S. market. That should make them subject to higher tariffs, the manufacturers said.As a warning of what might come, they pointed to an announcement earlier this year by CubicPV, a Massachusetts-based solar manufacturer that scrapped plans for a massive factory after citing a “collapse” in prices and surging construction costs.“We're at a real inflection point now for developing clean energy manufacturing in the United States,” said Scott Paul, president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing. “The presence of the massive amount of industrial overcapacity China has in solar, in [electric vehicles] and related industries is a real threat, and we know this because we've seen this play out before in the United States and in other industries. It doesn't end well.”'Green trade war'The use of trade barriers has long been opposed by developers, who say higher prices driven by tariffs could slow U.S. solar growth and make it more expensive to address climate change.Kevin Hostetler, CEO of Array Technologies, a provider of utility-scale solar trackers, a technology that turns panels toward the sun, said the manufacturers’ trade petition creates “a level of uncertainty and delay” that negatively impacts the U.S. solar industry.“We just simply don't need the short-term shocks to the system that may benefit one or two particular companies, but then harm the broader industry over the course of what could be multiple years,” he said.A statement attributed to a White House spokesperson said the administration won’t weigh in on the petitions, but it pointed to “historic investments” in the solar industry under Biden. The administration is also monitoring potential unfair market practices by China in solar and other sectors.“As President Biden has made clear, his administration is keeping all tools on the table to support the unprecedented investments secured by the President’s agenda and take action to protect American workers and manufacturers against unfair competition,” the statements said, adding that Biden is committed to expanding solar deployment.The solar battle is part of a wider spat between the U.S. and China — that members of the Biden administration are increasingly acknowledging.As China’s domestic real estate market has cooled, the country has leaned heavily on its manufacturing sector to bolster economic growth. Wood Mackenzie, a consulting firm, estimated that Chinese firms make 80 percent of the components in a solar panel, such as polysilicon, wafers, cells and modules.At the same time, S&P Global Market Intelligence said an “unprecedented wave” of imported solar panels — linked largely to China-based companies operating in Southeast Asia — came into the U.S. in 2023. Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam together accounted for 84 percent of U.S. solar panel imports in the fourth quarter of last year.In Europe, China’s dominance and the supply glut of cheap solar panels has already left manufacturers unable to compete. The surge in foreign panels has the potential to stymie a boom in U.S. solar manufacturing launched by the IRA.U.S. companies have announced plans to build factories capable of churning out 140 gigawatts of solar module capacity, Wood Mackenzie said. But only half of that is likely to be built by 2027, said Elissa Pierce, an analyst who tracks solar manufacturing at the consulting firm. Factories that build subcomponents that go into panels face even bigger hurdles. Of the 61 GW in announced wafer facilities, Wood Mackenzie said only 3.3 GW would be built. Less than one-quarter of the announced cell manufacturing facilities is actually expected to come online.“There is a growing transition from a traditional trade war to a green trade war,” said ClearView’s Fox.Biden administration officials have sharpened their rhetoric in recent weeks."It's important that China recognize the concerns [and] begin to act to address it," Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said this week. "But we don't want our industry wiped out in the meantime, so I wouldn't want to take anything off the table."Yellen recently traveled to China to discuss the administration’s concerns.'No objective answer'A similar fight in 2022, over China funneling U.S.-bound products through Southeast Asia, left some manufacturers frustrated and prompted a presidential veto. This time could be different.“I can safely say I've never filed a trade case before where there were such strong statements of support in terms of the need to address Chinese dumping, in particular in the renewable energy sector, as we've had in recent weeks,” said Tim Brightbill, co-chair of Wiley Rein’s international trade practice and lead counsel in the manufacturers’ recent petitions.Those petitions, filed Wednesday, are backed by First Solar, Qcells, Meyer Burger, Mission Solar, REC Silicon, Convalt Energy and Swift Solar — many of which have announced new expansions or investments since passage of Democrats’ climate law.It comes on the heels of a request from Qcells, a South Korean solar maker that has invested $2.5 billion in new factories in Georgia, to end an exemption under an existing tariff regime on bifacial solar panels.The company said double-sided modules now compose over 98 percent of U.S. solar module imports — meaning less than 2 percent of imports are subject to duties. The administration is reportedly planning to soon grant that request.Brightbill called the IRA “a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to reclaim the solar supply chain and the solar manufacturing process here in America.” But, he added, “you have to not just have the investment, you have to have enforcement as well.”But the petitions received an icy response from the industry’s largest trade groups.In a joint response Wednesday, the Solar Energy Industries Association, American Clean Power Association, Advanced Energy United and American Council on Renewable Energy expressed concern that the trade petitions “will lead to further market volatility across the U.S. solar and storage industry and create uncertainty at a time when we need effective solutions that support U.S. solar manufacturers.”The administration has also faced bipartisan pressure from lawmakers to take additional steps to support the domestic industry. That’s included calls to better incentivize purchases of U.S.-made solar components through stronger tax credits, and to further address stockpiling of Chinese-linked products.“China is running the same playbook Ohio steelworkers know all too well, routing their products through other southeast Asian countries to try to get around the rules,” Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, a Democrat who is facing a tough reelection race, said in a statement. “The Administration cannot let them get away with it.”The administration last year determined Chinese companies were funneling solar products through Southeast Asia in order to avoid tariffs. Then it did the opposite of what many manufacturers had hoped: It placed a two-year moratorium on new tariffs, after the initial inquiry prompted months of infighting within the solar industry.The moratorium ends in June, and duties on solar modules are expected to resume for companies that are circumventing tariffs. “We will enforce that rigorously — including ensuring that imported panels are not being inappropriately stockpiled,” a White House official told POLITICO, speaking anonymously to abide by administration guidelines.Antoine Vagneur-Jones, head of trade and supply chains at BloombergNEF, said the U.S. faces a choice. He pointed to Europe as an example of the stakes. Solar modules there are roughly half as expensive as those in the U.S., due to a lack of trade barriers. Yet European solar factories are closing, leaving the continent almost entirely dependent on China for solar equipment.Adopting tariffs could help expand factories in the U.S., creating jobs and political support for the industry, he said. But it will mean higher costs for solar panels as critics contend that cleaner energy sources is already too expensive.“Are you prioritizing speed? Are you prioritizing not being entirely reliant on one region? Those are value judgments,” Vagneur-Jones said. “There is no objective answer.”This story also appears in Energywire.Reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2024. E&E News provides essential news for energy and environment professionals.

Inexpensive Chinese solar panels are pitting Americans who want cheap equipment against those who want to make it

CLIMATEWIRE | A flood of Chinese solar components is casting a shadow on President Joe Biden's climate priorities.

That's creating deep divisions in the U.S. solar industry and causing political headaches for the president. American manufacturers are calling for additional trade restrictions on Asian imports amid what they say are market-flooding practices by China that are undermining U.S. plans to build a fleet of solar factories.

