The US has banned mention of climate change from trade talks that Trump’s administration has been holding with the UK.

Leaked documents show that the UK raised the issue of climate change only to be bluntly told it is off limits because it is too politically sensitive and a ‘lightening rod issue’.

The document state that the “UK inquired about the possibility of including reference to climate change in a future UK-US trade agreement given that the UK has a strong historical stance on climate change and pushed strongly for the Paris Agreement.

“UK also highlighted the pressure for this that would come from civil society and NGOs. US responded emphatically that climate change is the most political (sensitive) question for the US, stating it is a ‘lightning rod issue’, mentioning that as of 2015, USTR are bound by Congress not to include mention of greenhouse gas emission reductions in trade agreements. US stated this ban would not be lifted anytime soon.” 

Sabotaging policy

This pandering to climate change denial is completely unacceptable in the face of the climate emergency.

But beyond this, it’s good to be clear on what the connections between trade deal and climate change are. Otherwise it might not seem that important for climate to be on the trade agenda.

Trade deals can make the climate crisis worse, block climate action and undermine a just transition. Trade deals really matter if we are to have any chance of tackling the climate crisis.

Trade deals can increase both trade in fossil fuels themselves and in fossil fuel intensive sectors, thus increasing climate change emissions.

The failed EU-US trade negotiations, TTIP, had a chapter specifically on the energy trade, which aimed to increase trade in energy while outlawing discrimination between dirty fossil fuels and renewable energy. Campaigners at the time said it could sabotage climate policy.

Climate action

Last year, the EU agreed a very quick mini pact with Trump in an attempt to head of his threats of imposing heavy tariffs. It only covered two things, but those two things are both significant for the climate: gas and soybeans.

A fossil fuel, and a fossil fuel intensive crop. Soy is produced on mega plantations, often destroying rainforest and savannah in the process, with heavy use of pesticides and artificial fertilizers which are produced from fossil fuels.

Shipping goods around the world is itself currently a climate problem, as marine fuel oil is one of the dirtiest fossil fuels.

We know we must have strong, immediate action to tackle the climate crisis. After lost decades of inertia, we need binding regulation that can make real change happen.

But trade rules are written to promote voluntary self-regulation by industry – exactly the approach that has resulted in continued inaction and business as usual. Throughout the leaked papers from the US-UK trade talks, US officials keep insisting that they only want voluntary industry-led measures.

Corporate courts

Whenever actual regulation is mentioned in the leaked papers, the officials emphasise the need for big business to help write the rules. They are pushing for corporations to get early warning of any planned laws, which might mean big business could block proposals before they are even seen by parliament.

That’s not all. If laws and decisions are actually passed to take meaningful climate action, trade rules have another ace up their sleeve: corporate courts.

Formally known as ISDS, these allow transnational corporations to sue governments outside of the national courts, over decisions that they don’t like. The amounts involved can be massive, and the threat is real.

We’re already seeing this happen on climate. The Netherlands recently took the decision to phase out coal power in the light of climate change, and promptly a German energy company, Uniper, has started threatening to sue in a corporate court.

And in Canada, when the province of Quebec introduced a fracking moratorium, energy company Lone Pine sued in a case that is still ongoing.

Corporate courts should not exist. They are unjust and illegitimate, and should have no place in UK trade policy. Yet the leaked papers show it seems increasingly likely that they would be included in a US-UK trade deal.

System change

Tackling climate change will require a transformation of our economy and society – a system change. In a change of that scale, we need to ensure that those with least responsibility for the crisis are not the ones that end up paying for it.

Those on the frontlines of the crisis in the global south have contributed the least in terms of historic emissions, with responsibility lying in the global north. Part of balancing this debt should include transferring technologies to the global south to help tackle climate change, and supporting policies that can build a more sustainable future – a global green new deal.

Yet trade rules explicitly outlaw technology transfer, and try to limit the flexibility for governments to introduce the active industrial and developmental policies they need.

In the UK and elsewhere, we also need a just transition that provides decent jobs. Those who currently work in polluting industries should not be penalised – they need to be able to find good new jobs helping to make the transition happen and in new sustainable sectors.

