Analysis: Clean energy just put China’s CO2 emissions into reverse for first time

Spread the love

Original article by Lauri Myllyvirta republished from Carbon Brief under a CC license

Workers install solar photovoltaic panels in Yinchuan, China. Credit: Cynthia Lee / Alamy Stock Photo

For the first time, the growth in China’s clean power generation has caused the nation’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions to fall despite rapid power demand growth.

The new analysis for Carbon Brief shows that China’s emissions were down 1.6% year-on-year in the first quarter of 2025 and by 1% in the latest 12 months.

Electricity supply from new wind, solar and nuclear capacity was enough to cut coal-power output even as demand surged, whereas previous falls were due to weak growth.

The analysis, based on official figures and commercial data, shows that China’s CO2 emissions have now been stable, or falling, for more than a year.

However, they remain only 1% below the latest peak, implying that any short-term jump could cause China’s CO2 emissions to rise to a new record.

Other key findings include:

  • Growth in clean power generation has now overtaken the current and long-term average growth in electricity demand, pushing down fossil fuel use.
  • Power-sector emissions fell 2% year-on-year in the 12 months to March 2025.
  • If this pattern is sustained, then it would herald a peak and sustained decline in China’s power-sector emissions.
  • The trade “war” initiated by US president Donald Trump has prompted renewed efforts to shift China’s economy towards domestic consumption, rather than exports.
  • A new pricing policy for renewables has caused a rush to install before it takes effect.
  • There is a growing gap that would need to be bridged if China is to meet the 2030 emissions targets it pledged under the Paris Agreement.

If sustained, the drop in power-sector CO2 as a result of clean-energy growth could presage the sort of structural decline in emissions anticipated in previous analysis for Carbon Brief.

The trend of falling power-sector emissions is likely to continue in 2025.

However, the outlook beyond that depends strongly on the clean energy and emissions targets set in China’s next five-year plan, due to be published next year, as well as the economic policy response to the Trump administration’s hostile trade policy.

China’s emissions decline due to clean power

Over the past decade, China’s CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and cement have risen by nearly a fifth, but there have been ups and downs along the way.

The shallow decline in 2015 and 2016 was due to a slump that followed a round of stimulus measures, while zero-Covid controls caused a sharper fall in 2022. Overall, however, emissions have continued to increase, pausing only during periods of economic stress.

More recently, there have been signs that China’s CO2 emissions could be close to reaching a peak and plateau, or even a period of structural decline.

The latest data, for the first quarter of 2025, shows that China’s CO2 emissions have now been stable or falling for more than a year, as shown in the figure below.

However, with emissions remaining just 1% below the recent peak, it remains possible that they could jump once again to a new record high.

China's CO2 emissions drop due to clean energy for first time
China’s emissions from fossil fuels and cement, million tonnes of CO2, rolling 12-month totals. Source: Emissions are estimated from National Bureau of Statistics data on production of different fuels and cement, China Customs data on imports and exports and WIND Information data on changes in inventories, applying emissions factors from China’s latest national greenhouse gas emissions inventory and annual emissions factors per tonne of cement production until 2024. Sector breakdown of coal consumption is estimated using coal consumption data from WIND Information and electricity data from the National Energy Administration.

Therefore, the future path of China’s CO2 emissions hangs in the balance, depending on trends within each sector of its economy, as well as China’s response to Trump’s tariffs.

These sectoral trends are explored further in the sections below, along with signals on what could be coming next from Chinese policymakers as they consider the country’s international climate pledge for 2035 and the five-year plan for 2026-2030.

Power-sector emissions fall while other sectors rebound

The reduction in China’s first-quarter CO2 emissions in 2025 was due to a 5.8% drop in the power sector. While power demand grew by 2.5% overall, there was a 4.7% drop in thermal power generation – mainly coal and gas.

Increases in solar, wind and nuclear power generation, driven by investments in new generating capacity, more than covered the growth in demand. The increase in hydropower, which is more related to seasonal variation, helped push down fossil power generation.

Power-sector emissions fell by more than total generation from fossil fuels, as the share of biomass and gas increased, while average coal power plant efficiency improved.

Specifically, the average amount of coal needed to generate each unit of electricity at coal-fired power plants fell by 0.9% year-on-year.

The first-quarter reduction in CO2 emissions from coal use in the power sector is shown at the bottom of the figure below, below CO2 changes in other sectors.

Chart: Falling CO2 due to clean power outweighed rises elsewhere
Year-on-year change in China’s CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and cement, for the period January-March 2025, million tonnes of CO2. Source: Emissions are estimated from National Bureau of Statistics data on production of different fuels and cement, China Customs data on imports and exports and WIND Information data on changes in inventories, applying emissions factors from China’s latest national greenhouse gasemissions inventory and annual emissions factors per tonne of cement production until 2024. Sector breakdown of coal consumption is estimated using coal consumption data from WIND Information and electricity data from the National Energy Administration.

