Latest news

Courts are a new front line of climate action with cases against governments and oil firms spiralling, and while victories have so far been rare the pressure for change is growing

Global moves to tackle climate change through lawsuits are poised to break new ground this week, as groups and individuals seek to hold governments and companies accountable for the damage they are causing.

What is it?

Instability attributed to changes in power mix that can leave grid at mercy of the weather

The Australian Energy Market Commission says the national electricity grid is becoming more unstable, with 11 incidents in 2016-17, up from seven the year before and four the year before that.

The instability is attributed to changes in the power generation mix, with thermal, synchronous generators leaving the system in favour of more renewable capacity, which can leave the grid at the mercy of the weather.

Related: Turnbull's national energy guarantee a step closer after Jay Weatherill's exit

Let fossil fuel-funded think tanks make their case, then ignore it

In 2007, the US Supreme Court ruled that carbon dioxide is an air pollutant, which means that if it poses a threat to public health or welfare, the EPA must regulate it under the Clean Air Act. In 2009, the EPA completed its review of the climate science literature and correctly concluded in its Endangerment Finding that carbon pollution poses such a threat via climate change. That document is the foundation for all government climate policies, including the Obama Administration’s Clean Power Plan. Climate deniers have thus long had their sights set on revoking the Endangerment Finding.

That’s a tall order, since the scientific literature is crystal clear on this question. House Republicans first tried to simply rewrite the Clean Air Act to state the greenhouse gases aren’t pollutants, but they failed to get nearly enough support to pass that legislation. Next they proposed setting up a ‘Red Team’ of climate deniers to debate the mainstream climate science ‘Blue Team.’ But Trump’s chief of staff John Kelly worried that having this prominent debate on the record would be a distraction and potentially expose the administration to litigation, so he killed the idea.

1) Scientists’ basic physical understanding of factors that impact the climate system like the increasing greenhouse effect and natural influences.

2) Scientific evidence that global warming over the last several decades is ‘unusual.’

Scientists have outlined plans to build a series of mammoth engineering projects in Greenland and Antarctica to help slow down the disintegration of the planet’s main glaciers. The controversial proposals include underwater walls, artificial islands and huge pumping stations that would channel cold water into the bases of glaciers to stop them from melting and sliding into the sea.

The researchers say the work – costing tens of billions of dollars a time – is urgently needed to prevent polar glaciers melting and raising sea levels. That would lead to major inundations of low-lying, densely populated areas, such as parts of Bangladesh, Japan and the Netherlands.

Related: Geoengineering is not a quick fix for climate change, experts warn Trump