To do this, governments need to be able target resources at communities that are likely to be affected. This could be by making it a condition for a company wanting to invest that they create jobs locally. But again, this is something trade rules say is not allowed.

Take action

Trade deals have teeth in international law. They override climate agreements, and currently they are a problem for climate action.

We need to change that. A throwaway reference to climate change in a deal does nothing. We need to fundamentally change the way trade deals are done so that they have climate justice at their core. And we also need to stop the trade deals that would make the climate crisis worse.

Take action and join our campaign to stop a US-UK trade deal.

This Author

Jean Blaylock is campaigns and policy manager at Global Justice Now. 

Boris Johnson has defended his use of short-haul flights to dash around the country as he bids for election victory.

The Prime Minister said the Conservative Party has offset the carbon contribution of his flights, which have drawn criticism from climate campaigners and Labour.

He added there was no need to ban aviation but he expected British firms to help develop planes that produce fewer carbon dioxide emissions.

Shoe

The Tory leader visited Grimsby Fish Market on Monday and travelled by road to Robin Hood Airport, near Doncaster, to board a propeller plane to Teesside International, near Darlington.

The 30-minute flight on a plane with more than 70 seats, which appeared at least two-thirds full, was followed by a trip on his campaign battle bus to Washington, near Sunderland.

If Mr Johnson had completed the 114-mile journey from Robin Hood Airport to Washington by road, it would have taken around two hours.

The Prime Minister later returned to Teesside before flying to Birmingham Airport, which again took around 30 minutes, and then drove to a shoe warehouse near Gloucester.

Damaging

The PM began his campaign by using a plane he dubbed “Con Air” to travel to north-east England, Scotland and Northern Ireland before returning to the East Midlands, in one day.

Asked about criticism of him using short-haul flights for his campaigning, given his party’s green agenda, Mr Johnson told reporters: “The best way I can respond is by saying we’re offsetting the carbon contribution of this flight.

“One day, when we get Brexit done and we drive the technological revolution this country is capable of, we will have not quite Prius aeroplanes but planes that produce much less CO2 and that’s the world we should work for.”

Mr Johnson said the future has to involve low-carbon planes. He said: “I don’t think we should ban aviation, people need to get around, and they can offset it and also work for a world, which is what we’re going for, where we’ve improved engine efficiency so much that flying by plane is no longer as damaging to the atmosphere as it is at the moment.”

Criticism

He spoke about the need to retrofit houses to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

He added: “It’s Vorsprung durch Technik, it’s about technological progress, believing in the abilities of this country to solve our problems – as we can.

“We’re going through now an incredible revolution in battery technology. We will have planes that produce much less carbon.

“But in the meantime I’m going to humbly accept your criticism and point out we’re offsetting our carbon footprint.”

This Author

Richard Wheeler is the PA parliamentary editor. Image: Stefan Rousseau/PA Wire. 

Water supplies for around a quarter of the global population are at risk due to climate change, according to international research.

The study, authored by 32 scientists from around the world, assessed the vulnerability of the planet’s 78 mountain glacier-based systems.

These natural resources, known as mountain water towers, store and transport water via glaciers, snowpacks, lakes and streams.

Socioeconomic

Up to 1.9 billion people globally – roughly a quarter of the world’s population – get their supplies from these systems.

New research shows them to be at risk, in many cases critically, due to the threats of climate change, growing populations, mismanagement of resources and other geopolitical factors.

Tobias Bolch, of the School of Geography and Sustainable Development at the University of St Andrews, contributed to the study as an expert in the changing mountain cryosphere and its impact on the downstream society.

He said: “The study quantified for the first time both the natural water supply from the mountains as well as the water demand by society, and also provided projections for the future based on climatic and socioeconomic scenarios

Vulnerable

“The projected loss of ice and snow and increasing water needs makes specific densely-populated basins located in arid regions, like the Indus basin in South Asia or the Amu Darya basin in Central Asia, highly vulnerable in the future.”