But those calls are colliding with the interests of some renewable energy developers that rely on China-linked companies for components that are fueling a solar building spree in the U.S. They contend new trade barriers could hinder U.S. efforts to eliminate climate pollution in the electricity sector — a pillar of Biden's environmental agenda.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

The solar standoff underscores Biden's precarious balancing act as he races toward the presidential election.

The Inflation Reduction Act, the sweeping climate law signed by Biden in 2022, lavishes tax breaks on companies to build the solar supply chain in the United States. Slowing foreign imports could help create demand for domestic components. But it could also hurt Biden's other priority: achieving 100 percent carbon-free power by 2035 — a promise that analysts say can't be met without a full-speed buildout of renewable energy.

That might not be possible without imported solar products.

“There’s numerous examples of the conflict between President Biden’s decarbonization agenda and his deglobalization agenda,” said Tim Fox, an analyst who tracks the industry at ClearView Energy Partners. “You want to decarbonize with available and cheap solar panels. But you also want to develop solar here at home. There is tension between those two efforts."

The situation came to a head this week when seven U.S. solar manufacturers filed petitions with the federal government requesting an investigation into whether the budding U.S. industry is being harmed by what they say are unfair trade practices from China-linked companies operating in Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam.

The manufacturers argued that companies in Southeast Asia are benefiting from foreign subsidies, and exporting below-cost solar components into the U.S. market. That should make them subject to higher tariffs, the manufacturers said.

As a warning of what might come, they pointed to an announcement earlier this year by CubicPV, a Massachusetts-based solar manufacturer that scrapped plans for a massive factory after citing a “collapse” in prices and surging construction costs.

“We're at a real inflection point now for developing clean energy manufacturing in the United States,” said Scott Paul, president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing. “The presence of the massive amount of industrial overcapacity China has in solar, in [electric vehicles] and related industries is a real threat, and we know this because we've seen this play out before in the United States and in other industries. It doesn't end well.”

'Green trade war'

The use of trade barriers has long been opposed by developers, who say higher prices driven by tariffs could slow U.S. solar growth and make it more expensive to address climate change.

Kevin Hostetler, CEO of Array Technologies, a provider of utility-scale solar trackers, a technology that turns panels toward the sun, said the manufacturers’ trade petition creates “a level of uncertainty and delay” that negatively impacts the U.S. solar industry.

“We just simply don't need the short-term shocks to the system that may benefit one or two particular companies, but then harm the broader industry over the course of what could be multiple years,” he said.

A statement attributed to a White House spokesperson said the administration won’t weigh in on the petitions, but it pointed to “historic investments” in the solar industry under Biden. The administration is also monitoring potential unfair market practices by China in solar and other sectors.

“As President Biden has made clear, his administration is keeping all tools on the table to support the unprecedented investments secured by the President’s agenda and take action to protect American workers and manufacturers against unfair competition,” the statements said, adding that Biden is committed to expanding solar deployment.

The solar battle is part of a wider spat between the U.S. and China — that members of the Biden administration are increasingly acknowledging.

As China’s domestic real estate market has cooled, the country has leaned heavily on its manufacturing sector to bolster economic growth. Wood Mackenzie, a consulting firm, estimated that Chinese firms make 80 percent of the components in a solar panel, such as polysilicon, wafers, cells and modules.

At the same time, S&P Global Market Intelligence said an “unprecedented wave” of imported solar panels — linked largely to China-based companies operating in Southeast Asia — came into the U.S. in 2023. Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam together accounted for 84 percent of U.S. solar panel imports in the fourth quarter of last year.

In Europe, China’s dominance and the supply glut of cheap solar panels has already left manufacturers unable to compete. The surge in foreign panels has the potential to stymie a boom in U.S. solar manufacturing launched by the IRA.

U.S. companies have announced plans to build factories capable of churning out 140 gigawatts of solar module capacity, Wood Mackenzie said. But only half of that is likely to be built by 2027, said Elissa Pierce, an analyst who tracks solar manufacturing at the consulting firm. Factories that build subcomponents that go into panels face even bigger hurdles. Of the 61 GW in announced wafer facilities, Wood Mackenzie said only 3.3 GW would be built. Less than one-quarter of the announced cell manufacturing facilities is actually expected to come online.

“There is a growing transition from a traditional trade war to a green trade war,” said ClearView’s Fox.

Biden administration officials have sharpened their rhetoric in recent weeks.

"It's important that China recognize the concerns [and] begin to act to address it," Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said this week. "But we don't want our industry wiped out in the meantime, so I wouldn't want to take anything off the table."

Yellen recently traveled to China to discuss the administration’s concerns.

'No objective answer'

A similar fight in 2022, over China funneling U.S.-bound products through Southeast Asia, left some manufacturers frustrated and prompted a presidential veto. This time could be different.

“I can safely say I've never filed a trade case before where there were such strong statements of support in terms of the need to address Chinese dumping, in particular in the renewable energy sector, as we've had in recent weeks,” said Tim Brightbill, co-chair of Wiley Rein’s international trade practice and lead counsel in the manufacturers’ recent petitions.

Those petitions, filed Wednesday, are backed by First Solar, Qcells, Meyer Burger, Mission Solar, REC Silicon, Convalt Energy and Swift Solar — many of which have announced new expansions or investments since passage of Democrats’ climate law.

It comes on the heels of a request from Qcells, a South Korean solar maker that has invested $2.5 billion in new factories in Georgia, to end an exemption under an existing tariff regime on bifacial solar panels.

The company said double-sided modules now compose over 98 percent of U.S. solar module imports — meaning less than 2 percent of imports are subject to duties. The administration is reportedly planning to soon grant that request.

Brightbill called the IRA “a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to reclaim the solar supply chain and the solar manufacturing process here in America.” But, he added, “you have to not just have the investment, you have to have enforcement as well.”

But the petitions received an icy response from the industry’s largest trade groups.

In a joint response Wednesday, the Solar Energy Industries Association, American Clean Power Association, Advanced Energy United and American Council on Renewable Energy expressed concern that the trade petitions “will lead to further market volatility across the U.S. solar and storage industry and create uncertainty at a time when we need effective solutions that support U.S. solar manufacturers.”

The administration has also faced bipartisan pressure from lawmakers to take additional steps to support the domestic industry. That’s included calls to better incentivize purchases of U.S.-made solar components through stronger tax credits, and to further address stockpiling of Chinese-linked products.

“China is running the same playbook Ohio steelworkers know all too well, routing their products through other southeast Asian countries to try to get around the rules,” Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, a Democrat who is facing a tough reelection race, said in a statement. “The Administration cannot let them get away with it.”

The administration last year determined Chinese companies were funneling solar products through Southeast Asia in order to avoid tariffs. Then it did the opposite of what many manufacturers had hoped: It placed a two-year moratorium on new tariffs, after the initial inquiry prompted months of infighting within the solar industry.