Outside of the power sector, emissions increased 3.5%, with the largest rises in the use of coal in the metals and chemicals industries.

The coal-to-chemicals industry is undergoing rapid expansion, driven by concerns about dependence on imported oil and gas. During the first quarter of 2025, it was also benefiting from more favourable economics due to lower coal prices and relatively high oil prices.

Crude steel production increased 0.6% year-on-year, metal products output by 6% and non-ferrous metals production by 2%. All of these increases were mainly due to a jump in March. Metals demand was boosted by the bump in exports ahead of the tariffs, but high output has continued well into April.

Real-estate construction “starts” fell by 24% and sales of new properties by 3%, indicating that the demand for cement, steel and glass from the construction sector continues to decline.

In contrast, economic output in vehicle and machinery production increased by 12% and 13%, respectively, signalling increased demand for metals.

Cement production fell by 1.4%, a slower rate of decrease than in previous years, likely due to an earlier start to weather-dependent construction activity thanks to warm weather.

Gas consumption increased by an estimated 6% in the power sector, due to a 14% increase in gas-fired power generation capacity, even as the average utilisation of the plants fell. However, gas consumption fell in other sectors, outweighing the increase for power.

Oil products consumption increased slightly, as shown by the bar at the top in the figure above. Warmer weather meant that weather-dependent construction and agricultural activity rose earlier in the year than usual.

However, structural factors, particularly vehicle electrification and the shift to liquified natural gas (LNG) in the freight sector, point to continued declines in oil demand.

Have China’s emissions peaked?

Following the 1.6% decline in the first quarter of 2025, China’s emissions have now been stable or falling for more than a year, starting from the beginning of March 2024.

However, emissions in the 12 months to the end of March 2025 were down only 1% from their recent peak, implying that any short-term jump could lead to a new record high.

After the sharp reduction in the first quarter, emissions from power generation are now down year-on-year for the most recent 12 months.

This has happened four times before over the past four decades – in 2009, 2012, 2015 and 2022. However, the current drop is the first time that the main driver is growth in clean power generation.

The falls in 2009 and 2012 were related to the global financial crisis and the Euro area crisis, while the drop in 2015 was driven by the construction and industrial sector slump that followed the 2008-12 stimulus program.

These economic shocks resulted in the sharp reduction in electricity demand shown in the figure below. The drop in 2022 was a combination of slow power demand growth due to strict “zero-Covid” measures and relatively strong clean-power additions.

Chart: For the first time, clean energy growth has cut China's fossil-fuel power in the face of surging electricity demand
Year-on-year change in electricity generation from fossil fuels and clean energy, terawatt hours, rolling 12-month totals. The total annual change in demand is shown by the solid line and the average annual increase is shown by the dotted line. Sources: China Electricity Council; Ember; analysis for Carbon Brief by Lauri Myllyvirta.

Importantly, the growth in clean power generation in the first quarter of 2025 was not only larger than the rise in demand overall, it was also higher than the average increase in demand over the past 15 years, marked by the dashed line in the figure above.

Moreover, hydropower has been stable year-on-year in the past six months, implying that the clean-energy growth has been driven by increases in solar, wind and nuclear power capacity, not year-to-year variation in hydropower output.

Looking beyond electricity generation, all sectors registered a fall in emissions over the most recent four months from December 2024 to March 2025, except for coal-to-chemicals.

In order for China’s emissions overall to peak and then start declining, CO2 cuts in declining sectors will need to outweigh continued growth elsewhere.

For example, process emissions from cement production peaked in 2021 and have declined by 27% since then, as shown in the top left chart in the figure below.

Six line charts of China's sectoral emissions: CO2 emissions have fallen in most sectors this year
Sectoral emissions from fossil fuels and cement, million tonnes of CO2, rolling 12-month totals. Source: Emissions are estimated from National Bureau of Statistics data on production of different fuels and cement, China Customs data on imports and exports and WIND Information data on changes in inventories, applying emissions factors from China’s latest national greenhouse gas emissions inventory and annual emissions factors per tonne of cement production until 2024. Sector breakdown of coal consumption is estimated using coal consumption data from WIND Information and electricity data from the National Energy Administration.

Coal use outside the power and chemicals sectors peaked at the same time as cement, but has been rebounding since then and is now close to previous peak levels.

The China Coal Association expects coal use in the steel and building materials industries to fall, while coal consumption in the chemical industry is projected to continue growing.

Hopes of future growth in demand for coal are pinned on the chemical sector, described as a shift from using coal primarily as a fuel to a role as both a fuel and a raw material.

The association also believes that coal-fired power generation will resume growth – at least in the short term – but it recently revised down its projections for 2025 compared with the outlook at the end of 2024.

The tariff “war” may have affected expectations. One analysis suggests a 0.5 to 1 percentage point reduction in China’s GDP growth rate due to the tariffs could result in a similar reduction in demand for thermal coal – mainly used at power stations.

Oil product consumption has been declining since the post-Covid rebound ended in March 2024, falling 2% from its peak. The long-term trend is expected to be downwards, due to the electrification of transportation, despite rising demand for chemicals and aviation.