The authors concluded it is essential to develop international, mountain-specific conservation and climate change adaptation policies and strategies..

The most relied-upon mountain system in the world is the Indus water tower in Asia, according to the research.

It is made up of vast areas of the Himalayan mountain range and covers portions of Afghanistan, China, India and Pakistan, and is also one of the most vulnerable.

High-ranking water tower systems on other continents are the southern Andes, the Rocky Mountains and the European Alps.

This Author

 Conor Riordan is a reporter at PA Scotland.

There’s a newly established dynamic at the UN climate negotiations. Back in 2015 when the Paris Agreement was celebrated, I witnessed many indigenous peoples crying as they realised that no firm commitment to hold to 1.5ºC was, in fact, a death sentence.

The difference between 1.5ºC and 2ºC is climatically enormous and devastating to billions of vulnerable people around the world. Between that time of signing of the Paris Agreement and today, no progress has been made. As emissions continue to rise, people are starting to see the devastating impacts of climate change in every part of the world. 

What has changed is the presence and voices of young people who have now formed a tight bond with the indigenous peoples of the world to bring their plight and fight to a wider audience.

Beyond Greta

Greta Thunberg is no doubt the figurehead of the movement as is evidenced by the press here at the COP in Madrid stalking her every appearance.

Greta herself is using her platform and empowerment to push the agenda of the Fridays For Future movement. Although very present, she is delegating the high-level exposure to her colleagues and representatives from around the world. 

Leonie Bremer, is a 22-year-old student living in Cologne, studying environment and energy, and the press spokesperson for Fridays for Future Germany. She highlighted her own desperation at the climate situation and how it is impacting so many people today.

Leonie Berners (LB): At the COP right now we have people from 41 countries here and, of course, they all have different expertise. There are also indigenous people who can tell us about their experiences and their suffering from the climate crisis everyday. Myself, for example, I am studying the environmental and energy stuff, so I can talk a little bit more about this, so yeah, we are specialised in different ways.

Nick Breeze (NB): You mentioned indigenous people and their suffering. Is it quite obvious to you that in the west we tend to think of 2050, 2100, when we talk about climate change but when you are talking to indigenous peoples it has been about yesterday and about now for quite some time?

LB: Yeah, I am talking to them about this and I am really sad when I hear their stories and I am back in my country and people are like, ‘well yeah, we still have time to solve the climate crisis’ but at the same time I am talking to those that have lost their mother and their brother because they have no more food because hydroelectric dams are flooding their homes. They cannot fish anymore and they are dying. Sometimes I feel a little bit desperate about this.

Island States

This was highlighted in the press conference hosted by Thunberg when Carlon Zachras from the Marshall Islands pointed out that they are two metres above sea-level but have been experiencing tidal surges of nearly five metres. 

This means they are losing their agriculture and homes to the encroaching sea. The situation is worsening and it is caused by the relentless pollution of the wealthier, developed nations. It disgracefully unjust. Zachras pointed out that the Marshall Island’s are responsible for 0.000001% of global CO2 emissions.

NB: The youth movement has really put climate change on the international newsreel, you have got the world’s attention, what next?

LB: The world leaders have to understand the climate crisis and yet it doesn’t seem like they do. When they do, then we have to get involved in the decision making. It is not fair that they decide about our future but we are the ones that have to live with that. 

We have to break down the complex science so that everybody can understand and feel the panic that I feel everyday when I think about the climate crisis. I see the climate crisis in every aspect of my life and I think this has to spread around the world.

NB: The COP is a strange event really: it is held to address a crisis, there are a mixed bag of people, all walks of life; there are presentations, press releases, press everywhere, reports being released… is it sufficient?

Freer World

LB: It is not sufficient. As we see, for example, in 2015 we decided on the Paris Agreement but it has been four years and the climate crisis is not averted.

We need to take this seriously and to act. Not just talking about it, but to agree on things we have to change and to have an action plan that is controlled every year and that is really strict on climate policy. 

NB: How do you see Fridays4Future evolving because it seems like young people have to get more active. You are pretty active as it is but you have to get more active to make the demands that are needed.

