00:50 Fossilized faeces give news insights into dinosaurs’ diets and rise
A huge collection of fossilized digestive contents has provided clues as to how dinosaurs grew to become the dominant animals on the planet. Why these animals rose to dominance has been unclear, with one theory proposing that a chance event wiped out other species, whereas another suggests that dinosaurs had adaptations that better allowed them to thrive. By analysing more than 500 vomit and faeces fossils, researchers have better identified what dinosaurs ate, and their interactions with other animals. The new work suggests both of these theories are correct, with dinosaurs benefiting from one or the other at different points in time. The researchers believe this work demonstrates how useful fossilized food contents are for understanding these ancient creatures.
Research Article: Qvarnström et al.
News and Views: Wastes of time — faeces and vomit track how dinosaurs rose to prominence
News: Fossilized poo and vomit shows how dinosaurs rose to rule Earth
10:05 Research Highlights
Bacteria found on an asteroid actually came from Earth, and why play helps chimps to cooperate.
Research Highlight: Bacteria found on a space rock turn out to be Earth-grown
Research Highlight: Chimps tickle and wrestle in play to pave the way for teamwork
12:46 A commensal fungus found in mouse guts
By testing mice across the United States, researchers have identified a fungus that is well adapted to living in the gastrointestinal tracts of mice, an important step in modelling the role these microorganisms play in the body. Fungi are known to be a constituent of the gut microbiome, but very little is known about what they do. Now, a team has identified that the fungus Kazachstania pintolopesii is probably a long-term resident of mice guts, which they hope will allow them to study how these microbes interact with the immune system, and the role they play in host defence and allergies.
Research Article: Liao et al.
21:57 The key takeaways from COP29
The United Nations annual climate change conference, COP29, finished last week. Largely, the discussions revolved around climate finance — the idea that wealthier countries who have benefitted most from past carbon emissions should pay to help poorer, vulnerable countries adapt to the effects of climate change. Although a last-minute agreement was hammered out at the conference, not everyone was happy with the text and promised actions. We discuss this and the other key outcomes of COP29.
Nature: Is the COP29 climate deal a historic breakthrough or letdown? Researchers react
Subscribe to Nature Briefing, an unmissable daily round-up of science news, opinion and analysis free in your inbox every weekday.
Many places are becoming increasingly unlivable. And around one-quarter of humanity is already dealing with drought and associated food insecurity. By 2070, one-fifth of the planet could become too hot for normal human life, causing up to 3.5 billion people to move. Sea level rise alone could displace 410 million people globally by 2100.
We are poised to see the largest and fastest movement of people in human history. New policy frameworks will be needed. In 2025, we will begin to shift from reactive to proactive, and start to embrace the imperative of climate-driven relocation.
Unsurprisingly, climate-driven relocation will hit poor communities and communities of color hardest. Those with the fewest resources to adapt, who did the least to cause the climate crisis, will bear the brunt. Think of the 33 million displaced by the floods in Pakistan in 2022, with 9.4 million acres of farmland damaged or destroyed. Think of how the history of racism in America increases climate risks—formerly redlined neighborhoods have 25 percent more homes facing high flood risk. But no person, no place is immune—think of the heat waves in Europe in 2022 that killed more than 61,000, where few people have air conditioning because it was never needed. At the rate humanity continues to spew greenhouse gases, all that could be just a dress rehearsal.
To date, most climate migration has occurred within nations, but as the regions affected by extreme weather expand, that will need to change. We will have to be vigilant about keeping xenophobia at bay, acknowledging the cruel injustice at play as the lowest greenhouse gas emitting nations, like the Pacific islands, are the first to be inundated.
Where will people go? How will this be managed? One thing is certain: Ignoring the problem will not make it go away; to the contrary, it will result in chaos. At the international, national, and local levels, we will begin to develop policies to fill the current legislative and regulatory void, like restricting construction of housing in high-risk areas. One example is the State of New Jersey buying out around 200 property owners in Woodbridge Township—one of the areas most affected by flooding from Hurricane Irene in 2011 and Hurricane Sandy in 2012—to ban new construction developments and return the land to nature.