Gas use has been falling for a few months, but the trend is likely still increasing.

The table below lists the 12-month periods with the highest emissions for each sector, as well as the reduction since the latest peak in each case.

SectorDate of highest emissionsReduction since peak
CementApril 2021-28.2%
Coal and gas: PowerNovember 2024-1.7%
Coal-to-chemicalsMarch 2025Still increasing
Coal: Other sectorsApril 2021-3.0%
Gas: Other sectorsDecember 2024-0.8%
Oil productsApril 2024-1.0%
Total CO2February 2024-0.8%

For all of the sectors other than cement production, it is too early to declare a definitive peak in emissions. Still, there are signs that other sectoral peaks could be past their peak, too.

Indeed, for oil products consumption and steel production, industry projections indicate that the future trend is likely to be falling.

For the power sector, clean-energy additions at or above current levels would likely lead to a structural peak, as clean-energy growth would more than cover electricity demand growth.

Together, these sectors cover more than 80% of China’s total emissions. If all of them enter a structural decline, then total emissions are very likely to do so too.

China pushes domestic demand in response to US tariffs

The economic and emissions outlook for this year and beyond will be affected by the Trump administration’s unprecedented trade tariffs – and China’s counter-measures.

The initial impact was a drop in emissions due to lower factory output in export-oriented coastal provinces and possible knock-on impacts on investment and consumer spending.

Conversely, the temporary easing of tariffs for 90 days will lead to a rush of orders from the US to make up for the short-lived slowdown in trade and to stockpile goods before the relief ends.

China’s reactions to the tariffs focused on counteracting the economic impacts with stimulus.

An anonymous comment piece in People’s Daily, the main Communist party affiliated newspaper, says the country should “strive to make consumption the main driving force and ballast stone of economic growth”, leveraging China’s large domestic market.

(The piece has the byline “People’s Daily commentator”, which implies that it is written by someone with authority.)

The article says that this will involve increasing consumer income, while easing financial and social burdens to boost purchasing power and willingness to consume.

While the temporary easing of tariffs will reduce the urgency of these measures, the US tariff rate on China, at 40%, remains much higher than it was before Trump’s presidency – and China’s leaders will likely want to prepare against the risk of renewed tariff hikes.

The focus will be creating domestic markets for the products China exports to the US. The long-held aim of rebalancing China’s economy towards consumption could finally become reality as a result. A successful rebalancing could mean less energy-intensive growth.

China’s response also includes redoubling its focus on “new quality productive forces”, a concept that emphasises new technology.

The concept includes the clean-energy industry, which has become such an important economic driver in China that it would be hard to leave out of stimulus plans.

A new list of low-carbon demonstration projects, published by the National Development and Reform Commission, provides a look at China’s priorities for clean-energy investment. Green hydrogen, energy storage, “virtual power plants” and industrial decarbonisation based on hydrogen are new growth areas.

In terms of the emissions implications of China’s response to Trump’s tariffs, the big question is whether stimulus focused at these favoured sectors – including the new low-carbon focus areas and other clean-energy industries – is deemed sufficient.

Some traditional recipients of stimulus spending, such as shipbuilding and public infrastructure, have already posted strong growth in the first quarter of this year as a result of stimulus measures announced in 2024.

New wind and solar pricing policy increases uncertainty

An additional source of uncertainty for China’s emissions comes in the form of its new electricity pricing policy for renewable energy, which enters into force in June.

The new policy removes price guarantees pegged to coal-power prices, with new wind and solar projects supposed to secure direct contracts with electricity buyers. This is likely to lead to lower prices being paid to new wind and solar projects.

However, it offers more favourable pricing – via “contracts for difference” – to the amount of new capacity needed to meet central government energy targets.

The immediate effect of the policy will likely be a rush of projects rushing to complete installation before the June deadline, so as to secure guaranteed prices.

This rush was already apparent in the latest data: 23 gigawatts (GW) of solar and 13GW of wind was added in March alone, up 80% and 110% from previous records for the month.

Furthermore, this year’s installations are likely to be very strong, even topping last year’s record, as a lot of centralised solar power and wind-power projects are racing to complete before the end of the 14th five-year plan period. 

The China Wind Energy Association expects a new record of 105-115GW installed this year across onshore and offshore wind projects – up from the record-breaking 80GW last year – based on very active bidding last year. It also expects volumes to stay at that level even in 2026 and to then grow further towards 2030. 

The China Electricity Council predicts an even larger wind-power capacity addition of 120GW in 2025. Another analyst projects a 20% drop in wind-power capacity additions in 2026, but after an even steeper increase in 2025 to 120-130GW of capacity added. So he also expects 2026 installations to be far above the current record year of 2024.

For solar, the China Photovoltaic Industry Association forecasts a drop in installations of 8-23% this year, from the staggering record of 278GW last year. Even the low end of this projection would see installations stay at 2023 levels in 2025 and then recover from there.  The China Electricity Council’s projection for solar additions in 2025 matches the low end of the industry association’s forecast.