LB: Yeah, here at COP we have the chance to talk to people from Chile, or from Hong Kong, and all the countries where there is many protests on the streets.

When I have the chance to talk with them I give them power to keep on fighting and this is so important because otherwise, they lose their power because they get so many critical views from their country but what they are doing is correct. By [this kind of action] we grow and we evolve and we get stronger everyday.

NB: Are you seeing solidarity around the world from the youth movement?

LB: Yeah, especially here at the COP, we try to draw attention to Chile again just because the COP is taking place in Madrid right now, the problems are not solved yet.

We need to really focus on those things and not be partying like the people did here last night. We need to work the whole night to get a freer world. This is what we are trying to achieve here.

‘Chile woke up’

A delegate from Chile, Angela Valenzuela, spoke out on the same panel as Thunberg and Zachras, pointing a finger at the Chilean government for coming to the UN and behaving like nothing has happened.

She said angrily that since the COP was relocated to Madrid the worlds mainstream media had stopped reporting on the dire situation there. 

On the climate crisis, Valenzuela said, “Chile woke up. We said we cannot support a system that ignores the climate crisis… Chile woke up, and the world is waking up too!”

Fridays4Future represents a new voice in the world who are doggedly prepared to speak truth to power in a world that is already looking chaotic, both climatically and politically. 

These issues cut across gender, environmental racism, and intergenerational injustice.

Making the right choice to tackle the climate crisis should be the easiest choice to make, however, as Rose Ripple from the US indigenous peoples said, ‘This colonial institution continually favours corporate profits…Our movements must be bigger than recycling and bolder than holding signs!’

This Author

Nick Breeze is a climate journalist reporting at the COP in Madrid, and has organised the Cambridge Climate Lecture Series. He is also a wine journalist and writes for the for Secret Sommelier.

Nick Breeze: There has been a drop in the rate of the rise of emissions. Should we interpret this as good news?

Kelly Levin: The bottom line is that this is bad news because we cannot afford any growth in emissions right now. For our best chance to avoid the worst climate impacts we need to peak emissions by 2020. So not only do we have to slow the growth of emissions but completely bend the curve downwards. While it is a bit of a silver lining that we have a slower growth of emissions, we need to see a decline altogether.

Paris Agreement

NB: Your own report states that we have seen a doubling of emissions since the 1970’s. With 25 years of these COPs, are we achieving anything here politically, do you think?

KL: Certainly, what we know is that in the absence of climate policy and the Paris Agreement, temperature would be much warmer than it would be with these climate change commitments.

Right now we are slated for 3ºC warming. We would have seen 4ºC, possibly more, had we not seen a Paris Agreement. Yet we still see a huge gulf between the Paris Agreement and where we need to be to get down to 1.5-2ºC of warming. 

To take the Paris Agreement off the table would really be spelling disaster.

NB: Do you think having these two weeks at the COP is enough to get what we need to do done. The scale of the problem is so large and yet we allocate quite small amounts of time?

KL: So I think that while these particular negotiations only last for x number of hours in a given year, there is a tremendous amount of technical and diplomatic work that goes on throughout the year. So it is really a culmination and an important inflexion point where you can put pressure on governments. 

It is probably difficult, I think, for them to last any longer but at the end of the day, the action that is really going to move us is happening domestically. Therefore, that is all the climate legislation that is being cast is happening day in, day out back home.

Tremendous transformation

NB: I think it is somewhere like 37 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide that we emit every year. Is that about correct?

KL: Yes. With all the greenhouse gases and the land sector, we have to half emissions from where we are today by 2030 and then get to net-zero by midcentury.

That is a tremendous transformation and yet the pledges that countries have put forward suggest emissions will continue to rise through 2030 at least. That is definitely the wrong direction from where we need to be going.

NB: When we talk about emissions rising and where they actually go, we have these natural land sinks and oceans sinks. How much more carbon can they take?

KL: It is a very good question. What we have seen is that the ocean sink and the land sink have been sucking in more and more carbon dioxide as we emit more.