The moratorium ends in June, and duties on solar modules are expected to resume for companies that are circumventing tariffs. “We will enforce that rigorously — including ensuring that imported panels are not being inappropriately stockpiled,” a White House official told POLITICO, speaking anonymously to abide by administration guidelines.

Antoine Vagneur-Jones, head of trade and supply chains at BloombergNEF, said the U.S. faces a choice. He pointed to Europe as an example of the stakes. Solar modules there are roughly half as expensive as those in the U.S., due to a lack of trade barriers. Yet European solar factories are closing, leaving the continent almost entirely dependent on China for solar equipment.

Adopting tariffs could help expand factories in the U.S., creating jobs and political support for the industry, he said. But it will mean higher costs for solar panels as critics contend that cleaner energy sources is already too expensive.

“Are you prioritizing speed? Are you prioritizing not being entirely reliant on one region? Those are value judgments,” Vagneur-Jones said. “There is no objective answer.”

This story also appears in Energywire.

Reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2024. E&E News provides essential news for energy and environment professionals.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Starmer condemns Badenoch for abandoning cross-party consensus on climate crisis policy – UK politics live

Prime minister says Tory leader’s attacks on climate targets diminishes government ability to tackle central issueJohn Prescott: share your tributes and memoriesBritish prime minister Keir Starmer says he is “deeply saddened” to hear that Prescott has died, and called him a “true giant of Labour”.In a statement on X, he said, “I am deeply saddened to hear of the death of John Prescott. John was a true giant of the Labour movement. On behalf of the Labour Party, I send my condolences to Pauline and his family, to the city of Hull, and to all those who knew and loved him. May he rest in peace.”He possessed an inherent ability to connect with people about the issues that mattered to them – a talent that others spend years studying and cultivating, but that was second nature to him.He fought like hell to negotiate the Kyoto Protocol and was an unwavering champion of climate action for decades to come. I’m forever grateful to John for that commitment to solving the climate crisis and will miss him as a dear friend.” Continue reading...