The figure below, based on these various projections, shows that additional electricity generation from new clean power capacity is expected to remain above last year’s record-breaking levels in both 2025 and 2026.

Bar chart: Newly added clean generation is set to remain above the record levels set in 2024
Annual electricity generation from clean power capacity newly added each year, terawatt hours by source. Two alternative projections for 2025 are taken from a range of different organisations, while the 2026 projection is a combined total from the wind and solar industry associations. Power generation from new capacity is projected using average capacity factors for each technology over 2015–2024. Sources: Historical data from China Electricity Council; projections from China Wind Energy Association, China Photovoltaic Industry Association and China Electricity Council; analysis for Carbon Brief by Lauri Myllyvirta.

The projections shown in the figure above illustrate that the energy industry expects to be able to navigate the new renewable pricing policy and to maintain a high level of wind and solar additions over the next two years.

The policy has, however, created a lot more uncertainty. The stop-go cycle of a flood of installations in the first half of this year and then a slowdown in the second half – likely especially in the distributed solar segment – is likely to be a tough time for the industry. 

The uncertainty relates above all to two things. First is the local implementation of the policy, as provincial governments have a lot of leeway here. Given the economic significance of clean energy for many provinces, they can be expected to seek to implement the policy in a way that minimises disruptions to the industry.

The other source of uncertainty is central government targets. The pricing policy ties the availability of more favorable pricing to central government energy targets, after clean-energy growth outpaced those targets by a wide margin in the past few years. 

This emphasises the importance of the targets set for the next five year plan. The National Energy Administration (NEA) is targeting “more than 200GW” per year of clean-energy capacity added, which is far lower than the 360GW added last year. 

The effect of the pricing policy also depends on market conditions, of course, with a risk of oversupply of coal-fired power due to the ongoing rapid addition of new coal-fired power plants.

China’s nuclear construction also keeps accelerating, with another 10GW of reactor projects approved in April, on top of 10GW approved in each of the previous two years. These projects will contribute to clean power supply towards 2030 as they are completed.

China faces widening gap to Paris pledge

The uncertainty around wind and solar expansion also has implications for China’s international climate pledges under the Paris Agreement.

After exceptionally slow progress in 2020-23, China is significantly off track for its 2030 commitment to reduce carbon intensity – the emissions per unit of economic output. It is almost certain to miss its 2025 target. Carbon intensity fell by 3.4% in 2024, falling short of the rate of improvement needed to meet the 2025 and 2030 targets.

The government work plan for 2025 did not set a carbon intensity target. It only included a target for reducing the intensity per unit of GDP for energy supply from fossil fuels by 3%, excluding use for raw materials.

This provides an indirect indication of the targeted improvement in carbon intensity. In 2024, carbon intensity fell by 3.4%, while fossil energy intensity fell by 3.8%. If the ratio is similar in 2025, then carbon intensity would need to fall by around 2.5% at a minimum, allowing CO2 emissions to increase by more than 2%, if the target for 5% GDP growth is also met.

The absence of a carbon intensity target and the lack of emphasis on reducing carbon intensity also signals that meeting the target is not seen as a priority at the moment.

The government work plan emphasised the “dual-carbon” goals of peaking CO2 emissions before 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality before 2060.

However, these goals allow CO2 emissions to continue to increase until the end of the decade, implying the potential for a significant absolute emission increase from 2024 levels by 2030. The “dual-carbon” goals, even if met, therefore do not guarantee the delivery of China’s current key international climate commitment, the 2030 carbon-intensity target.

Even if emissions fell this year, improvements to carbon intensity would need to accelerate sharply in the next five years to meet China’s 2030 Paris commitment.

If China remains committed to its 2030 pledge, then this acceleration would need to be reflected in the targets set in the country’s next five-year plan.

Outlook for 2025 and beyond

The past 12 months mark a potentially significant turning point for China’s CO2 emissions, with clean-energy growth for the first time outpacing demand growth and displacing fossil fuel use in the power sector.

Record-breaking clean energy additions expected in 2025, despite new pricing policy uncertainties, suggest that the trend will continue this year.

The longer-term trajectory depends heavily on the targets set in the upcoming five-year plan and on the economic policy response to US tariffs and other economic headwinds.

In the short term, the US tariffs will dampen energy demand growth and emissions. Economic policy designed to offset the impacts of Trump’s tariffs will likely boost the clean-energy sector further and might lead to a shift towards domestic consumption as an economic driver, implying lower energy consumption growth relative to GDP. 

On the other hand, previous rounds of economic stimulus in China have led to sharp increases in emissions. If China is to deliver stimulus that targets consumption and new technology, rather than emissions-intensive construction and heavy industry, then it will require a significant break with earlier patterns.

Whether power-sector emissions have peaked will be determined by a race between growth in clean energy supply and total power demand growth. 

