Heat waves rise near a heat danger warning sign in Death Valley National Park, California. (Photo: David McNew/Getty Images)
“These are not your grandparents’ heatwaves,” said one meteorologist.
Millions of people in the United States are facing the high likelihood of extreme heat in the coming weeks, with northern states that frequently have relatively temperate summers among those where higher-than-average temperatures are expected this summer, according to federal data.
As The Guardian reported Monday, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) new predictions for the summer months state that most of New Mexico and Utah have a 60%-70% chance of hotter-than-normal weather, along with parts of Arizona, Texas, and Colorado.
Houston and the surrounding area has already experienced spiking temperatures that were tied to a heat dome that was positioned over Mexico for several weeks. The high atmospheric pressure drove record-breaking heat across Mexico and in Texas, as well as a powerful storm earlier this month that killed at least seven people and left hundreds of thousands of people in the Houston area without power.
NOAA’s Heat Risk tool showed that on Monday, a significant stretch of southern Texas was experiencing an “extreme” level of heat, defined as including “little to no overnight relief” and affecting the health and safety of “anyone without effective cooling and/or adequate hydration.”
The new tool takes into consideration whether the heat is unusual for the time of the year, whether residents get relief with cooler temperatures in the evenings, and whether temperatures pose an elevated risk of health impacts like heat stroke or heat exhaustion.
NOAA found that the entire Northeast, from Maine to New Jersey and Pennsylvania, has a 40%-50% chance of having above-average temperatures from June through August.
Too hot girl summer in a hot climate summer 🥵@noaa released their heat predictions for this summer and, you guessed it, it’s gonna be HOT, hotter than normal, as it has been for the last several years of record-breaking temperatures. #ClimateActionNowpic.twitter.com/NflVEdJINZ
“We can expect another dangerous hot summer season, with daily records already being broken in parts of Texas and Florida,” Kristy Dahl, climate scientist for the Climate and Energy program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, told The Guardian. “As we warm the planet, we are going to see climate disasters pile up and compound against each other because of the lack of resilience in our infrastructure and government systems.”
The predictions come days after the consumer advocacy group Public Citizenreleased a report, Scorched States, about state laws that protect outdoor workers from extreme heat—and those that don’t.
As many as 2,000 U.S. workers die every year from laboring in extreme heat, said Public Citizen, even though “every workplace illness, injury, and fatality caused by heat stress is avoidable, and relatively simple preventative measures—water, shade, and breaks—have proven extremely effective at protecting workers.”
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s forthcoming heat standard rules are not expected to be finalized until at least 2026, but states including Washington, Colorado, and Minnesota have issued their own labor laws to protect workers from heat-related injuries.
The Guardian pointed out that the extreme heat expected this summer will likely take hold as the Earth transitions away from El Niño—the natural phenomenon that causes ocean temperatures to rise—and toward La Niña.
“As we transition to La Niña, it still looks to be a potentially record-breaking year. That clearly suggests to me that the anthropogenic signal is there,” James Marshall Shepherd, director of the University of Georgia’s atmospheric sciences program, told The Guardian. “I am also worried about the ocean temperatures, which are very warm, particularly as we approach the Atlantic hurricane season.”
“Attribution studies are pretty decisive that heatwaves will continue to be more intense and frequent” as the planet warms, Shepherd said. “These are not your grandparents’ heatwaves.”
Last year, scientists found that neither the hot and dry conditions that led to destructive wildfires in Canada, nor extreme heatwaves that took hold in Europe and North America, would have been as likely to occur without the planetary heating that’s been linked to continued fossil fuel extraction.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak. Credit: Associated Press / Alamy
“Outrageous” findings show that the Conservative Party “is clearly in bed with the fossil fuel lobby”, say MPs and campaigners.
The Conservative Party has received £8.4 million since December 2019 from oil and gas interests, highly polluting industries, and individuals who have expressed or supported climate science denial, DeSmog can reveal.
This comes as climate action is increasingly being used as a “wedge” issue to divide voters ahead of the next election, which is due to be held on 4 July.
Over the last year, the governing Conservative Party has watered down its support for the UK’s flagship 2050 net zero emissions target, and has enacted policies to increase fossil fuel extraction. In July, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak confirmed that his government plans to issue hundreds of new oil and gas licences, as well as introducing annual licensing rounds, claiming that he intends to “max out” the UK’s fossil fuel reserves.
Sunak launched the election campaign by claiming that he had “prioritised energy security and your family finances over environmental dogma”.