They only partially compensate for that growth in emissions, so the emissions still build-up but they are critically important for seeing that the temperature rise that we have already seen is not any higher.

There are scientific studies that show saturation rates in the ocean and in the land. Certainly in the land, there are some tipping points where you could see the Amazon, for example, flip from a tropical forest to a savanna-like ecosystem, where you lose some of that very basic carbon storage-like capability.

If that were to happen, certainly the rise in emissions would be much much higher.

Tipping points

NB: So that the system effectively starts breaking down, from where it is friendly to us specifically?

KL: Yeah, what scientists have pointed out is that there are a number of tipping points in the system and that we are dangerously close already to many of them.

These should really frighten us more than anything because it would really flip us into an unknown state. Human civilisation has flourished in a relatively very stable state climate-wise and this would be a very very big unknown as to what the consequences would be.

NB: You said we are dangerously close to these tipping points?

KL: Some scientists feel like, for some of the tipping points, we are already seeing rates of decline, for example, of sea ice, where those tipping points may have already been reached.

I think there is a lot of unknowns in terms of where particular tipping points lie in the system but the science is advancing significantly. Even just last week there was a significant paper stating that we are closer than we thought to a lot of these tipping points.

Coal

NB: One of the biggest causes seems to be use of coal in terms of attributable source. Does the WRI have any proposed strategy for getting away from coal faster?

KL: The good news is that the economics no longer favour it and investors are walking away. In the United States, for example, we are seeing dramatic decreases in coal in the last year to a point that is half what its peak was in 2005.

We are seeing no new construction and lots of announcements of cancellation of plans for new plants. 

Natural gas is in some cases being substituted for coal and to a lesser extent in renewables. In many geographies, we are seeing that coal is on the way out.

Especially in the US and Europe. We are seeing a growth in coal in China and India but the rate of growth in India has slowed considerably.

Natural gas

NB: You mentioned natural gas but that still has half the emissions of coal, is that correct?

KL: Yes, that is right. Natural gas is certainly on the rise and the emissions intensity of natural gas is about half that of what it is for coal.

While natural gas is on the rise the emissions associated with it have not displaced the emissions associated with the decline of coal. In some cases the natural gas is displacing the losses from coal, for example, in the United States. 

In other places, like if you take Japan, the use of natural gas is displacing the use of nuclear, so not everywhere is it displacing the use of coal.

NB: I know people call natural gas a transition fuel, but is there not a way to leapfrog it? It seems like it is not really a great transition option.

KL: Yeah, there is a great danger that we could lock-in natural gas infrastructure for decades to come, which would prohibit growth in renewable energy.

We really need to watch that or natural gas could become the next lock-in story, as coal was!

Transport

NB: Transport is another big area where the trends are quite worrying. especially things like flying. We seem to love flying. How do we reverse these kinds of trends that are tied in with peoples aspirations?

KL: It is very difficult. Aviation emissions are on the rise and especially in economies where per capita aviation emissions have been slow to date.

But we are seeing a real heightened amount of flying recently. I think CORSIA is going to help to some extent in the carbon offsetting scheme of aviation to stop the growth in emissions.

There is also going to be needed some technological development but certainly some signals to consumers to both reduce the amount of flying period, as well being smarter in terms of the types of flights they are taking.

NB: Do you have a lot of confidence in the NDCs as a pathway to a safe future?

KL: Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement are climate change commitments that countries put forward. They are nationally determined by nature so countries come forward with whatever they can pledge in terms of their climate action.

What we know is that, collectively, they are insufficient for limiting the worst of climate change impacts but yet they are better than what we would have in the absence of them. Countries next year are invited to update and increase their NDSs. 

The hope is that there will be tremendous pressure over the next year for countries to do so. Maybe some countries have had early implementation success. Maybe the economics of certain technologies have changed but certainly the hope is that we are going to see much more ambition next year because we desperately need it.

Cautious optimism

NB: On a scale of one to ten how optimistic are you that we are going to achieve these goals and really bring down emissions and restore the climate?

KL: What we know is that it is technically feasible but whether or not we actually do this is going to be a question of leadership and whether or not governments will take concerted action. 