Matt Hancock gives evidence to Covid inquiryWe will carry on reporting tributes to John Prescott as the day goes on, but there is other news happening today too and soon I will switch to the Covid inquiry, where Matt Hancock, the former health secretary, is giving evidence from 10am. He has already given evidence to the inquiry before, but the inquiry is now on module 3, focusing in particular on the impact of the pandemic on the NHS, and Hancock will be talking about that.We have also got John Healey, the defence secretary, giving evidence to the Commons defence committee from 10.30am this morning.Matt Hancock arriving at the Covid inquiry this morning. Photograph: Tayfun Salcı/ZUMA Press Wire/REX/ShutterstockShareUpdated at 04.49 ESTKey eventsShow key events onlyPlease turn on JavaScript to use this featureWe are inviting readers to share their memories of John Prescott. You can do so via this page.Matt Hancock gives evidence to Covid inquiryWe will carry on reporting tributes to John Prescott as the day goes on, but there is other news happening today too and soon I will switch to the Covid inquiry, where Matt Hancock, the former health secretary, is giving evidence from 10am. He has already given evidence to the inquiry before, but the inquiry is now on module 3, focusing in particular on the impact of the pandemic on the NHS, and Hancock will be talking about that.We have also got John Healey, the defence secretary, giving evidence to the Commons defence committee from 10.30am this morning.Matt Hancock arriving at the Covid inquiry this morning. Photograph: Tayfun Salcı/ZUMA Press Wire/REX/ShutterstockShareUpdated at 04.49 ESTThere's no paywall hereApologies for the brief interruption. We hope you’re appreciating these factual, verified, up-to-the-minute news updates provided by our expert reporters.You won't find a paywall around our live blogs – or any of our news, because the Guardian believes that access to trustworthy information is vital for democracy.In a time of increasing misinformation spread by bad actors, extremist media and autocratic politicians, real, reliable journalism has never been more important – and we’re proud to be able to make ours free thanks to the generous support of readers like you. By helping fund the Guardian today, you can play a vital role in combating the bad faith and self-interest of a powerful few who spread lies to undermine our democracy, enrich themselves, and stoke division between Americans.Before you get back to reading the news, we would be grateful if you could take half a minute to give us your support. Any amount helps. Thank you.Peter Mandelson says Prescott was 'the cement that kept New Labour together'Peter Mandelson was one of many people in the Labour party who feuded with John Prescott at various times when they were in government, and at one memorable photocall in the summer of 1997 Prescott compared him to a crab. Today, speaking on Sky News, Mandelson played down the extend of their disagreements, and pointed out that Prescott had supported his application to become Labour’s communications director in 1985 – the job that turned out to be the launchpad for Mandelson’s career.Mandelson said it was wrong to say Prescott was not New Labour. Some people say sometimes that he wasn’t New Labour. But that’s not true. He was New Labour. He was one very essential part of New Labour. He basically kept us anchored in our working class roots, our trade union history. And he was the bridge, essentially, between that and the modernisers in the Labour party, Tony, Gordon, me and the others. And he always wanted that project to work. It’s not as if he was standing outside it and peering in. He was on the inside and making it work. He was, in many respects, the cement that kept New Labour together. Asked what he was like to work with, Mandelson replied: He was absolutely impossible. When I say he was sort of courageous, he was. When I say he was loyal, he was. When I say he was determined, he was. He was always determined to get his own way on any particular issue at any given moment. Right up until the point he’d say, ‘OK, I’ll do this for you. You do this for me. As long as you cover this off I’ll happily go along with it.’ So he was a negotiator. He was a trade union negotiator. He was a broker. But at the end of the day he wanted it to work and the way in which he made it work was by being incredibly difficult for days on end and then finally sealing it, making work, agreeing it and off we went. Mandelson also recalled a surprise conversation earlier this year he had with Prescott. I was at home on a Sunday morning and the phone went and then suddenly I put it on and it was the face of John Prescott on my phone FaceTiming me from Hull. I mean, no advanced warning. No how do you do. It was, ‘Hello, is that you?’ ‘Yes John it is me. What do you want?’ He said ‘I just want to say that I know it was difficult and we were bloody awful to you at times and I was, but actually you did good and I want to forgive you.’ What am I being forgiven for here? It was just, ‘I want to forgive you because you did good. And I know it wasn’t easy at times and I know it was rough and I know I didn’t help but now I understand.’ And I said, ‘John that’s very kind of you. How do you suddenly understand this?’ He said, ‘Oh well somebody gave me this book of yours. I didn’t read it before. It looked very boring. But I’ve looked at it, I’ve dipped into it and I’ve seen what you went through … I feel rather sorry for you actually. And anyway, thanks very much.’ It was a few minutes more … but that was it. That was the last time I spoke to him. Here are more tributes to John Prescott from Labour figures on social media.From Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair’s communications director in No 10 JP RIP … there was nobody else like him. Tony could not have had a better deputy. Labour could not have had a better campaigner. The government could not have had a better negotiator and - yes, often, peacemaker. Hull could not have had a better MP. Of course he was combative but he had an enormous heart and a great capacity for friendship. Even with his horrible illness in later years, the old JP was always there. Love to Pauline, Jonathan and David and nothing but fond memories of a total one off who will be missed by so many. From Yvette Cooper, the home secretary Such sad news about John Prescott. A campaigning Labour hero & a remarkable minister who transformed lives - upgrading millions of council homes, coalfield regeneration, tackling climate change. Fierce & warm hearted - there was no one like him. Thinking of Pauline & family today From Ed Balls, the former adviser to Gordon Brown and later secretary of state for childrenFrom Jeremy Corbyn, the former Labour leader I am really sad to hear that John Prescott has passed away. John was a huge figure and personality, from his seafaring union days to the highest offices in Government. I will be forever grateful for his personal and political support in the 2017 and 2019 elections. His endless warmth and iconic wit were loved on the campaign trail. My deepest sympathies to John’s family at their loss. He will be greatly missed. From Hilary Benn, the Northern Ireland secretary 1/2 John Prescott was a political giant who made a unique contribution to the Labour and trade union movement he loved so deeply. Authentic, funny, tough, highly skilled and, at times, unpredictable, he often used the phrase “traditional Labour values in a modern setting”. 2/2 In doing so, he would reassure and inspire Party members with whom he had a great bond. He will be much missed. All our thoughts are with Pauline and his family on this very sad day. From David Lammy, foreign secretary John Prescott was one of the giants of our party. Committed, loyal, Labour to his core. A relentless champion of working people who never forgot who he came into politics to fight for. Full of good humour and blunt common sense. Rest in peace Angela Rayner pays tribute to Prescott, saying he was 'inspiration to me'Angela Rayner is often compared to John Prescott. They were both brought up working class, became Labour MPs after working in the trade union movement and have been frequently patronised or demonised by Tories and the media, partly on the grounds of class snobbery. And both ended up deputy PM.Here is her tribute to Prescott. Through his half a century of public service and a decade as deputy prime minister, John Prescott was driven by his Labour values to serve working people. Fiercely proud of his working class and trade union roots, he never lost sight of who he came into politics to serve. He used the chance he was given to change the lives of millions of working people. A giant of the labour movement and loyal friend, he will be remembered with huge fondness by all those who knew him. John was not only a Labour legend but an inspiration to me, and always so generous with his time and support. We will miss him greatly. Our thoughts and prayers are with Pauline, David, Johnathan and the rest of the family. ShareUpdated at 04.06 ESTPrescott's family ask people not to send flowers but to donate to Alzheimer's Research UK insteadHere is the full statement from John Prescott’s family announcing his death. Prescott was living with Alzheimer’s in his final years and his family have asked wellwishers minded to send flowers to donate to Alzheimer’s Research UK instead.They say: We are deeply saddened to inform you that our beloved husband, father and grandfather, John Prescott, passed away peacefully yesterday at the age of 86. He did so surrounded by the love of his family and the jazz music of Marian Montgomery. John spent his life trying to improve the lives of others, fighting for social justice and protecting the environment, doing so from his time as a waiter on the cruise liners to becoming Britain’s longest serving deputy prime minister. John dearly loved his home of Hull and representing its people in parliament for 40 years was his greatest honour. We would like to thank the amazing NHS doctors and nurses who cared for him after his stroke in 2019 and the dedicated staff at the care home where he passed away after latterly living with Alzheimer’s. In lieu of flowers and if you wish to do so, you can donate to Alzheimer’s Research UK. As you can imagine, our family needs to process our grief so we respectfully request time and space to mourn in private. Thank you. Here is a John Prescott picture gallery.Gordon Brown pays tribute to PrescottGood morning. I’m Andrew Sparrow, taking over from Caroline Davies.The former prime minister Gordon Brown has just been on the Today programme paying tribute to John Prescott. He said: John was a friend of mine, he was a colleague, but when you think of him, he was a colossus, he was a titan of the Labour movement. John Lennon talked about working class hero. It’s difficult to fit that term, but I think John would like that. You’ve got to look at his achievements. He was probably the first government minister to see the importance of the environment. Kyoto, that environmental treaty in 1997, you’ve got to attribute that to John’s hard work with Al Gore. Then he saw the importance, and he was a pioneer of regional policy. So the fact we have devolution and mayors owes a great deal to what John was thinking right throughout the 1980s and 90s when I was working with him. And then we mustn’t forget that one of the great achievements of John as environment secretary was the repair and improvement of housing, 1.5m houses which would not have been repaired without John’s determination that the social housing stock had to be remodernised. So you’ve got to look at the practical achievements of someone who possibly surprised himself by the way that he managed to become deputy prime minister, but actually made a huge difference. Yorkshire has “lost one of its great political heavyweights,” said Tracy Brabin, mayor for West Yorkshire. In a post on X she said: Deeply sad news to hear of John Prescott’s passing. Yorkshire has lost one of its great political heavyweights. A true Northerner with unwavering authenticity. John’s record speaks for itself: tackling regional inequalities, fighting for social justice and protecting the environment. We must all now build on his legacy and work tirelessly, as he did, to create a country that works for all. ShareUpdated at 03.44 ESTLord Prescott’s wife and two sons said he had been in a care home recently living with Alzheimer’s. Hilary Evans-Newton, chief executive at Alzheimer’s Research UK, said: It’s heartbreaking to hear that former deputy prime minister, Lord John Prescott, one of the most prominent political figures of our generation, has died with Alzheimer’s. Our thoughts are with his family and loved ones during this difficult time. It’s tragic how many lives are being lost to dementia, the leading cause of death in the UK. We’re incredibly moved by Lord Prescott’s family, who have asked for donations to Alzheimer’s Research UK, in lieu of flowers. As the UK’s leading dementia research charity, we’re accelerating progress towards a cure, so no one’s life has to end this way.

Climate
Government
Social Justice

The climate crisis is a big problem. Marine biologist Ayana Elizabeth Johnson is dreaming of even bigger solutions.