The new renewable electricity pricing policy, which ties the volume of “contracts for difference” given out to new solar and wind projects to national clean energy targets, further increases the importance of target-setting in China’s upcoming 2035 climate targets under the Paris Agreement and in the next 15th five-year plan, covering 2026-2030.

Sector-by-sector analysis suggests that, in addition to the power sector, emissions have likely also peaked in the building materials and steel sectors, as well as oil products consumption.

These sectors together represent over 80% of China’s fossil fuel-related CO2 emissions. However, there are uncertainties and potential for short-term rebound in all of these sectors.

The sector with remaining potential for substantial emissions growth is coal-to-chemicals. The drop in oil prices after US tariff announcements will undermine the profitability of this sector and likely lead to lower utilisation of plants, even as more capacity is added. China’s counter-tariffs on imports of petrochemical products from the US could have benefited the industry – but these have reportedly been waived.

All of this suggests that there is potential for China’s emissions to continue to fall and for the country to achieve substantial absolute emissions reductions over the next five years.

However, policy choices working in the opposite direction could just as easily see emissions increase further towards 2030.

About the data

Data for the analysis was compiled from the National Bureau of Statistics of China, National Energy Administration of China, China Electricity Council and China Customs official data releases, and from WIND Information, an industry data provider.

Wind and solar output, and thermal power breakdown by fuel, was calculated by multiplying power generating capacity at the end of each month by monthly utilisation, using data reported by China Electricity Council through Wind Financial Terminal.

Total generation from thermal power and generation from hydropower and nuclear power was taken from National Bureau of Statistics monthly releases.

Monthly utilisation data was not available for biomass, so the annual average of 52% for 2023 was applied. Power sector coal consumption was estimated based on power generation from coal and the average heat rate of coal-fired power plants during each month, to avoid the issue with official coal consumption numbers affecting recent data. 

When data was available from multiple sources, different sources were cross-referenced and official sources used when possible, adjusting total consumption to match the consumption growth and changes in the energy mix reported by the National Bureau of Statistics.

CO2 emissions estimates are based on National Bureau of Statistics default calorific values of fuels and emissions factors from China’s latest national greenhouse gas emissions inventory, for the year 2018. Cement CO2 emissions factor is based on annual estimates up to 2024.

For oil consumption, apparent consumption is calculated from refinery throughput, with net exports of oil products subtracted.

Original article by Lauri Myllyvirta republished from Carbon Brief under a CC license

Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels.
Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels.
Continue ReadingAnalysis: Clean energy just put China’s CO2 emissions into reverse for first time

US Wields ‘Hand of Genocide’ by Vetoing Yet Another UN Gaza Cease-Fire Resolution

Spread the love

Original article by Brett Wilkins republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Original article by Brett Wilkins republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

“This latest shameful U.S. veto—one in a long list—gives Israel the green light to continue its genocide of Palestinians in Gaza,” said the head of Amnesty International.

For the fifth time since Israel launched its genocidal assault and siege of the Gaza Strip—and for the first time during President Donald Trump’s tenure—the United States has vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for a cease-fire, a move that came as Palestinians continue to suffer daily massacres, mass starvation, and ethnic cleansing in the embattled enclave.

U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Dorothy Shea—a former political officer at the American Embassy in Tel Aviv, Israel—was the lone vote against the Security Council draft resolution demanding an “immediate, unconditional, and permanent cease-fire” in Gaza and the release of all remaining hostages held by Hamas and other Palestinian resistance groups.

“Any product that undermines our close ally Israel’s security is a nonstarter,” Shea explained after sinking the resolution. In addition to diplomatic cover, the U.S. provides Israel with tens of billions of dollars in armed aid, including weapons that have been used in some of the Israel Defense Forces’ (IDF) deadliest massacres in Gaza.

The resolution was put forth by the 10 non-permanent Security Council members—Algeria, Denmark, Greece, Guyana, Pakistan, Panama, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, Somalia, and South Korea—who explained Wednesday in a joint statement that the measure was “prompted by our deep concern over the catastrophic situation in Gaza, which deteriorated further after the resumption of hostilities in March.”

According toThe Palestine Chronicle, Hamas—which governs Gaza and led the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel—said the U.S. veto shows “Washington’s blind bias towards the occupation government” and support for Israel’s “crimes against humanity in Gaza.”

At least hundreds of Gazans, mostly children, have recently died from malnutrition and lack of medical care amid Israel’s tightened siege, according to local officials. Israeli airstrikes continue to kill and wound scores of Palestinians—and sometimes more—daily, and upward of 100 Gazans have been shot dead while desperately trying to secure humanitarian aid in recent days.

“This latest shameful U.S. veto—one in a long list—gives Israel the green light to continue its genocide of Palestinians in Gaza,” Amnesty International secretary general Agnès Callamard said in a statement. “It allows Israel to continue starving Palestinian civilians and creating conditions of life meant to bring about their destruction.”