What we know from the science is that we need tremendous transformation on a scale that is unprecedented across sectors and geographies. That will be a true test for us.

I think one needs to be a bit optimistic to stay in the game because the consequences are so tremendous otherwise but certainly if you look at the scale of the ambition required, it is very very daunting.

This Author

Nick Breeze is a climate change writer and interviewer and also writes a great deal about wine. He is an organiser of the Cambridge Climate Lecture Series and Secret Sommelier. 

Time is running out. There is a climate emergency and we have only a few years left to keep global warming at safer levels, beyond which we may cross tipping points and activate feedback loops it is near impossible to reverse.

This year, 2019, may well be the year the world’s collective consciousness was finally awoken to the reality of the climate and ecological emergency and the pressing need to act decisively.

Many social movements have begun to appear and raise their voices to protest at the lack of political leadership on this, the defining issue of our time.

Emergency

This includes an increasing number of health professionals, who are clear that the climate emergency is a health emergency and are demanding decisive action from organisations and political leaders.

Impacts of climate change, including extreme weather events, spread of infectious diseases and food and water insecurity, will effect the vulnerable the most.

Whilst the UK government has declared a climate emergency, the underpinning policy ambition to respond to this remains unclear and ill defined. The UK is not on target to meet its international obligations under the Paris Agreement.

There is a strong social justice argument that due to high historic emissions, the UK should go faster and further on its commitment to achieve net zero.

The 2019 General Election presents an opportunity to influence this and may be our last chance to vote for decisive and timely action on the climate emergency.

Influence

We are a group of UK health professionals who have come together to highlight the link between health and climate. We have worked to scrutinise manifestos of the main political parties in England, Scotland and Wales and score them on their commitments relating to climate and health.

With reference to the Lancet Countdown and UK Health Alliance on Climate Change policy recommendations, we developed a list of policy areas, which was refined through discussion and a shortlist agreed.

Each manifesto was scored independently on our final five criteria of clean air, low carbon economy, transport, food & farming, and green homes. We have produced an infographic demonstrating how party manifesto commitments do on plans to tackle the climate and health emergency.

We hope that readers in public health and beyond can use this, along with knowledge of their local area, to inform their decision on who to vote for to have the best chance of tackling the climate emergency.

Good health for our families, our patients our communities and our population depend on a stable climate and healthy ecosystems. The next Government’s policies must reflect these pressing concerns.

We are asking all health professionals to vote with climate change and health in mind on December 12th, and – even more importantly – to encourage their colleagues and others within their sphere of influence to do so as well.

These Authors

This article is written by Dr Sarah Gentry and Dr Ruth Speare in conjuction with Dr Yas Barzin, Dr Isobel Braithwaite, Dr Anya Göpfert, Dr Chris Newman, Alexander Crane, Michael Baldwin, Dr Oytun Babacan (Imperial College London) and Dr Iain Staffell (Imperial College London). 

Climate change activists wearing gas masks blocked a central London road to demand the next government tackles “deadly levels of air pollution” in the capital.

Six Extinction Rebellion protesters dressed in hi-vis suits glued their hands to yellow breeze-blocks in the middle of Cranbourn Street, outside Leicester Square Tube station.

The demonstration, called The Air We Grieve, involved 25 cement blocks which the activists said represents the number of Londoners who die each day as a result of air pollution.

Illegal

A van parked sideways next to them was emblazoned with a sign reading: “Air Pollution Kills 25 Londoners Each Day”.

Police later arrived in the street, which protesters said has “dangerously high levels of air pollution”.

One protester, teacher Rosamund Frost, said: “We are here demanding action on illegal levels of toxic air in our communities, our schools and our streets.

“In February 2017, the European Commission issued a ‘final warning’ to the UK over illegal levels of air pollution.

Ecological

“In May that year, after the Government failed to take decisive action, they were taken to Europe’s highest court, the European Court of Justice.

“The Government have neglected to tackle fatal levels of air pollution. How can we put our trust in them to address the broader climate and ecological emergency?”