Here’s an exercise for you: Imagine the trajectory of our current climate crisis.  You probably don’t need to imagine very hard what this future looks like because we’re seeing it play out in the present: towns torn apart by massive hurricanes, thousands displaced by wildfires, lives taken by extreme heat. All of it is enough […]

Here’s an exercise for you: Imagine the trajectory of our current climate crisis.  You probably don’t need to imagine very hard what this future looks like because we’re seeing it play out in the present: towns torn apart by massive hurricanes, thousands displaced by wildfires, lives taken by extreme heat. All of it is enough to make a person freeze with fear. But there is a flip side to this terror.  Such an all-consuming problem inherently requires innovative solutions and adaptations of epic proportions. So here’s another exercise: Close your eyes and think, what could a world that hasn’t just taken the climate crisis seriously but also risen to the challenge look like? Envisioning a better future in the face of serious climate threats might seem like lofty daydreaming, especially when we take into consideration our world leaders’ inaction. But Ayana Elizabeth Johnson, a marine biologist and climate policy wonk, has spent much of her career dreaming and coming up with climate solutions — and she knows that nihilism and avoidance won’t get us anywhere. In her recently published book, What If We Get It Right?: Visions of Climate Futures, Johnson tackles how we can transform our ways of being, thinking, and doing to stop the worst of climate change. She expertly intertwines her conversations with scientists, artists, and activists to create a practical and accessible guidebook for a more just future brimming with possibilities — a salve for even the most environmentally anxious.  “Peril and possibility coexist,” she writes in the book. Of course, she’s well aware of just how big of an environmental mess our world is in, but you won’t catch her dwelling on the worst-case scenarios for long. “We’re pretty fucked,” Johnson said in her September interview on Vox’s The Gray Area, “but there’s a lot we could do to have a better possible future.”  Johnson is particularly adept at speaking to those who know the climate crisis is real but have the instinct to bury their head in the sand at the thought of such a massive existential crisis. Though she is frank about the state of our world’s environmental health, she speaks and writes with an energizing clarity — whether it’s conversing with climate advocates for her book tour or breaking down big environmental questions as a co-host of the podcast How to Save a Planet. It’s Johnson’s understanding of our instinct to flee the climate problems that has made it essential for her to explore the possibilities to address it and take action that goes beyond protesting or voting. These are important measures, Johnson believes, but also broad ones that aren’t necessarily fine-tuned to our individual experiences, skills, and interests.  For Johnson, a Brooklyn native who calls the ocean her love before it became her career, that looked like co-founding Urban Ocean Lab (UOL) in 2018. The nonprofit think tank specializes in researching coastal cities in the United States — places that one in five Americans call home and are often vulnerable to some of the worst environmental disasters — and developing equitable, pragmatic policy recommendations for these regions.  One such recommendation is UOL’s climate readiness framework for coastal cities. It’s a comprehensive collection of over 70 actions that coastal communities can apply to better adapt to current and future climate risks, such as working with community-based organizations to strengthen disaster preparedness plans and developing home relocation programs for low-income residents and people of color living in climate-vulnerable places.  The Caribbean region in particular has a special place in Johnson’s heart — her late father hailed from Jamaica, whose waters have suffered from pollution and overfishing. “To me, ocean conservation is in part about cultural preservation,” she writes after reflecting on her father’s life between Jamaica and New York City. “We are losing something more fundamental than a meal: a way of life.” It makes sense that Johnson has also worked to improve the waters surrounding these islands. Prior to founding UOL, she led an ocean management policy project called the Blue Halo Initiative at the Waitt Institute, where she served as executive director. Starting in Barbuda in 2013, Johnson focused on engaging with the community, interviewing hundreds of fishers and residents to develop policy recommendations for better preserving the waters and the species within it. Just a year later, the Barbuda Council signed into law a set of ocean zoning policies to protect underwater ecosystems and ensure sustainable fishing. These efforts were soon replicated in Montserrat and Curaçao. Johnson’s reverence for the ocean and the career she’s made out of it has made its way into the American political sphere, too. Back in 2019, the Green New Deal, a set of proposed progressive climate policies, was supported by left-leaning candidates up and down the ballot. Johnson had just one issue with it: It left out our seas almost entirely. “I was feeling bummed about the ocean getting short shrift in the Green New Deal Resolution — just a single, vague reference to the ocean,” Johnson wrote in What If We Get It Right? That summer, Johnson co-authored an op-ed in Grist about this big blue gap and what solutions to fill it with. Within that year, Johnson was contacted by Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s 2020 presidential campaign to help write what would become the Blue New Deal, an official policy platform for the Warren campaign. It was an extensive list of actions, like expanding marine protected areas, building climate-smart ports, and holding Big Agriculture accountable for water pollution. When Johnson later met Sen. Warren, she wrote in What If We Get It Right? that “[Senator Warren] told me it was the plan that got the most excited mentions in her selfie lines.” And while Joe Biden won the Democratic nomination and the election, his administration became the first to put out a federal Ocean Climate Action plan — which included similar elements to the Blue New Deal — after dozens of businesses and organizations (including UOL) pushed the White House to do so. There are a lot of studies that show engaging with nature helps our physical and mental well-being, so it’s not surprising that conserving our environment is important for many people. One word that Johnson often uses and embodies is “biophilia”: a love for nature and life, and in her words, “a powerful driving force for conservation.” With this in mind, I have one more exercise for you: Think of moments you’ve felt biophilia. Maybe you once walked through a lush forest, swam in a pristine lake, or witnessed snow-capped mountains up close. Perhaps you’ve encountered one of the millions of amazing creatures that inhabit these ecosystems. But how can one hold onto this sense of biophilia if much of our ways of life are destroying the very essence of it?  It’s all the more reason not to let our worries immobilize us and instead try to get it right, just as Johnson has done. Her wide-ranging expertise on climate policy; deeply empathetic and inclusive lens for climate solutions; and her unwavering, contagious biophilia has made her a bold visionary to follow in the climate space.  How apt that a lover of the ocean is making waves. —Sam Delgado

Climate
Crisis
Agriculture

Denmark is tiny. Its ambition to make its food system more climate-friendly is huge.

Climate scientists agree on at least one necessary change to our food system: People, especially those in rich countries, ought to be eating more plants and fewer animals.  Globally, livestock production accounts for some 15 to 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions and accelerates a host of other environmental problems, from deforestation to freshwater depletion […]