Other initiatives and policies will involve preparing lower-risk areas to become receiving communities for those who must relocate. In the Pacific, one of the world’s lowest greenhouse emitting regions, whole nations are in danger of being inundated. The nation of Kiribati has already bought land in Fiji as part of their plan to ultimately relocate people as needed due to sea level rise. In 2023, 18 Pacific Island nations endorsed the Pacific Regional Framework on Climate Mobility, which outlines several priorities such as regional collaboration on cross-border relocation to ensure that human rights are being respected, developing guidelines in consultation with relocating communities and coordinating support between countries for cross-border migrants.
In 2025, at the level of individuals and families, we will see those with means start to relocate proactively. Already, 11 percent of Americans have considered moving to avoid the impacts of global warming, and roughly 75 percent are hesitant to buy homes in areas with high climate risks like wildfires (more than 30 million homes in the lower 48 US states are at risk of being hit with wildfires).
We will also continue to see the insurance market play a significant role in these shifts, as more and more high-risk places become uninsurable. For instance, in 2023, the National Flood Insurance Program changed its pricing structure for the first time since it was established in 1968. As a result, the average cost of flood insurance has risen in many places—in Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, it soared by more than 1,000 percent.
In 2025, continually rebuilding in the same places after extreme weather events, standard practice to date, will become widely understood as absurd. It’s not that people want to move, to leave the communities and ecosystems they love and call home; it’s that they must. Cultures and diasporas will start shifting to embrace this new reality. Many of them will face a stark question: What does home actually mean in the age of climate breakdown?
A new study by Nagoya University has revealed that dust from snow- and ice-free areas of the Arctic may be an important contributor to Arctic warming.
Previous studies have theorised that Arctic warming leads to the region’s clouds containing more liquid droplets and fewer ice crystals. As a result, this might cool the region during summer.
The Arctic is warming much faster than the rest of the world, a phenomenon known as ‘Arctic amplification’.
Arctic temperatures are rising at least three times faster than the global average. In 2023, the Arctic experienced its warmest summer ever recorded.
Some factors that contribute to the amplification of Arctic warming include:
Less snow and ice: Snow and ice reflect sunlight, so when they melt, more sunlight is absorbed by the ocean, which warms the ocean and atmosphere.
Less convection: In the Arctic, less sunlight reaches the surface, so the atmosphere is heated by moist air from the tropics. This results in less convection and vertical mixing.
Greenhouse gases: Carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases mainly affect the atmosphere near the surface.
The effects of Arctic warming are felt across the high latitudes and beyond, and have global environmental, economic, and social implications.
Debunking previous understandings of ice crystal changes
Mixed-phase clouds, which consist of both liquid droplets and ice crystals, are ubiquitous in Earth’s atmosphere and have substantial impacts on Earth’s cloud radiative balance, precipitation, and hydrological cycle.
These clouds are particularly abundant in the lower troposphere of the Arctic region, where warming is proceeding at a rate two to four times faster than the global average
It is possible that more ice crystals in the clouds are making the clouds thinner and shorter-lived, therefore reflecting less sunlight, which might heat the region during summer (emission feedback).
“Increasing amounts of dust due to Arctic warming may cause the opposite phenomenon of the conventional understanding of ice crystal changes,” explained Associate Professor Hitoshi Matsui of Nagoya University, the lead author of the study.
“Our previous study found that a large amount of Arctic dust is distributed in the lower troposphere (below about 3 km altitude) over the region in summer and early fall, with the dust acting as a very efficient nucleus for ice formation in clouds at this altitude during the season.”
How Arctic warming and dust levels are connected
To estimate the impact of Arctic dust on the region’s clouds, Matsui and Dr Kei Kawai of Nagoya University, in collaboration with researchers from the National Institute of Polar Research and Hokkaido University, conducted a study using the CAM-ATRAS global aerosol-climate model.
They first looked at changes in the amount of dust released from the Arctic land surface over the past 40 years, between 1981 and 2020.
The simulations showed that dust emissions increased by 20% during this period as Arctic warming increased.
This increase promotes ice nucleation in clouds in the lower troposphere, weakening the efficiency of clouds to contain more liquid droplets and fewer ice crystals as the Arctic warms.