DeSmog reviewed the donations to every major Westminster party since 12 December 2019 and found that the Conservative Party and its MPs had received 80 times more polluting cash than the Liberal Democrats (£132,600), and 160 times more than Labour (£41,600). The anti-net zero party Reform UK has received more than £2 million in polluting donations since December 2019, accounting for more than 90 percent of its funding.
Since the December 2019 election, the Conservatives have received £2.35 million from fossil fuel interests, £5.7 million from highly polluting industries, and £404,000 from supporters of climate science denial.
“No political party should be taking any money from fossil fuel interests whatsoever,” Caroline Lucas, the Green Party MP for Brighton Pavilion, told DeSmog.
“To have the Conservative party of government in their pocket to the tune of £8.4 million is simply outrageous and unacceptable. Is it any wonder they’ve adopted so many reactionary and dangerous policies to prop up planet-wrecking fossil fuels? He who pays the piper, calls the tune.”
The Conservative Party did not respond to DeSmog’s request for comment.
Fossil Fuel Donations
Since the 2019 general election, the Conservative Party has received more than £2 million from fossil fuel companies, their executives, and those with a financial interest in oil and gas.
These donations have come from some of the party’s highest-ranking figures.
Tory peer Lord Michael Spencer is a former party treasurer who sits on the board of its endowment fund, the Conservative Party Foundation. In a personal capacity and through his family office, IPGL, Spencer has given £548,500 to the party since December 2019.
Spencer currently holds an 18.8 percent (£4.5 million) stake in the oil and gas exploration company Deltic Energy, which has been awarded multiple North Sea licences by the government.
He previously told DeSmog that he believes “it is totally in the best interest of the UK to replace imported oil and gas by energy extracted from our own North Sea.”
He added in a new comment that “using our own oil and gas clearly is a huge benefit to UK balance of payments” – with reference to the amount that the UK exports versus the amount that it imports.
Spencer has a number of oil and gas interests. His House of Lords register of interests shows that he has a stake in Pantheon Resources, a UK company exploring for oil in Alaska, and previously had a stake in Cluff Energy Africa, which is described as an “early stage oil prospecting company seeking licences in Africa (Angola and Sierra Leone)”.
Tory peer Lord Michael Farmer has also donated £317,000 to the party since the last election. Until April 2024, Farmer held shares in the fossil fuel giants Shell and BP, each worth more than £100,000. Farmer still holds shares in BHP Group, which has mining and oil assets. In 2022, BHP’s petroleum business merged with the energy company Woodside, with the new firm being 48 percent owned by BHP shareholders, creating a “global top 10 independent energy company”.
The Conservative Party has also received £75,900 from Amjad Bseisu, the CEO of EnQuest – a company that has been awarded North Sea oil and gas licences, as well as licences to explore CO2 storage under the North Sea. EnQuest declined to comment.
Alasdair Locke, who chairs the UK’s largest independent petrol station operator Motor Fuel Group, has given £280,000 to the Tories since December 2019. Locke is also the non-executive chair of Well-Safe Solutions, a firm that decommissions oil and gas wells, and is the founder and former executive chairman of Abbot Group, a major North Sea oil and gas services company.
Balmoral Holdings, an engineering firm heavily involved in the North Sea industry, has given £335,000 to the party, while more than £100,000 has been donated by Matthew Ferrey, a former senior partner at oil trading firm Vitol.
Donations worth £63,000 have also been given by Nova Venture Holdings, a firm owned by Jacques Tohme, who describes himself as an “energy investor” on LinkedIn and says that he is the co-founder and former director of Tailwind Energy, an oil and gas company.
In 2023, Serica Energy bought Tailwind, reportedly making Serica one of the 10 largest North Sea oil and gas producers.
“This investigation is yet more evidence of the stranglehold the oil and gas industry has on our politics,” Georgia Whitaker, Greenpeace UK’s climate campaigner, told DeSmog. “And it’s bill payers and the climate that will continue to suffer because of it.
“The governing party we’ve had for the last 14 years is clearly in bed with the fossil fuel lobby. We’ve seen rowback after row back on climate policy, as well as highly damaging rhetoric from political leaders. It’s clear that the Conservatives can’t be trusted to make the right decisions about energy policy.
“We already have the solutions to cut bills, increase energy security and cut emissions, but the government has ignored them in favour of pandering to vested interests at the expense of the rest of us. Dirty money from fossil fuels, highly polluting industries, or climate deniers should have no place in our politics.”