Climate scientists agree on at least one necessary change to our food system: People, especially those in rich countries, ought to be eating more plants and fewer animals.  Globally, livestock production accounts for some 15 to 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions and accelerates a host of other environmental problems, from deforestation to freshwater depletion to air pollution. And yet virtually all Western governments have designed their food policy to churn out more and more meat, milk, and eggs.  The idea that we need to eat more, not less, meat is also baked into many nations’ cultural psyches, with both subtle and overt messages that meat equals masculinity and prosperity. Meat has been dragged into many countries’ culture wars, stifling civil discussions over how to make food systems sustainable. One country, though, far more than any other, has heeded the climate scientists’ advice: Denmark, the small Scandinavian nation of 6 million people known for its intensive factory farming system and resulting pork and dairy exports. In 2021, the Danish Parliament and government made a deal to shift its food system in a more plant-based and organic direction, and has set aside around $200 million US to do it. About $85 million is going to farmers who grow plant-based foods. The rest is being used to fund new projects, like experimenting with “nudge theory” — redesigning cafeterias to subtly encourage consumers to choose more plant-based options — and launching a startup incubator for plant-based companies at the Technological Institute of Denmark.  Many people have labored to turn these ideas into policy, but Rune-Christoffer Dragsdahl, the secretary-general of the Vegetarian Society of Denmark, has unquestionably been the leader. Dragsdahl became the society’s first employee in 2016, when he went unpaid for the first year or so. Since then, the organization has grown to employ 22 staff members.  How exactly did a tiny organization with little political clout blaze a trail toward a more sustainable, humane food system? I spoke with Dragsdahl last month to find out. His secret, it turns out, is diplomacy.  Dragsdahl and his vegetarian society colleagues spent years building a coalition of farmers, scientists, and organic food advocates, emphasizing shared values — sustainability and food innovation — instead of differences, like the merits of vegetarianism. This big-tent approach appealed to politicians, including not just members of left-wing parties but also politicians on the right, one of whom called the country’s plant-based action plan an “intelligent idea,” according to Dragsdahl.    “That, I think, shows the fact that we and other stakeholders have somehow managed to mainstream this,” he told me. “There are still ideological battles and clearly we’re not done, but we have to a large extent managed to get many people to see that this should also be a part of Danish agriculture and that it should be stronger. That there’s actual potential in this. That there’s no need to fight over more plants.” My conversation with Dragsdahl has been edited for length and clarity. What role does meat play in Danish society? It’s really a centerpiece of food culture, of Danish culture. There are many social events, whether it’s football events — people will have their hot dogs — and when they’re grilling in the summer.  Apart from food culture … Denmark is a very agricultural nation. We are the most cultivated country in the world, together with Bangladesh, in terms of the [percentage of the] surface of the land being cultivated, because the country is very flat, so you can say it’s suitable for this.  Even though the country might be suitable, you can over-cultivate it. And that is the problem — we have severe biodiversity loss here, severe eutrophication. … So it’s definitely damaging the local environment here. But for many decades, it has been difficult to do anything about it because at least some people have felt we are an agricultural nation. It’s in our blood, that’s who we are. And livestock is an integral part of that.  So there are things here, both culturally but also politically. And there’s this universal pride for people — that Danish dairy, Danish butter, is being exported to the whole world… But also, of course, bacon and pork products. But that has been increasingly questioned in the last 10 years.  What happened to lay the groundwork for the plant-based action plan? In 2019, we got the idea to start something we call the Danish Network for Plant Proteins. You make such a network, really, to make people feel welcome no matter where they’re from. … We had hard-hitting scientists, we had inspiring startups, we had interesting content — but always in a friendly and warm and pragmatic tone. And that meant that even the farming association [the Danish Agriculture and Food Council] attended. They later came back to us a month later and told us that they liked our approach. We don’t agree about scaling down livestock production, but they did agree that we could work together on how to look more into plant-based [food production] to diversify Danish agriculture.  When they did that, it almost immediately eliminated any opposition from a large part of the political spectrum. So maybe some of the resistance in the right wing became neutral, and some of the hesitance among the parties in the center of Danish politics became slightly positive. And that was extremely helpful because you move the entire playing field. And then, of course, the parties which are even more progressive on the center and center-left wing, they can push even harder for it and get the middle parties on board without the right wing making a big fuss about it. And the farmers’ association was definitely important for that. I think we have really successfully been insisting that plant-based is both the whole foods plant-based and the processed [foods] and everything in between. And by insisting on that, we’re getting less opposition between the people who just want everything to be home-cooked and believe children should be taught how to cook their own vegetables again. These solutions are both needed, and there [are] also places in between. There might be processed products that imitate meat but that are processed in milder ways. I think many of the Danish startups in this space are actually trying to find these kinds of solutions. So that has been a way to get many different kinds of people on board.  What kind of plant-based projects have been awarded funding?  So far, around 35 projects have been granted [in each of two rounds].  In the first round, the Hospitality School of Copenhagen got funding for a vegetarian chef’s degree. They got the funding for developing a curriculum that the government could then approve as acceptable for a new chef’s degree — which does not have any meat — and that degree becomes part of the government system, so it becomes a formal government education. But they could not have done it without getting funding to develop the curriculum. In the second round, some [agricultural] schools applied for funding for developing a curriculum on legumes, but also to teach the professionals in the kitchens at the farmer schools how to include more legumes in the foods eaten by the young farmers. What else should people know about Denmark’s efforts to build a more plant-based food system? Denmark is not paradise. [People] will have this excuse — they’ll say, “This is just Denmark, Denmark is always ahead on everything.” But that’s not the full story. And I think that’s the important part to be told here. This happened in the country with the largest livestock production per capita and with a very powerful livestock lobbying sector. So when we can succeed on that in Denmark, there will be pathways to that in other countries. And for me, that is a really important message that we should not give up — that there is actually hope.

Climate
Food
Forests

“Absolutely devastating”: Climate change is pushing coral reefs to extinction, experts warn

Coral reefs have experienced four mass bleaching event in 18 months, with no sign of stopping