Meanwhile, other Extinction Rebellion protesters were entering their fourth week on hunger strike outside political party headquarters in Westminster.

The strikers, including 76-year-old grandfather Peter Cole, have sent a letter to Prime Minister Boris Johnson, inviting him to discuss the climate and ecological emergency with them on Monday.

This Author

Laura Parnaby is a reporter with PA.

More than half a million hermit crabs have been killed by becoming trapped in plastic debris on two remote islands, researchers said.

Scientists conducted surveys across a range of sites on the Cocos (Keeling) Islands in the Indian Ocean, where they recorded 508,000 trapped crabs, and Henderson Island in the Pacific, where 61,000 were found.

The numbers falling foul of debris such as plastic bottles is equivalent to one to two crabs per square metre of beach, a significant percentage of the population.

Shells

The problem is likely to be widespread on islands worldwide, seriously affecting hermit crab populations, the researchers said.

The study was led by the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS) at the University of Tasmania and included researchers from London’s Natural History Museum and the Two Hands Project community science organisation.

The researchers have previously revealed that Cocos and Henderson Islands are littered with millions of pieces of plastic.

Now their research has found that the piles of plastic pollution on island beaches create both a physical barrier for the crabs to navigate and a series of potential deadly traps.

Hermit crabs do not have a shell of their own, instead seeking out available empty shells.

Cost

Because dead crabs trapped in the plastic debris send out a chemical signal to others of their species advertising an available shell, more are attracted to the deadly trap in a “gruesome chain reaction”, the experts said.

Dr Alex Bond, from the Natural History Museum, said: “The problem is quite insidious really, because it only takes one crab.

“Hermit crabs do not have a shell of their own, which means that when one of their compatriots die, they emit a chemical signal that basically says ‘there’s a shell available’ attracting more crabs who fall into the containers and die, who then send out more signals that say there are more shells available.

“Essentially it is this gruesome chain reaction.”

He added: “We all need to consider our actions, especially in relation to the purchase of single use plastic products as we are proving time and time again that the cost of this convenience is immense.”

Impacts

High concentrations of plastic debris are being found on beaches worldwide, where hermit crabs could be expected to encounter the same problems as on the islands studied.

Hermit crabs play an important role in tropical environments by aerating and fertilising soil, dispersing seeds and removing detritus, and are also a key part of marine nature systems.

Losses of hermit crabs on a global scale would cause problems for ecosystems, the researchers warn.

IMAS researcher Dr Jennifer Lavers, who led the study said: “These results are shocking but perhaps not surprising, because beaches and the vegetation that fringes them are frequented by a wide range of wildlife.

“It is inevitable that these creatures will interact with and be affected by plastic pollution, although ours is one of the first studies to provide quantitative data on such impacts.” The study has been published open access in the Journal of Hazardous Materials.

This Author

Emily Beament is the PA environment correspondent. Image: warrenski.

Thousands of youth strikers took to the streets around the world last week, from here in Madrid to parallel demonstrations in New York and Stockholm among the many other locations.

The impacts of climate change not only threaten our collective future but are wrecking lives all over the world today.

From the north east of England to Bangladesh and Sydney, Australia, people are starting to realise that climate action is not just needed, it is critical. Emissions must come down – policies and people must change.

Youth announcement

Youth delegates at the UN climate conference in Madrid held a press conference delivering a very stark outlook for their futures if governments do not take action now.

The science is irrefutable and scientists are now speaking out that the old system of growth and profit is destroying the planet. 

Internationally renowned climate scientist, Professor James Hansen commented: “The young people have different attitudes than the younger generation but right now our politics are still driven by this older generation, the baby boomers. The younger generations are starting to say, “Okay boomer…!”

Dismayed over the lack of action being taken by governments and the staggering injustice of subsidising the fossil fuel industry which is the main cause, Joel Pera from Latin America said: “Politicians all over the world are not only ignoring science, they lead a war against concrete climate action.

“They are supporting the fossil fuel industry’s interests instead of workers, frontline communities and youth. We stand in solidarity with all workers, women, indigenous people fighting for justice.