Carbon-Intensive Industry
The largest polluting donation to the Conservatives came from Amit Lohia, a petrochemicals executive whose business interests include a Russian textiles plant, as previously revealed by DeSmog. Lohia donated £2 million to the party in March 2023.
The Conservative Party also received more than £1.7 million during this period from the construction giant JCB and its proprietors the Bamford family. JCB sells its products in 150 countries and specialises in heavy machinery. The company, chaired by Tory peer Lord Anthony Bamford, also sells diesel-powered generators.
According to the government’s Environmental Audit Committee, the UK’s built environment is responsible for 25 percent of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions. The construction industry is responsible for 18 percent of large particle pollution in the UK, a figure that rises to 30 percent in London, according to a report by Impact on Urban Health, and the Centre for Low Emission Construction.
Aviation entrepreneur Christopher Harborne has given more than £1.6 million to the party since the last election. Harborne is the owner of AML Global, an aviation fuel supplier operating in 1,200 locations across the globe with a distribution network that includes “main and regional oil companies”, according to its website. Harborne is also the CEO of Sheriff Global Group, which trades in private jets.
In addition to his Conservative Party donations, since December 2019 Harborne has given £465,000 to Reform UK, the country’s most overtly anti-net zero political party.
Aviation emissions accounted for eight percent of the UK’s annual greenhouse gas emissions before the pandemic, according to the government’s Climate Change Committee (CCC).
In response to DeSmog’s request for comment, Harborne posted a lengthy statement on the AML Global website. He said: “I am not a climate science denier and … I do not seek to influence any government through donations or lobbying regarding their policies on climate change or in favour of corporate interests.”
Harborne added that “there is overwhelming scientific evidence that human activity and in particular the use of hydrocarbons as an energy source is accelerating climate warming due to the greenhouse effect.”
He noted that he supports “aviation industry initiatives to improve fuel efficiency and the use of sustainable aviation fuel” and that he is “financing a business that is creating ambitious and innovative new designs for next generation aircraft that will have a radically lower carbon footprint.”
Climate-Denier Donors
Climate science denial is a growing feature of mainstream British politics. Its proponents dispute the settled consensus around human-caused climate change and the need to reach net zero emissions by 2050, displacing informed debate with divisive conversations that mislead the public.
The Climate Action Against Disinformation global coalition has observed that “climate has become co-opted into the culture wars”, which has widened the potential scope of mis- and disinformation around both the causes of and best solutions to global heating.
Since the 2019 election, the Conservative Party has received hundreds of thousands of pounds from individuals who have funded and promoted climate science denial.
Hedge fund manager Lord Michael Hintze has donated £294,000 to the Tories and a number of its MPs, including energy security and net zero secretary Claire Coutinho in January 2024.
Hintze, a Conservative peer, was one of the early funders of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), the UK’s leading climate science denial group, which has claimed that carbon dioxide has been mis-characterised as pollution, when it is a “benefit to the planet”.
Hintze has said that he believes “there is climate change” caused “in part due to human activity over the past century”. However, he has said that “all sides must be heard” on climate change “to reach the right conclusion for society as a whole“.
A number of climate consensus studies conducted between 2004 and 2015 found that between 90 percent and 100 percent of experts agree that humans are responsible for climate change. A study published in 2021, which reviewed over 3,000 scientific papers, found that over 99 percent of climate science literature says that global warming is caused by human activity.
The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s foremost climate science body, has stated it is “unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land”.
The party has also received £90,000 from First Corporate Consultants, a firm owned by Terence Mordaunt, a director and former chair of the GWPF. Mordaunt told openDemocracy in 2019 that “no one has proved yet that CO2 is the culprit” of climate change.
The IPCC has stated that carbon dioxide “is responsible for most of global warming” since the late 19th century, which has increased the “severity and frequency of weather and climate extremes, like heat waves, heavy rains, and drought”.
Jolyon Maugham, director of the Good Law Project, told DeSmog: “No one who has seen how the Conservative Party chose Big Oil over families during the cost of living crisis will be surprised by these numbers. But that shouldn’t dull our sense of quite how grim all of this is.”
Other Parties
Last year First Corporate Consultants also donated £200,000 to Tory rivals, the right-wing party Reform UK, which has been the second largest recipient of donations from polluting sources since December 2019.
Of the £2.5 million that Reform UK has received in donations since the 2019 election, around 92 percent (£2.3 million) of that income has been given by fossil fuel interests, polluting industries, or climate science deniers.