Increased dust levels promote ice crystal formation, outweighing the decrease in ice crystal formation by the temperature feedback in 30% of the region annually and 70% in summer.
“Most climate models have not considered the effects of dust from the Arctic land surface,” Matsui said.
“Our research suggests that the counterbalancing temperature and emission feedbacks should be considered to improve the accuracy of climate change predictions in the Arctic.”
Nature, Published online: 26 November 2024; doi:10.1038/d41586-024-03773-9
Climate change and urbanization are exacerbating the effects of flooding. A close look at a Nepalese river reveals that efforts to reduce the impact of floods must consider the geomorphic changes that occur during these extreme events.
At around 3 am on Sunday morning, in a drained plenary, the gavel slammed to bring COP29 to a close. Coming at the end of a convulsive final day in Baku, Azerbaijan, the conclusion of the Conference of the Parties was greeted by applause. It gave way, immediately, to discontent.
The conference, whose primary focus was agreeing on a new finance deal to help developing nations with their climate actions, was supposed to end on Friday. But disagreements among the nearly 200 countries over the updated amount of financing to be given delayed the conclusion by 33 hours. The hope had been that developed countries would commit to giving more than $1 trillion a year. Yet by Friday, negotiations had not come anywhere close to that figure.
The final extra day was marked by drafts, huddles, and bitter clashes behind closed doors, negotiators having splintered from the main hall into separate smaller rooms following the failure to reach a deal. At 4 pm on Saturday, the door to room number 3 unexpectedly opened. A phalanx of delegates from some of the world’s most climate-vulnerable nations paraded in front of photographers and reporters, leaving the negotiations in protest that they were not being heard.
Frantic hours of further negotiations followed. After several postponements, the Azerbaijani COP presidency, led by the country’s minister of ecology and natural resources, Mukhtar Babayev, convened the assembly twice in the evening. Eventually, an agreement on climate finance was approved—but for only a fraction of what had been hoped for.
What the Agreement Says
The text requires developed countries to put $300 billion a year into climate finance for developing nations by 2035. The initial, grander target that was brought to the conference—$1.3 trillion every 12 months by 2035—is still in the text, but it is little more than an invitation.
The crux, which the document does not resolve, is who the money will come from. Governments? Private finance? The vagueness is intentional. Clarification will hopefully come in a road map (dubbed the “Baku to Belém Road Map to 1.3T”) that is being created in the lead-up to COP30 next year, which will take place in Brazil. There is a commitment, in short, to clarify everything in the coming months.
Importantly, China, which is still considered a developing country under the 1992 agreements that govern climate action, has not had its status changed, meaning that it is not obliged to help with climate financing. It has long been called upon to contribute through the COP process, on the basis that it leads the world in aggregate emissions and is the world’s second-largest economy. Now, for the first time, China will make a voluntary contribution via the COP system, but this will not result in an obligation to do so.
Mark J Spalding, President of The Ocean Foundation, discusses how investing in innovative ocean companies can maximise returns and help to make the world a better place.
The Ocean Foundation and its partners are developing regenerative opportunity investment portfolios by focusing on transitions resulting from, or in response to, change. This includes structural shifts related to environmental degradation, societal evolution, and technological innovation. Building credible new portfolios grounded in sustainability is challenging due to the dependence on the reputation of all partners involved in any efforts to improve the economic, social, and environmental wellbeing of human communities and the resources they depend on. Global ocean innovation is the key to human adaptability, as these transformative changes are coming. Innovative ocean economy companies can produce greater shareholder returns and build ecological and social resilience. Investors can use innovation as a hedge against inflation and a potential path to outperforming the market over the long term.
Why focus on innovation?
Innovation can be thought of as applying new ideas, methods, or products in a way that results in a beneficial change. Innovation involves the origination of a new thing – its conception and development – and the pioneering adoption. While traditional investing has focused on trying to understand the potential future earnings of a business, knowing that a company focuses on developing and cultivating innovation can be a better way for investors to predict the long-term potential earnings of that company. The internet and its continued global expansion are causing a secondary acceleration of innovation adoption. Because of this, we can expect innovation cycles to become more frequent and cause faster and more extreme change.