“Millions of people are demanding climate justice. But our economic system is advancing the destruction of our planet. If we don’t act, the people benefiting from this status quo will win.” 

Toby Thorpe, a School Striker in Australia said: “I come from a country of privilege, technology, money and the possibility to lead on climate action.

“But our oceans are warming, our country is literally on fire. We are not only in a climate emergency we are in a climate justice emergency.

“The Pacific people, the frontline communities and the youth will suffer the most even though we contributed the least to this problem. 

“COP25 prides itself on the slogan ‘Time For Action’. That means it’s time to move beyond politics, money, greed and move to global collaborative action now.” 

Adenike Oladosu, a youth striker from Nigeria gave a very moving address at the COP. She said: “Africa is the most hit by climate crisis. Every day hundreds of lives are lost.

“Should we continue to live this way? Climate injustice is a crime. We cannot wait for 3-5 years, to combat climate crisis. We cannot stay passive when our future is being washed away by the climate crisis.

“It’s time for action and not empty words.” 

Cautious optimism

When asked about his optimism that we will make good on climate action, Professor James Hansen said: “Well, it has to start soon because the more [carbon emissions] we put there, the harder the solution becomes.

“I am hoping that in the next year or two we will see a real change. We need to see a change in the United States for sure!”

This Author

Nick Breeze is a climate change writer and interviewer and also writes a great deal about wine. He is an organiser of the Cambridge Climate Lecture Series and Secret Sommelier. Follow the actions on Twitter: @Fridays4future #6DPorElClima, #LosPueblosPorElClima, #COPforFuture, #6DPorElClima, #COP25.

Sir David Attenborough will present The Green Planet – a “mind-blowing” look at the “unseen” world of plants.

The veteran broadcaster, 93, will front the landmark BBC One series, which will track “remarkable new behaviour” and even “emotional stories”.

Sir David recently filmed Seven Worlds, One Planet, which was four years in the making and featured wildlife firsts.

Technology

This time, and despite his advancing years, he will be doing even more, travelling to the US, Costa Rica, northern Europe and Croatia to turn his attention to the plant world.

The five-part series, from BBC Studios Natural History Unit (NHU), will look at the planet “from the perspective of plants”.

Airing in 2021, it will go “beyond the human eye” by using technological advances in robotics, moving time-lapse and super-detail thermal cameras to uncover the “hidden life of the green planet”.

Sir David said: “This is a wonderful opportunity to explore a neglected yet truly remarkable part of the natural world.

“Once again, the innovative approach of the NHU and groundbreaking technology will reveal new and surprising wonders to the audiences on BBC One and around the world.”

Perspective

The programme will feature deserts, mountains, rainforests and the frozen north.

Executive producer Mike Gunton said: “This series will take viewers into a world beyond their imagination – see things no eye has ever seen.

“The world of plants is a mind-blowing parallel universe, one that we can now bring to life using a whole range of exciting new camera technology. This is Planet Earth for plants!”

Highlights will include seeds that can outlive civilisations, the “largest living things that have ever existed, trees that care for each other, and plants that breed so fast they could cover the planet in a matter of months”.

BBC Content director Charlotte Moore said: “Following the success of Seven Worlds, One Planet, which is the most watched factual programme of this year, Sir David Attenborough will turn his attention to the remarkable world of flora, looking at the planet through the perspective of plants in ways that have never been seen before.”

Heart

The Green Planet will feature “remarkable new behaviour, emotional stories and surprising heroes in the plant world”, the BBC said.

“Sir David discovers that plants are as aggressive, competitive and dramatic as animals, locked in desperate battles for food, for light, to reproduce and to scatter their young.

“They are social – they communicate with each other, they care for their young, they help their weak and injured. They can plan, they can count, they can remember.”

Seven Worlds, One Planet put a conservation message “at the heart” of each episode. Blue Planet II raised awareness around the world of the environmental damage caused by plastic pollution.

The Green Planet was previously announced as one of several new series from the BBC but with no presenter attached.

This Author

Sherna Noah is the PA senior entertainment correspondent.