In addition to vetoing five Security Council cease-fire resolutions, the U.S. last year used its veto power to block Palestine’s bid to become a full U.N. member. The U.S. also abstained from voting on two Security Council cease-fire resolutions during the Biden administration.

“The U.S. has squandered yet another crucial opportunity to demand that Israel ends civilian bloodshed,” Callamard added. “What possible justification can there be for blocking action by the U.N. Security Council that could help to end the harrowing starvation and suffering, free hostages, and lift Israel’s suffocating aid restrictions?”

All told, more than 194,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded—including over 14,000 people who are missing and believed dead and buried beneath rubble—during 606 days of an onslaught for which Israel is facing a genocide case at the World Court and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity including extermination and weaponized starvation.

Upward of 2 million Palestinians have also been forcibly displaced, often multiple times, most recently during Operation Gideon’s Chariots, the IDF’s ongoing campaign to indefinitely occupy and ethnically cleanse Gaza, possibly to facilitate Israeli recolonization, as pushed by far-right figures.

On Wednesday, International Committee of the Red Cross president Mirjana Spoljaric said conditions in Gaza are “worse” than last month, when she described them as “hell on Earth.”

All this, as a cease-fire proves as elusive as ever due to what pro-Palestine critics say is Netanyahu’s desire to prolong the war in order to delay his own criminal corruption trial and Hamas’ demand for a guaranteed end to Israel’s onslaught.

“The world is watching, day after day, horrifying scenes of Palestinians being shot, wounded, or killed in Gaza while simply trying to eat,” Tom Fletcher, the U.N.’s top humanitarian chief, said Wednesday. “We must be allowed to do our jobs. We have the teams, the plan, the supplies, and the experience.”

“It’s simply unconscionable to stand in the way of this resolution.”

Amnesty International USA executive director Paul O’Brien said: “Once again, the U.S. government, this time under Trump’s leadership, is on the wrong side of history. While it’s not a surprise the U.S. vetoed this resolution, it’s nonetheless devastating.”

“The language is focused on the urgency of the unconditional release of all hostages and unfettered access to humanitarian aid,” O’Brien added. “When children are dying of starvation and the fate of the hostages is uncertain, it’s simply unconscionable to stand in the way of this resolution.”

Original article by Brett Wilkins republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
Continue ReadingUS Wields ‘Hand of Genocide’ by Vetoing Yet Another UN Gaza Cease-Fire Resolution

‘The Witkoff Massacre’: Hundreds Killed or Wounded as Israeli Forces Open Fire on Gaza Food Aid Site

Spread the love

Original article by Jon Queally republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Injured Palestinians are being brought to the Nasser Hospital for their treatment process after Israeli soldiers opened fire at Palestinians trying to reach the points where U.S. aid is distributed west of Rafah city in the southern Gaza Strip, in Khan Yunis, Gaza on June 01, 2025. It was reported that at least 31 people were killed and 170 people were wounded by the gunfire of Israeli soldiers. (Photo by Hani Alshaer/Anadolu via Getty Images)

“The new U.S.-Israeli genocide strategy: starve the population, lure them with promises of aid, then kill them.”

Fresh international outrage erupted on Sunday after Israeli forces opened fire on hundreds of starving Palestinians in Gaza gathered at a food distribution point where they had been directed by Israeli officials, resulting in a massacre described by witnesses as the largest since a new U.S.-backed humanitarian plan run by Israel was put in place last month.

Health officials in Gaza and multiple witnesses at the site near the southern city of Rafah reported that “Israeli forces fired on crowds around a kilometer (1,000 yards) away from an aid site run by an Israeli-backed foundation,” according to the Associated Press.

“The international community must act immediately and decisively to compel Israel to end its inhumane aid distribution mechanism in Gaza, following today’s massacre near a U.S.-backed aid centre south of Rafah, where Israeli forces killed or injured over 220 starving civilians,” said the Switzerland-based Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor (Euro-Med), in a Sunday morning statement, which had personnel on the ground near the aid station.

“Let them stop these massacres, stop this genocide. They are killing us.”According to the group:

Euro-Med Monitor’s field team documented Israeli forces opening fire on thousands of civilians gathered at dawn today, Sunday, 1 June 2025, in Tel al-Sultan, Rafah, near an aid distribution centre established by the Israeli army. Preliminary data indicate that the attack killed at least 31 civilians, including two women, and injured more than 200 others. Several remain missing.

The death toll is expected to rise due to the high number of critical injuries and the severe collapse of the healthcare system caused by the blockade and Israeli targeting of medical facilities.

In early May, as Common Dreams reported, United Nations aid officials and other humanitarian relief experts warned against the plan put forward by Israel and backed by the Trump administration that would allow a private and newly created Israeli foundation, euphemistically named the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, to administer the delivery of aid across Gaza with security provided by the IDF and U.S. mercenary soldiers.