How do we seek to capture ocean innovation?
Our approach to investing in innovation has been honed through more than 15 years of ocean-centric thematic investing. To select our themes, sub-themes, and companies, we have studied the history of innovation, which results from a series of recurring properties, patterns, and habits that sustain or encourage innovation. We then look to identify dynamic companies that are actively engaged in innovation across those subthemes and prioritise those that we believe will be able to cultivate innovation and drive its adoption.
We focus on larger, more established companies that are good at improving what they have been good at doing. For them, innovation can be sustaining: it keeps a company healthy and ahead of its competition. In addition, we will watch for disruptive innovation, which is often led by new firms with radical new methods, products, or ideas. However, disruptive firms will play a lesser role in the portfolio because we believe their path to continuing innovation is much less predictable – until it is not, at which point we will be ready for them.
As we look for sustaining or disruptive innovation, we also screen for companies capable of embedding equity in those innovations. Only with embedded equity can the innovation-focused portfolio truly achieve the multi-pronged benefits we seek.
Innovation themes and sub-themes
The Ocean Foundation and our partners developed the following list of four possible driving themes and then defined sub-themes looking at trends linked to the need for solutions, evolution, or changes that we believe are already inspiring, enabling, and accelerating innovation.
Ocean conservation presents significant investment opportunities due to unprecedented ecosystem threats. Technological solutions like advanced satellite monitoring, artificial intelligence (AI)-powered tracking systems, and blockchain-enabled supply chain transparency can help enforce fishing quotas and reduce illegal maritime activities. Bioengineered filtration systems, precision agricultural technologies, and advanced wastewater treatment methodologies can also help reduce nutrient loading caused by agricultural runoff and urban waste. Technological interventions can monitor and mitigate coastal and offshore development impacts using remote sensing, predictive ecological modelling, and sustainable engineering practices. Entrepreneurs and impact investors are developing solutions like marine habitat reconstruction technologies, renewable offshore energy systems, and real-time monitoring platforms. These innovations offer potential financial returns and are crucial tools for preserving marine biodiversity, supporting global food security, and maintaining the ocean’s role in climate regulation.
Ocean pollution is a growing concern that can be addressed through technological innovation. Sustaining innovations, such as advanced filtration systems and plastic recycling processes, are improving waste management. Disruptive innovations, such as AI-powered ocean-cleaning drones and biodegradable materials, offer transformative potential. These technologies address environmental issues and present significant economic value driven by regulatory pressures and global sustainability commitments. The most promising investment domains include technologies addressing seismic and acoustic pollution, waste disposal solutions integrating circular economy principles, and advanced chemical pollution detection and remediation systems. Venture capital and impact investment funds are interested in scalable solutions that generate financial returns and measurable environmental benefits, making ocean pollution prevention a strategic investment frontier with substantial long-term growth potential.
Climate change is expected to significantly impact ocean economy sectors, including aquaculture, fisheries, tourism, and hospitality. Changes in water quality and weather conditions could lead to reduced operations and employment, shifting communities from extractive industries to conservation and eco-tourism models. Climate policy will trigger new strategies like a more circular economy, and investment opportunities will expand significantly. However, there may be inequity between developing countries with resource constraints and developed countries with research and innovation capacity. Investing in decarbonisation is crucial for combating climate change and moving towards a sustainable future. Supporting clean energy projects, green technologies, energy efficiency, and sustainable practices can reduce environmental impact and position investors at the forefront of a rapidly expanding market. Transportation innovations like electric vessels, autonomous technologies, and smart transportation systems can drive progress in mobility, efficiency, and sustainability, improving human health and mitigating climate change. The transition from traditional offshore oil and gas production to marine renewables is expected to create new opportunities in emerging energy fields, particularly in countries with strong R&D capabilities.
Technology innovation is transforming industries, improving efficiency, and addressing global challenges. Investing in technologies like artificial intelligence, digitisation, automation, and material science can enhance productivity, reduce operational costs, and gain a competitive edge. Automation and robotics can streamline processes, minimise human errors, and unlock new levels of efficiency, leading to increased profitability and sustainable growth. Digitisation is crucial for staying relevant in the digital age, enabling businesses to streamline operations, enhance customer experiences, and access valuable data insights. Material science innovations create stronger materials and improve energy efficiency and sustainability. AI offers unprecedented opportunities to revolutionise industries and unlock valuable insights from vast datasets.