Reform UK has received £515,000 from former Tory donor Jeremy Hosking, whose investment firm had more than $134 million (around £108 million) invested in the energy sector at the close of 2021, two thirds of which was in the oil industry, along with millions in coal and gas.
Hosking, who also donated £50,000 to the Conservatives during this period, previously told DeSmog: “I do not have millions in fossil fuels; it is the clients of Hosking Partners who are the beneficiaries of these investments.” He declined to comment further for this article.
Hosking told The Guardian in May that he had ended his donations to Reform UK and is now channelling his political donations to Reclaim, a radical right-wing party led by actor Laurence Fox.
Since December 2019, Reform UK has also received more than £1.1 million from businesses run by its leader Richard Tice, who is a prominent climate science denier. Tice has claimed that “there is no climate crisis”, and has also expressed the view that “CO2 isn’t a poison. It’s plant food”. Reform UK campaigns on an overtly anti-climate platform. It has called for the UK’s 2050 climate target to be scrapped, and has proposed holding a “referendum on net zero”.
Reform UK has also received more than 50 loans collectively worth around £1.4 million from a company called Tisun Investments, which is owned by Tice, since the start of 2020.
A Reform UK spokesman said: “Climate change is real, Reform UK believes we must adapt, rather than foolishly think you can stop it. We are proud to be the only party to understand that economic growth depends on cheap domestic energy and we are proud that we are the only party that are climate science realists, realising you can not stop the power of the sun, volcanoes or sea level oscillation.
“The deniers are those who continually gaslight the public into thinking you can stop these powerful natural forces. We must use the energy under our feet, rather than send our money and jobs abroad.”
The Liberal Democrats and Labour have received much smaller sums from fossil fuel interests, polluters, and climate science deniers since December 2019. DeSmog’s analysis found that the Lib Dems have received £132,600, including £10,000 from energy investor Hosking, and £110,600 from Christopher D. Leach, who runs a private plane chartering and management business.
The Labour Party has received £41,600, including £9,600 from the aviation firm Airbus, and £12,000 from biomass company Drax, which is the UK’s largest single source of carbon emissions. Labour has also received sizeable donations from green technology entrepreneurs, including eco-campaigner Dale Vince.
The Scottish National Party (SNP) did not receive any Westminster donations from fossil fuel interests, polluters, or climate science deniers, according to DeSmog’s research.
Labour and the Liberal Democrats did not respond to DeSmog’s request for comment.
Climate campaigners should be thinking about the likely headlines coming out of the important European Parliament elections taking place from June 6-9.
The Parliament passes EU legislation alongside the Council of Ministers (representing EU Member State governments) following formulation by the European Commission in the EU’s tripartite rule-making system.
The latest poll of polls by Politico, released May 24, predicts a hard-right shift by voters for Parliament representatives, followed by related attacks on EU climate policy, which is now one of the lead policy objectives of the right across Europe.
The polls show the hard-right Identity and Democracy Group, which includes Italy’s Lega (LSP) and France’s Rassemblement National (RN) rising to 66 seats from 59 in the 720-seat parliament. That may now be optimistic given the expulsion last week of Germany’s Alternative für Deutschland from the group.
The predicted rise would see it close in on Renew Europe, the pro-EU party that includes France’s Mouvement Democrate and the Dutch D66 and VVD parties, which is forecast to slip to 82 seats from 102.
A marginal rise in seats is also predicted for the right-wing European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR), from 72 to 74.
That will create serious climate headwinds in the European Parliament.
‘Anti-Woke’
Right-wing parties now regularly oppose votes on environmental issues and are increasingly formulating their own “Motions for Resolutions” (proposals put forward for vote) with an anti-regulatory stance.
The hard-right push won’t make the European policy weather though.
That’s made largely by the centre-right European People’s Party (EPP, Christian Democrats) – predicted to make a marginal rise to 176 from 174 seats – and the left-wing Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D), also predicted to rise slightly to 144 from 140 seats.
The forecast is not cheery here either.
Sustainability campaigners say political support is waning for environmental, social and governance (ESG) – a moniker that started life in the push for policy and action in financial markets, but has become a broader catch-all term for sustainable economics.
The EPP’s backing of ESG votes has dropped by 40 percent between 2020 and 2023, according to data compiled for nongovernmental organisations and seen by DeSmog.
Even support from the left (S&D) has dropped by 10 percent, while Renew Europe backed 15 percent fewer ESG policy initiatives over the same period.
Why?
Campaigners say part of the answer lies in the transatlantic wave effect of the so-called “anti-woke”, anti-ESG campaign from the United States to Europe.