“There is no reason to put in place a system that is at odds with the DNA of any principled humanitarian organization,” said Jens Laerke, a spokesperson for the U.N.’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), on May 9.a

The controversial Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, which has been marred by controversy since its creation last month and denounced as operating as cover for Israel’s ongoing atrocities against the Palestinian people in Gaza, said in a statement reviewed by the AP that it distributed 16 truckloads of aid early Sunday “without incident,” and dismissed what it referred to as “false reporting about deaths, mass injuries and chaos.”

Footage and testimony from witnesses at the scene posted online, however, made those claims look like lies:

Dr. Ramy Abdul, a professor of law and Euro-Med chair, however, shared footage of the scene where the killings and chaos took place and said: “The new U.S.-Israeli genocide strategy: starve the population, lure them with promises of aid, then kill them.”

As did others, Abdul dubbed the horrific event the “Witkoff Massacre,” a reference to President Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff, now in charge of brokering a U.S.-sponsored cease-fire deal between Hamas and the Israeli government.

The AP reports:

Thousands of people headed toward the distribution site hours before dawn. As they headed toward the site, Israeli forces ordered them to disperse and come back later, witnesses said. When the crowds reached the Flag Roundabout, around 1 kilometer (1,000 yards) away, at around 3 a.m., Israeli forces opened fire, the witnesses said.

“There was fire from all directions, from naval warships, from tanks and drones,” said Amr Abu Teiba, who was in the crowd.

He said he saw at least 10 bodies with gunshot wounds and several other wounded people, including women. People used carts to ferry the dead and wounded to the field hospital. “The scene was horrible,” he said.

Most of the casualties were shot “in the upper part of their bodies, including the head, neck and chest,” said Dr. Marwan al-Hams, a health ministry official at Nasser Hospital, where many of the wounded were transferred after being initially brought to a field hospital run by the Red Cross.

In a point-by-point breakdown on Friday, Drop Site News‘ Jeremy Scahill detailed that Witkoff, through his negotiations with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is trying to “strong-arm Hamas into a deal that does not end the genocide” that continues apace in Gaza.

After Israel last week rejected tentative language amenable to both the U.S. and Hamas negotiators, Witkoff responded on Saturday to an updated draft submitted by Hamas with a rejection of his own, calling it “totally unacceptable.”

Meanwhile, the threat of famine for the entire population of Gaza continues—all with firm U.S. backing and complicity, infuriating humanitarians worldwide as the death and suffering mounts.

Reda Abu Jazar toldAl-Jazeera on Sunday that her brother was among those killed as he attempted to retrieve food at the distribution site in Rafah.

“Let them stop these massacres, stop this genocide. They are killing us,” she said.

Multiple deadly incidents over recent weeks at the aid delivery sites set up by the Israelis led Euro-Med on Sunday, following the latest massacre, to say “these incidents should not be dismissed as procedural issues fixable through operational adjustments.”

“They must be understood within the broader context of the grave consequences of the Israeli military’s control over humanitarian aid” in Gaza, the group continued. “It is inconceivable that the same entity accused of committing genocide for nearly 20 months can be entrusted with improving the humanitarian conditions of the very population it targets.”

Euro-Med called for an “immediate end to the Israeli aid distribution mechanism in the Gaza Strip… as it has become a site of field executions and fails to meet even the most basic humanitarian standards.”

The group called for the reinstatement of UN-led relief operations “to ensure the safe and effective delivery of aid to Gaza’s population.”

Original article by Jon Queally republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

UK Labour Party government ministers Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves explain that they are partners complicit in Israel's Gaza genocide. The UK has provided Israel with arms, military and air force support. They explain that they don't do gas chambers but do do forced marches, starvation, destroy hospitals, mass-murders of journalists and healthcare workers.
UK Labour Party government ministers Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves explain that they are partners complicit in Israel’s Gaza genocide. The UK has provided Israel with arms, military and air force support. They explain that they don’t do gas chambers but do do forced marches, starvation, destroy hospitals, mass-murders of journalists and healthcare workers.
Genocide denying UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy says that UK is suspending 30 of 350 arms licences to Israel. He also confirms the UK government's support for Israel's Gaza genocide and the UK government and military's active participation in genocide.
Genocide denying UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy says that UK is suspending 30 of 350 arms licences to Israel. He also confirms the UK government’s support for Israel’s Gaza genocide and the UK government and military’s active participation in genocide.
Experiencing issues with this image not appearing. I suspect because it's so critical of Zionist Keir Starmer's support of and complicity in Israel's genocides.
Genocide denier and Current UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is quoted that he supports Zionism without qualification. He also confirms that UK air force support has been essential in Israel’s mass-murdering genocide. Includes URLs https://www.declassifieduk.org/keir-starmers-100-spy-flights-over-gaza-in-support-of-israel/ and https://youtu.be/O74hZCKKdpA

Continue Reading‘The Witkoff Massacre’: Hundreds Killed or Wounded as Israeli Forces Open Fire on Gaza Food Aid Site

Anti-environmentalism is on the rise but it’s full of contradictions

Spread the love
Vadim Sadovski/Shutterstock

Alastair Bonnett, Newcastle University

Anti-environmentalism is gaining ground. Attacks on the net zero goal and hostility to conservation measures and anti-pollution targets are becoming more common. And, as recent election results have shown, these tactics are reshaping politics in Britain and across the west.