Emerging innovative blue economy sectors
All ocean economy sectors should be part of the blue economy, and the need for sustainable use will drive their redevelopment. Innovative emerging sectors have significant potential as they are at the forefront of new industries. They will likely see increased profits, social and environmental improvement, and potentially outsized shareholder returns. Novel designs and more human-centric operational procedures will drive a need for new suppliers.
Widespread ocean literacy underpins the blue economy. Understanding ocean systems forms the basis for innovation and developing new sectors. Success requires understanding the role of international governance structures, communications, and marketing strategies and how communities can be engaged in adopting emerging technologies. Improved marine management and governance designs are crucial for regulating emerging innovations and new goods and services, preventing market complications and unintended harm to the ocean and coastal communities.
Key ocean economy sectors include:
Aquaculture and fisheries: The conservation of wild fish stocks and increased reliance on aquaculture production necessitate the development of new technologies and manufacturing innovations.
Marine renewable energy: Marine renewable energy, including offshore wind and ocean energy projects, is an emerging and rapidly growing sector due to investment flows and the demand for new technologies and manufacturing innovations. It requires new solutions.
Marine transport and ports: Onshore facilities have already invested in ‘clean port’ technologies to reduce air pollution and improve efficiency. Emerging industries such as marine renewable energy, aquaculture, biotechnology, and geoengineering climate solutions are transforming marine transport and ports, requiring new specialised infrastructure, logistics, and services. Ports must adapt to offshore wind project support by developing new turbine assembly and maintenance facilities. Aquaculture and deep-sea mining require advanced logistics solutions, specialised vessels, and enhanced port capabilities to handle new cargo types. These changes will foster innovation in port operations, vessel management, and supply chain optimisation while pushing for sustainable, efficient, and tech-driven port systems.
Marine research: Marine research and innovation are crucial for the maritime economy, driving advancements in ocean technologies such as biotechnology, deep sea exploration, and satellite-assisted monitoring systems. These technologies and sustainability initiatives are driving growth and adapting to global challenges. Bioprospecting, an emerging sector, presents real opportunities in marine biotechnology, while artificial intelligence can aid in research and time management investments.
Marine and ship construction: Innovation in the design, manufacturing, and construction of coastal and port infrastructure, renewable energy equipment, and shipbuilding is critical to improving resilience and adaptation and to transitioning, supporting, and establishing innovative enterprises in this sector.
National defence: National security influences scientific and technological innovation amid international tensions, creating an economic framework that influences innovation. Even beyond naval defence needs, the sector has high innovation levels and a crucial role in ocean domain awareness and maritime security. As automation advances, it may increase employment in technology firms that support naval needs, from navigation to operations to meteorological forecasting. Reducing human-run military vessels will likely be slow as the existing fleet production lines represent significant embedded investment and, thus, will likely occur at the pace of decommissioning.
Ocean-centric innovation: A multidisciplinary approach
Ocean-centric innovation investing is a strategy that combines technological advancement, environmental concerns, and societal transformation to create a more sustainable blue economy. This approach focuses on companies that drive sustainable innovation in technology, healthcare, wellbeing, demographic shifts, and decarbonisation. Emerging sectors such as aquaculture, marine renewable energy, marine research, and marine construction offer promising opportunities for innovation and positive environmental and social outcomes. Focusing on regenerative opportunities ensures portfolio companies minimise harm while actively contributing to ocean ecosystem regeneration and building shareholder value.
Successful investing in the ocean economy requires a deep understanding of innovation patterns and ocean-specific dynamics. By focusing on established companies with sustained innovation capabilities and staying alert to disruptive newcomers, investors can build resilient portfolios that capitalise on the ocean economy’s growth while contributing to its sustainable development.
Integrating equity considerations into innovation assessment ensures that investments generate financial returns and contribute to inclusive economic growth. This approach acknowledges that sustainable ocean innovation must benefit all stakeholders while preserving and enhancing marine resources for future generations. Ocean-centric innovation investing offers a pathway to participate in and shape the future of our blue economy.