The Chagos Archipelago is one of the most remote places on Earth. Smack dab in the middle of the Indian Ocean, the collection of more than five dozen tiny islands are mostly uninhabited, due in no small part to the United States and United Kingdom expelling the Indigenous Chagossians in an ethnic cleansing from 1967 to 1973. For decades only a single atoll, Diego Garcia, has had any inhabitants. Yet as coral reef ecologist Alexandra Dempsey explored the atolls’ beautiful coral reefs in 2015, she nevertheless found signs of human pollution. “While we were there, we witnessed the very first stages of a bleaching event,” Dempsey said, referring to when coral becomes dead and white due to stress. Dempsey recalled "the scale at which these 100-year-old corals were just stressed. They were paling. The cotton candy colors paling is definitely an indicator of an ecosystem that is extremely stressed.”  Even the supposed “crown jewel of the reefs” looked bleached because of temperatures upwards of 80 and 90 degrees Fahrenheit. As CEO of the Khaled bin Sultan Living Oceans Foundation, Dempsey often thinks about how to protect coral reefs from human activity, yet is now presented with evidence that even the most remote locations cannot be entirely protected. One big reason? Few things, if anything, will be unaffected by global heating. “No matter how much protection and how much due diligence goes behind trying to keep humans and people away from the reefs, the effects of climate change are just absolutely devastating to these ecosystems,” Dempsey said. Bleached Corals, Cenderawasih Bay, West Papua, Indonesia (Reinhard Dirscherl/ullstein bild via Getty Images)Similarly, if coral reefs go extinct, it won’t just be the diversity of the ocean that will suffer — many people will too. Approximately 3.3 billion people rely on aquatic foods for nutrition, which accounts for almost 20% of the average per capita consumption of animal protein. If the reefs collapse, so will some bigger fish stocks, like tuna and groupers. Marine fisheries ecologist Khatija Alliji, from the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, has personally seen humans tampering with coral reefs while exploring them, and from that observation points out that it is not merely our greenhouse gas emissions that harm coral reefs and underwater ecosystems. "We are clearly challenging coral’s natural capacity for adaptation." “Currently coral reefs face many threats, including (but not limited to) biodiversity loss, water quality, climate change, disease, predation, coastal development, litter, marine traffic and pollution,” Alliji explained. Because reefs are so complex, scientists still do not fully understand all the interlocking parts that make them work. Even the recent Red List assessment that found over two-fifths of coral reef species threatened with extinction added there are some species where data is so deficient that a risk category cannot be assigned. “Advancements in coral taxonomy using DNA has led to the discovery of new species of coral and better taxonomic definition,” Alliji said. “But there is still lots to investigate and this is both exciting and terrifying given the many threats listed above.” For all of the mysteries that remain about coral reefs, though, experts agree that climate change is an undisputed threat. Indeed, our planet is already in the middle of its fourth global coral bleaching event in 18 months largely due to climate change, which experts predict will worsen as we surpass 1.5º C of global temperature rise. Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter Lab Notes. “Locally, some reef regions surpassed 1.5º C in the last year, but it takes a global average over 20 years to calculate the threshold; it is highly likely temperature levels will exceed even 2º C globally before a turning point is reached,” David Obura, chair of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, told Salon. “Scientists recently shifted the estimated critical range for corals from 1.5º to 2º C warming to [between] 1º and 1.5º C warming. And as with many things with climate change and the Anthropocene, severe and compounding impacts are being observed earlier than predicted.” "The ocean has no boundaries and therefore a collaborative approach is required to ensure coral survival and guarantee their future." Aldo Croquer, a marine conservation program manager for the Central Caribbean in Nature Conservancy, said that coral reefs have weathered many cataclysmic events in Earth’s history, but they may not survive humanity. “Corals have evolved facing great challenges and they have managed to survive, even to massive global extinctions,” Croquer said. “Their capacity to adapt to environmental change and to come back from disturbances is indisputable, at least at evolutionary time scales. However, the changes that we are seeing today occurred at the scales of decades. This is unprecedented. Thus, we are clearly challenging coral’s natural capacity for adaptation.” To protect coral reefs from rising temperatures and other human activity, it is critical for local communities to work together with global authorities so they can salvage what they can. “Climate change is a global issue and will need both local and global management and solutions to ensure we protect our natural ecosystems and resources,” Alliji said. “The ocean has no boundaries and therefore a collaborative approach is required to ensure coral survival and guarantee their future.” Obura added, “There is a localized commitment to enabling the sorts of changes that can reduce local pressures, which revolve around promoting circular economies, less destructive economic and development practices. To some extent the problem is these are pitched as ‘local’ problems for local authorities to act on, but often the broader national and international contexts don’t facilitate this by continually incentivising more growth, more resorts, more fishing, more goods and services, etc.” Yet even if all of those changes are made, scientists like Jason Spadaro from the Coral Reef Restoration Research Program in Florida's Mote Marine Laboratory still expect more depressing journeys like one he recently took to the Florida Keys. “When I started my career back in 2006 or so, coral reefs in the Florida Keys in particular had about maybe a little better than 10% of their surface covered in live coral,” Spadaro said. “Today we've got somewhere less than 2%, as well as a fourfold decrease in the living tissue color cover of our coral reefs in the Keys. That's due almost entirely to things like climate change.” Read more about our oceans

Climate
Extinction
Conservation

How do you define climate adaptation? Here are 10,000 ways.

At COP29, a decade-long effort to realize the ambitions of the Paris agreement could give the world a way to measure the success of climate adaptation.