Anti-environmentalism is a rejection of both environmental initiatives and activism. But despite its sudden rise and bold rhetoric, it is built on shaky foundations. The messages it offers are often contradictory and row against the tide of everyday experience.

Take the US president, Donald Trump. He dismantled many environmental protections in his last term of office, and is now removing those that are left – including support for research that even mentions the word climate. Yet he told a rally in Wisconsin in 2024: “I’m an environmentalist. I want clean air and clean water. Really clean water. Really clean air.”


Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


Some of the contradictions of anti-environmentalism reflect its departure from traditional conservatism. Although routinely identified as “conservative”, the populist anti-green politics of Republicans in the US and Reform in the UK, along with the AfD in Germany and National Rally in France, represent a radical challenge to the ideals of continuity and conservation that were once at the heart of conservatism.

The Conservative Environment Network is an organisation which pitches itself as an “independent forum for conservatives in the UK and around the world who support net zero, nature restoration and resource security”. Much of this network’s work involves reminding people that important environmental protections, from America’s national parks to controls on pollution and climate change in Britain and elsewhere, were introduced by conservatives.

But few on the right appear to be listening. A populist tide is washing this conservative tradition away, despite the fact that support for environmental protection remains very popular.

Polling indicates that 80% of people in the UK worry about climate change. Public backing for the work of the US Environmental Protection Agency is also overwhelming, including among Republican voters.

In part, this support reflects the fact that environmental damage is an everyday reality: unpredictable weather, the collapse of animal and insect populations, and a range of other challenges are not just on the TV, they are outside the window.

In my research for a forthcoming book on environmental nostalgia across the world, I keep bumping into an irony. In western nations, voices from the right say they want their country back, yet appear hostile to environmental policies that would protect their country and ensure its survival.

There are many reasons for this disconnect, including resentment against initiatives that require lifestyle and livelihood changes. However, the enmity and disengagement is more complicated than a simple rejection of nature.

Many people – including Trump himself – claim they are environmentalists even when the evidence suggests otherwise. The signs and symbols of environmental care are knitted into every aspect of our commercial and cultural life: if wildlife could sue for copyright, there would a lot of rich bears.

I argue that a distinction can be made between what I call “cold” and “hot” forms of environmentalism. The former values and mourns the loss of nature, but as a spectacle to be observed – a set of appealing images of flora and fauna – while the latter feels implicated and anxious.

The former position allows people to claim they love nature yet be indifferent or even hostile to initiatives to save it. However, the line between cold and hot, or between anti- and pro-environmentalist, is neither fixed nor hard.

Another quality of anti-environmentalism is that its beliefs are changeable, even quixotic. Climate change is an example.

Reform’s leaders have long flirted with climate change denial. “Climate change has happened for millions of years,” explained former Reform UK leader Richard Tice in 2024, adding that “the idea that you can stop the power of the Sun or volcanoes is simply ludicrous”. Tice has not changed his views but later the same year, the party’s new leader, Nigel Farage, told the BBC that he was “not arguing the science”.

Like other populist parties, Reform adopts a mobile position on the environment, moving between denying that climate change is happening or that humans are causing it, and the very different contention that anthropogenic climate change is real but that environmental targets are unreachable and unfair, given that other nations (China is often mentioned) supposedly do so little.

A post-western paradox

Researchers are only just starting to think about anti-environmentalism. One key analysis is environmental politics researcher John Hultgren’s The Smoke and the Spoils: Anti-Environmentalism and Class Struggle in the United States. This new book explains how Republicans managed to convince working-class voters that there is “zero-sum dichotomy between jobs and environmental protection, workers and environmentalists”.

This kind of binary has also been found by contributors to The Handbook of Anti-Environmentalism, who identify and critique the stereotyping of environmentalism as middle-class and elite in several western countries.

Yet the geographical focus of these pioneering works misses yet another of the paradoxes of anti-environmentalism: that although its rhetoric often accuses China and other non-western countries of doing little, there has been a significant environmental turn in both policy and public attitudes beyond Europe and the US.

Environmentalism is becoming post-western. This is partly because the realities of environmental damage are so stark across much of Asia and Africa.

Extreme temperatures and unpredictable rainfall are leading to food insecurity and community displacement. Environmentalism in the African Sahel and south Asia might better be called “survivalism”.

And despite its continuing reliance on fossil fuels, China’s state-led vision of a transition to a conservationist and decarbonised “ecological civilisation” is positioning it as a global environmental leader.

Stereotypes of environmentalism being primarily a western concern are crumbling. Because of this, along with the many contradictions that beset it, the rise of anti-environmentalism appears not only complex, but curious and unsustainable.


Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.


Alastair Bonnett, Professor of Geography, Newcastle University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
Continue ReadingAnti-environmentalism is on the rise but it’s full of contradictions