About the author
Mark J Spalding (J.D., M.P.I.A.), President of The Ocean Foundation, is a Senior Fellow at the Center for the Blue Economy, a member of the UNEP Guidance Working Group for its Sustainable Blue Economy Finance Initiative, and an advisor to various ocean-centric investment funds. He is an international ocean policy, law, philanthropy, finance, and investment expert.
Please note, this article will also appear in the 20th edition of our quarterly publication.
Activists protest during at the COP29 climate meeting in Baku.Credit: Dominika Zarzycka/SOPA via ZUMA/Alamy
A last-minute deal that rescued the COP29 climate talks in Baku, Azerbaijan, is a “fragile consensus”, researchers who study climate finance have told Nature.
Visibly relieved COP delegates from rich countries applauded in the early hours of 24 November following a last-minute pledge in which rich countries will ‘take the lead’ in increasing climate finance to poor countries to at least $300 billion annually by 2035. Low-and middle income countries, notably China, will be expected to contribute to international climate funds, a first for a COP agreement.
But delegates from some of the largest developing countries, including India, Indonesia and Nigeria were furious. Some alleged that they had been pressured into a deal, so that the COP meeting did not end in failure. The meeting also did not agree how much of the $300 billion is to be in grants versus loans, nor how much will come from private or public-sector sources.
Current climate finance from rich to poor countries is more than $100 billion and projected to double to nearly $200 billion by 2030 under a ‘business as usual’ scenario, according to an analysis by ODI Global, a think tank in London.
Old wounds
“The finance outcome for Baku was deeply disappointing,” says Dipak Dasgupta, an economist at The Energy and Resources think-tank in New Delhi, and a lead author on climate finance for reports assembled by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
“While snatching this COP back from the flames deserves momentary celebration, getting here also exposed old wounds between wealthier and poorer nations,” notes Clare Shakya, head of climate at The Nature Conservancy, an international conservation organization headquartered in Arlington, Virginia, in the United States.
COP29 President Mukhtar Babayev (right, front) applauds the end of the UNFCCC climate conference in the early hours of 24 November after the climate-finance deal was made.Credit: Sean Gallup/Getty
Low-and-middle income countries, excluding China, approached the COP proposing to rich countries that they need around $2.4 trillion annually from 2030 to help wean them off fossil fuels and to protect them from the effects of global warming. This sum is in line with the recommendations from an influential report from scientists and economists that was presented at the COP. To get closer to a deal during the COP, more than 80 countries proposed a figure of $1.3 trillion.
“The pledge of $300 billion a year by 2035 will not convince anyone that we will get to $1.3 trillion a year needed by developing countries to respond to the climate emergency,” says Sarah Colenbrander, head of climate and sustainability at ODI Global.
The Trump factor
The agreed amount also does not reflect a scenario in which the United States retracts its global climate funding if an incoming Trump administration pulls out of international climate agreements.
Before the COP, US President Joe Biden’s administration was committed to providing $11.4 billion in climate finance each year by 2024, around 10% of the present annual global total. “There is no doubt that we will see a massive hole in the global climate finance provided [by the US] just as climate impacts are intensifying and accumulating,” says Shakya. By contrast, China has been providing around $4 billion annually in climate finance since 2013, she adds.
COP delegates also agreed that a finance “road map” document will be prepared ahead of COP30 in Belém, Brazil. This would show how countries will achieve the higher climate finance target.
“The Baku to Belém road map is there for good reason and good practical science is urgent,” Dasgupta says.” It needs careful nurturing, and not a wrecking ball.”
When asked why they chose Tado, he said that customers’ main reason was, “I want to save money. The second reason is, I want to make the planet a better place. If we cannot fulfill the first one,” he stressed, “the second one becomes less relevant.”
China seems to offer many solutions. Although coal consumption is climbing, it will peak in 2026 as renewables come online, with MingYang Smart Energy president Qiying Zhang outlining how floating and fixed offshore wind turbines are replacing fossil fuels. In August the company installed the world’s largest single-capacity offshore wind turbine, the MySE18.X-20MW, in Hainan, which can generate 80 million kWh annually, offsetting 66,000 tons of CO2.