The U.S. anti-ESG movement has been driven largely by social wedge issues, such as LGBTQ+ rights and abortion, as well as diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) debates.
In Europe, cost-of-living and migration are the arguments being deployed to derail, delay, or water down ESG policies. National nuances include stoked-up controversy around the transition to greener heating systems in Germany and France, or farmers and groundwater nitrate pollution in the Netherlands and Belgium.
Political attacks, from both right and left, on legislation related to ecodesign for sustainable products to create a circular economy, nature restoration, and the phasing out of internal combustible engines, have prompted the European Commission to delay green policies for fear of sparking an even wider backlash. Progressive groups have been slow to respond, fearing electoral consequences.
Green Deal
The European Union’s framework for a green, responsible economy looks roughly like this: The Green Deal provides the top-down policy direction for reducing emissions and green incentives, which feeds into the Green Taxonomy to classify what kinds of investments can be considered green. The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) requires companies to report on sustainable activities, and the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regime (SFDR) forms an equivalent rulebook for investors.
The EU’s regulatory activity between 2018-2024 has been a huge boost for sustainable finance.
Has policy always been good? No. There is work still to do to make the rules pragmatic and understandable in terms of output. But this is the nature of regulation in these days of intense lobbying, counter-lobbying and political expediency.
The end of the implementation phase for much of the EU’s regulatory advances comes next year. That will be a dangerous time. The cost of these policies will be fully visible for businesses, and ripe for pushback.
In an inflationary economy, right wing parliamentarians will frame the financial and social implications of ESG regulations as unnecessary; too much, too soon, too costly.
Anti-ESG actors are already weaponising the debate.
Investors in the sustainable finance field expect the anti-ESG movement to become increasingly structured after the European Parliament elections.
They believe populist parties will seek to co-opt concerns in the corporate and financial services sectors over the costs of ESG compliance, and seek to align with trade associations to increase opposition to new green rules.
Indeed, European investors are already watering down their voting against pro-ESG shareholder resolutions, which is the primary way they can influence corporate activity.
A report earlier this year titled Voting Matters by ShareAction, the responsible investment campaign group, found that in 2023 just three percent of resolutions proposed to encourage companies to take action on carbon dioxide emissions and related environmental concerns were passed, compared to 32 percent in 2021.
In the first instance, climate campaigners in Europe need to pay much more attention to the policy programmes of the parties and then get out the vote for the European Parliamentary elections.
Closer relationships will need to be built with the EPP on how to make green regulation work for voters in the longer term to head off the hard-right challenge.
Much more clarity is also required on how green regulation can be used to incentivise companies and investors to adopt changes that will improve the living standards and environment of citizens over realistic timeframes.
We should not shy away from the difficult debates and trade-offs that this will involve; indeed, we must be actively preparing for them.
Hugh Wheelan is co-founder of Response Global Media, publisher of Responsible Investor. He has written extensively on ESG, investment, corporate, and sustainability issues for international publications including Financial News, The Guardian, and The Financial Times.
DIANE Abbott has had the Labour whip restored less than one day after Keir Starmer’s claims that an internal party probe into her was still “ongoing” were revealed to be untrue.
However, she is still to be banned from standing for the party at the next General Election, according to reports.
The PA news agency said that Abbott was given the Labour whip back following an internal investigation into comments she made suggesting that white minorities do not experience “racism” in the same way as others.
As Starmer used comments aimed at Abbott from Tory donor Frank Hester to attack his Conservative opponents in March, he also claimed she could not be given back the Labour whip because that internal probe into her was still ongoing.
However, the BBC reported on Monday night that the investigation had actually concluded in December, 2023.
SIR KEIR STARMER has been concealing the truth over Diane Abbott’s exclusion from Labour in Parliament, it was revealed today.
BBC Newsnight reported that the party probe into Ms Abbott’s offence — a brief newspaper letter for which she immediately apologised — finished last December.
She has since remained without the Labour whip entirely at the discretion of chief whip Alan Campbell, who is appointed by and answers to the Labour leader.
Yet Sir Keir has repeatedly claimed that the decision on Ms Abbott’s future — she cannot stand in the general election for Labour without the matter being resolved — was nothing to do with him.
This has now been exposed as a falsehood. The fact that Britain’s first black woman MP has remained suspended to the point where her career may be terminated has been a decision of the Labour leadership.
Ms Abbott has long ridiculed Sir Keir’s hands-off pretence, tweeting last week that the situation was “everything to do with him.”
