Simon Evans

Find this line from Reuters very hard to believe, surely it should read "has the capacity to produce…"?

Otherwise there would be ginormous stacks of solar panels piling up somewhere.

Also, "tepid" demand??! China installed 212GW in H1 2025, which is 2x H1 2024?!

Staggering figures.
Source: www.nytimes.com/2025/07/28/b...
“Nepal, The Country Where 76% of Cars Sold Are Electric”

A second chance: Sizewell C to give jobs to hundreds of e... Nuclear power station to offer training courses and work for prisoners in the building and operation of the plant

Ex-offenders to be hired for Sizewell C construction to boost social benefits of the project observer.co.uk/news/nationa...

After three weeks of a heat pump replacing an old gas boiler, our house has used 34% less KWh of energy, emitted 40-50% less CO2 and energy costs have fallen by 25%.

thanks, have now received vis another kind academic

Global carbon emissions and decarbonization in 2024 Nature Reviews Earth & Environment - Global CO2 emissions in 2024 increased 0.9% on the previous year, totalling 36.3 Gt CO2. These ongoing emissions further deplete remaining carbon budgets,...

Request: Could anyone share the PDF of this paper with me?

TIA!

www.nature.com/artic...

This slope on this chart is INSANE

TRANSITION? WHAT TRANSITION?

Wind and solar, pet hates of the populist right, will meet >90% of global electricity demand growth to 2026, helping renewables topple King Coal's reign as the world's top power source

www.carbonbrief.org/...

Latest on the "stalling" shift to electric vehicles, EU edition

The Wall Street Journal has published the most anti-science editorial I have ever seen, celebrating a victory against "climate imperialism" - ie. efforts to respond to an accelerating crisis that is endangering hundreds of millions of lives and is on course to end organised civilisation.

A Wall Street Journal editorial welcomes Trump admin plans to repeal the "endangerment finding" behind US climate regulations

Titled "Climate Regulation Liberation Day", it questions the "dubious proposition that GHGs pose a clear and present danger"…

The most significant news today

2025 has seen the second warmest first half of the year on record after 2024 – and is on track to be the second or third warmest year since records began in 1850. My latest State of the Climate report over at Carbon Brief: www.carbonbrief.org/...

The EPA cited my paper in their argument against the endangerment finding today. However, their point is completely backwards: my paper actually supports the EPA's 2009 range of 1.8C to 4C warming by 2100. www.nature.com/artic...

The Trump admin plan to repeal the "endangerment" finding that underlies key climate regulations in the US is on the frontpage of today's NY Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal

Chart – 2025 is on track to be second or third warmest year on record: Annual global average surface temperature anomalies from the WMO aggregate plotted with respect to a 1850-1900 baseline. To-date 2025 values include January-June. The estimated 2025 annual value is based on the relationship between the January-June temperatures, ENSO conditions, and annual temperatures between 1970 and 2024. Chart by Carbon Brief.

NEW – State of the climate: 2025 on track to be second or third warmest year on record | @hausfath.bsky.social

Read here: buff.ly/NHyC9HP

So this is what the EU and China were able to agree on climate. Nothing groundbreaking but some positive elements.

Promising to align new 2035 emission targets with the 1.5/well below 2 degree temperature goal is good.

ICJ: What the world court’s landmark opinion means for climate change - Carbon Brief Carbon Brief explains the most important aspects of the ICJ’s 133-page advisory opinion and speaks to legal experts about its implications.

NEW – ICJ: What the world court’s landmark opinion means for climate change | @daisydunne.carbonbrief.org @joshgabbatiss.bsky.social @mollylempriere.carbonbrief.org

💬 w/ comment from Danilo B. Garrido Alves, Joy Reyes, Prof Viñuales, Dr Maria Antonia Tigre, Harj Narulla, Dr Bill Hare

Read here:

I also liked context you put around potential savings, rather than using big, impressive-sounding, but ultimately meaningless numbers ("£55bn" or whatever).

Too few admitted that if zonal was the answer to high bills, yet only shaved off a few %, then we probs weren't really solving high bills.

I don't think we were very well served by efforts to paint those "vested" interests as nefarious, evil corporates, particularly when we also want those same companies to make huge investments in new kit.

I agree this is a helpful thread. You touched on one aspect often lost in the rhetoric, amid accusations of vested interests and promises of giant consumer benefits, which is that the "vested interests" indeed stood to lose in favour of consumers.

🔥 ⚖️ 🌐HAPPENING NOW: Historic #ClimateJustice Ruling being delivered by the 🇺🇳 🧑‍⚖️ International Court of Justice.
🚨This ruling could signal a new dawn for climate law & accountability
📝 🧵 Live thread below with context, summary & analysis 👇
#ClimateJusticeAO #AOLetsGo

It seems to be contagious.

Now the Sun is also having to correct it heavily biased coverage of net-zero in response to, you know, actual facts...

China’s clean-energy footprint spans essentially the entire world, with exports to 191 of the 192 UN member states, excluding China, manufacturing plans in 25 countries in 12 of the 17 UN regions and clean-energy project financing in 27 countries in 11 regions.

NEW – Analysis: China’s clean-energy exports in 2024 alone will cut overseas CO2 by 1% | @laurimyllyvirta.bsky.social

Read here: buff.ly/V7BVSsL

New from me: How China's clean energy manufacturing boom is helping reduce CO2 emissions overseas. In 2024, China’s exports of solar panels, batteries and electric vehicles are shaved 1% off global emissions outside of China.

It was prominent on the frontpage and one of the most read articles, which I rather suspect answers your question (the Beeb driven by clicks, shurely shome mishtake)

Carbon Brief sat down recently with UK climate envoy Rachel Kyte in her first in-depth interview since taking up the role.

We discussed Trump and COP30, of course, but also the significance of a “really badly made movie” she once saw at a “very, very, strange meeting somewhere in eastern Europe”.

Sometimes I think there's a tendency to overthink Reform's policy interventions. In this case, it's easy to focus on "they're trying to undermine the AR7 auction and make it fail".

That is surely true, but it's also true that Reform's energy policy would just be a disaster. We should say that!

Letter from Reform’s Richard Tice to Octopus Energy Chief Executive Greg Jackson which warns him about bidding for AR7 and threatens to cancel contracts for difference support for renewable energy.

Probably no one here needs this, but just in case, what might happen if Reform got into power and actually did cancel contracts under AR7 (and let’s assume other all other renewable energy contracts)?

Spoiler: I think it would be disastrous…