Meanwhile, the country’s road transport electrification is moving at pace, thanks to heavy government subsidies. “In China, there were 570,000 EVs bought in August, and if you’re not driving an electric car in China, you’re considered a very boring person,” Stella Li, vice president of Chinese EV giant BYD, told the room. The new Z9 GT offered “intelligent driving,” meaning the car could park itself—even sliding sideways into a tight space, thanks to its flexible rear axle.
“The epicenter of the energy transition is China, which has a beautiful historical symmetry,” Arthur Downing, director of strategy at Octopus Energy explained. “Until the 18th century, the center of the world economically was China. It was the first energy transition of the industrial revolution in Britain that shifted that economic center of gravity to Europe. So we’re coming full circle at a ridiculous speed.”
Ann Mettler, European vice president of Bill Gates’ sustainable energy organization Breakthrough Energy, and Sabrina Schulz, strategic expert in climate, energy, and biodiversity, agreed that while Europe was making progress, it was falling behind and needed a blend of public and private finance to catch up by connecting and renewing grids and considering decentralized or even virtual power plants. “Policy certainty and public guarantees on investment in, say, green district heating is an absolute condition for investors,” Schulz argued.
Sana Khareghani, professor of practice in AI at King’s College London, suggested AI could help, managing and optimizing energy grids and helping develop new batteries to store power for when it’s most needed—helping reduce reliance on the fossil fuel powered generators of last resort.
This approach marks a stark shift from the Biden administration’s and puts the US’s emphasis more heavily on producing oil and gas than on attempting a transition to clean energy sources. In addition to touting the need to boost fossil fuels, Trump has disparaged subsidies for clean energy investments and called for “terminat[ing]” the funds that were allocated for those subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act. His stance ignores the role that burning fossil fuels has played in climate change and could cause considerable harm to US efforts to address the issue.
Several of his nominations are indicative of these goals. He’s chosen oil industry executive Chris Wright—a fracking evangelist—to head up the Department of Energy. He’s named North Dakota governor Doug Burgum—who connected Trump to oil executive donors during the campaign—as the lead for the Interior Department and as an “energy czar.” He’s also tapped former representative Lee Zeldin—who’s emphasized his commitment to deregulation—as his chief of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
There’s only so much the administration can control, however. Although Trump can take notable steps to try to increase fossil fuel production, actual upticks in oil and gas extraction will depend heavily on the private sector and the economics of the industry.
Still, while Trump faces some constraints, he has significant policy levers he can pull to encourage production of fossil fuels. Wright, Burgum, and Zeldin have also signaled they’re prepared to execute on the president-elect’s vision, including changes to drilling on public lands and speedier permitting for oil and gas projects.
“President Trump and his energy team—Mr. Burgum, Mr. Wright, Mr. Zeldin—can go to considerable lengths to make expanded production attractive and relatively easy,” Barry Rabe, a University of Michigan environmental policy professor, told Vox.
How Trump Could Increase Fossil Fuel Production
Trump has two key avenues he can utilize to boost fossil fuel production. One, he can open up more public lands and waters for exploration, development, and extraction. Two, he can ease the regulatory processes that govern fossil fuel work.
Trump Could Offer More Oil and Gas Leases on Public Lands
As president, Trump will oversee the Interior Department, which includes the Bureau of Land Management as well as the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, both of which manage a substantial fraction of the country’s public lands and waters. He’ll also oversee the Agriculture Department, which contains the Forest Service, another body that has oversight of some public lands.
The Bureaus of Land Management and Ocean Energy Management, as well as the Forest Service, are the three main entities that issue oil and gas leases on public spaces. These leases effectively allow fossil fuel companies to rent parcels of public land from the federal government so they can extract resources from these areas. Once land is designated as available for lease, leases are typically auctioned off to the highest bidder.
We had better hope that Vaclav Smil is wrong about the world’s food system. If he is right, the implication is that we will end up bulldozing what little remains of nature to keep the food we like on our plates.
The message I took from his new book, How to Feed the World: A factful guide, is that the food system pretty much has to be the way it is, and that there will…