The essence of the Paris climate agreement was distilled into a single number. The almost 200 countries that signed the pact in 2016 agreed they would try to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Over the past decade, as these countries have rolled out renewable energy installations and decommissioned coal plants, we have been able to evaluate their efforts against this number. (The results have not been promising.) But the 1.5-degree target was just one element of the Paris accord. The world also committed to throw its weight behind efforts to adapt to the global warming already baked in by centuries of fossil-fueled industrialization. Even if emissions fall, disasters over the next century will displace many millions of people and destroy billions of dollars in property, particularly in developing countries across Africa, Latin America, and Asia. Those countries fought to ensure that adaptation to those hazards was a key pillar of the agreement. But there’s no one way to measure the success of this commitment. Should the U.N. measure the number of deaths from disasters, or the value of property destroyed in floods, or the incidence of hunger, or the availability of clean water? How will the international community determine the efficacy of adaptation measures like sea walls and drought-resistant crops, given that the disasters they prevent remain so unpredictable? “There is no one single measure you can use that will apply to all adaptation globally,’” said Emilie Beauchamp, an adaptation expert at the International Institute for Sustainable Development, a think tank, who is participating in adaptation talks at COP29, this year’s U.N. climate conference in Baku, Azerbaijan. “It’s not like when we say, ‘we reduce our emissions.’ You can say we need to reduce vulnerability, but that’s going to change according to whose vulnerability you’re talking about.” This question is far from academic: Climate change is fueling more frequent and severe disasters, ravaging places with vulnerable infrastructure. In Zambia, electricity service has been reduced to just a few hours a day thanks to drought emptying out a key reservoir. Meanwhile, a year’s worth of rainfall deluged the Valencia region of Spain in just a few days last month, causing flooding that killed more than 200 people. In the United States, warming helped juice the intensity of several major hurricanes that made landfall this year. Despite the urgency, adaptation hasn’t received much attention at recent U.N. climate talks. This year’s COP is no exception. While the conferences often open with rich countries making major new funding pledges, this year just $60 million in new pledges went to the world’s biggest adaptation fund. That total, raised by European nations and South Korea, is well short of the $300 million the fund had hoped to raise. While the main target of COP29 is a new agreement on a global finance goal — which could end up well over a trillion U.S. dollars and is intended to help the developing world with all aspects of the climate fight — wealthy countries have refused to reserve a portion of that target for adaptation, in part because adaptation efforts attract far less private investment than renewable energy. In finance talks, developing nations have asked that billions of dollars be set aside for adaptation — a far cry from the $60 million announced at the start of the conference. Read Next Can you solve the world’s trillion-dollar climate finance puzzle? Jake Bittle Despite the funding impasse, the world is inching closer to finally defining an effort that could make the difference between life and death for millions of people around the world. The U.N. is halfway through a two-year attempt to finally pick “adaptation indicators,” or global yardsticks that will allow every country to measure its climate resilience. This decade-delayed effort to complete the ambitions of the Paris agreement will in theory give the world a way to measure adaptation success. “We’re hopeful,” said Hawwa Nabaaha Nashid, an official at the environmental ministry of the Maldives, an island state in the Indian Ocean. “If there’s a high-quality [outcome], we can answer the question—how well are we adapting and what needs to be done differently?” There are still big hurdles to clear. The latest text of the adaptation negotiators were considering, which appeared early Thursday, left out some priorities of developing countries, but negotiators expressed more optimism about the adaptation item than they did about other items such as decarbonization and climate finance. And the task of selecting indicators is daunting in itself. Last year’s COP saw agreement on specific target areas for adaptation, including water, health, biodiversity, food, infrastructure, poverty, and heritage. But to measure progress in these target areas, negotiators have proposed a whopping 10,000 potential indicators. This eye-popping sum highlights just how fluid and context-dependent the notion of “ climate adaptation” really is.  Some potential indicators, like “area of contorta pine” (a European Union proposal on biodiversity) and “number of boreholes drilled” (a water proposal from developing countries) seem far too specific, since most of the world doesn’t have significant amounts of contorta pine or get its water by drilling boreholes. Others, such as “types of synergies created” seem so vague as to be almost useless. Some, such as “number of mining operations in protected areas reviewed and temporarily suspended” don’t seem to have anything to do with adapting to climate disasters. “By the very nature of adaptation being more diffuse and broad, you get a multitude of indicators, sub-indicators, and criteria,” said Kalim Shah, a professor of environmental science at the University of Delaware who has assisted small island states like the Marshall Islands with adaptation planning. “It’s much more diffuse, and maybe that’s part of the problem: too many cooks in the kitchen.” The major roadblock in these discussions is money. In every negotiation, poor countries have demanded clear language acknowledging that adaptation is impossible without adequate funding, while rich countries have tried to exclude such language and focus on planning and logistics. In the fight over the indicators, the developing world is seeking a commitment to include an indicator that measures “means of implementation” — in other words, a metric for how capable countries are of carrying out their adaptation plans. This would amount to an acknowledgement that funding and capacity are critical to climate adaptation of any kind, whether it’s building new sand dams for pastoral herders or tracking the spread of dengue fever. But even that acknowledgement appears to be controversial. “It is still a big contention,” said Portia Adade Williams, who is negotiating adaptation needs on behalf of Ghana. “I’m still not sure how we are going to end it. But from a developing country point of view, this would be a complete red line, to have a decision that doesn’t allow us to track [capacity].”  Nashid, of the Maldives, said the country can’t consider scaling up its adaptation efforts without more money. The country has used huge amounts of reclaimed land to build quasi-artificial islands that can house displaced populations from lower-lying isles. “We have to exhaust our limited domestic budget to finance our adaptation efforts, taking away from other priority areas such as healthcare and education,” she told Grist. The capacity issue is especially acute for island nations with small populations, who don’t always have the infrastructure needed to navigate the complex bureaucracy of the multilateral U.N. funds that support adaptation. These low-lying nations often face an almost existential threat from rising sea levels, so they won’t necessarily benefit from just one capital project paid for by these funds — they have to adapt their entire territories in order to survive. “By the time all these little things have happened for you to get the money, the risks have increased,” said Filomena Nelson, an adaptation negotiator from Samoa who works for the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme, an intergovernmental authority that manages environmental protection across Pacific islands. “It takes forever, it’s complicated, it’s a vicious cycle.” When negotiators can’t discuss money, adaptation talks tend to get mired in the realm of the abstract. This was evident in Baku this week, where negotiators in one adaptation talk confronted a multi-dimensional graph about “transformational adaptation” with three axes: “time,” “changes in paradigms,” and “changes in the fundamental attributes of socio-ecological systems.” That chart was accompanied by another evaluation matrix that resembled a Rubik’s cube. One observer joked that she wanted to get it printed on a shirt. In the meantime, the need for action is only getting more urgent.  The United Nations’ annual report on adaptation, which became public just before COP29 began, underscored the life-or-death stakes of an issue that often feels like a forgotten middle child at global climate talks. The U.N. expert who led the report introduced it by saying that “people are already dying, homes and livelihoods are being destroyed, and nature is under assault.” The report estimated the unmet need for adaptation investment at up to $359 billion every year. Notably, this need was not expressed in forested acres or boreholes drilled, but in U.S. dollars. In recent years, as developed countries have belatedly endorsed the idea of a fund for redressing climate-fueled damage — and as the world has verged on breaching the 1.5 degrees C threshold laid out by the Paris accord — some have started to discuss the demise of small island states as an inevitability rather than a possibility. But Nelson said that while some disaster losses are inevitable, Samoa and other countries aren’t ready to admit that they will have to leave their homelands, an outcome that many experts fear will be likely with 1.5 degrees or more of warming.  “We will not give up our land just because we’re facing these issues,” she said. “This is where we come from — if we give up now, it sends the wrong signal.” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline How do you define climate adaptation? Here are 10,000 ways. on Nov 21, 2024.

Climate
Education
Food

Suggested Viewing

The Wisdom To Survive: Climate Change, Capitalism & Community

This film reveals how diverse environmental problems, from climate change to species extinction to ruined ecosystems, are all ultimately rooted in the “growth at all costs” attitude that pervades modern industrial society. Through beautiful and disturbing images and interviews with ecological scholars, spiritual leaders and activists, The Wisdom to Survive argues that the survival of humanity and most living beings on the planet will not come from technology, but from a profound raising of consciousness and deep spiritual transformation of humans who finally realize that we must live differently on planet earth.

Climate
Business
Extinction

Caught in Quicksand

The Dead Sea is disappearing. The documentary, Caught in Quicksand, was made to raise public awareness about the receding of the Dead Sea.

Water
Climate
Documentary

Sustainable Living with Patrick Lang

A day in the life of Patrick Lang living a sustainable life in Malibu… filmed before his home and community were consumed by fire in the fall of 2018.

Sustainable
Land Use
Solutions

Reboot

Humans have exploited Earth to the point where it is no longer possible to live on it. Their only option is to relocate to Mars. When the last group of people has boarded the spaceship for the red planet, the Earth can finally breathe easy. Like an expressionist painting, Reboot depicts a world in which the absence of our species is the only chance nature has to recover its lushness and flourish once more.

Animation
Crisis
Cosmos

Can Hydroponic Farming Help Reduce the Effects of Climate Change?

"Can Hydroponic Farming Help Reduce the Effects of Climate Change?" is an entertaining and educational short film. Rachel and her remarkable robot companion, Rex, witness the dire consequences of climate change through news reports of devastating natural disasters. When Rex encounters an alien emissary, he embarks on a journey to a ruined world where pollution and climate change led to the collapse of an entire civilization. Returning to Earth the three main causes of global warming are reveal—electricity production, transportation, and wasteful agriculture—and stress the importance of transitioning to clean energy sources, electric transport, and hydroponic farming. Rex takes on the mission of educating robots and humans alike about combating climate change. The film ends with a global commitment to address the crisis and a poignant celebration of Rex's role in this vital endeavor, reminding us of the urgency to protect our planet from climate catastrophe.

Conservation
Education
Climate

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.