Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

In Michigan: climate change, bird flu and dairy cows — and why ‘none of us saw this coming.’

News Feed
Thursday, June 13, 2024

This coverage is made possible through a partnership between IPR and Grist, a nonprofit environmental media organization. Earlier this month, Laurie Stanek shoveled hay to a group of young black-and-white Holstein cows, just a few among the roughly 200 cattle on her family dairy farm. Located in northern Michigan’s Antrim County, she has worked there for almost 50 years now.  The farm day starts early.  “We’re out here at 5 o’clock every morning to get started feeding the babies,” she said. But there are some additional chores for farmers in Michigan, now that avian influenza, or bird flu, has made the jump to cattle.  New state requirements include limiting the number of visitors and increasing disinfection practices like cleaning boots and vehicles. Michigan also has prohibited poultry or lactating cows from being shown at events like fairs. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has required that lactating cows moving across state lines receive a negative test result on bird flu.  “We are conscious that the threat is there, and we wouldn’t let just anybody come in,” Stanek said, referring to the state requirement to limit visitors.  With outbreaks of bird flu in dairy cattle across the country, health officials are emphasizing biosecurity — that is, efforts to prevent the introduction and spread of disease.  Researchers are still working to understand how climate change is affecting the spread of the bird flu. But, as Grist has previously reported, H5N1 has spread outside its typical seasons as migratory patterns have changed. And research has shown that generally, climate change could join a host of other factors in making the transmission of viruses between species more likely — something called “viral spillover.”  “We are in a place where the threat of emerging pathogens is much greater than ever before. So therefore, the need for biosecurity is even more significant than it has ever been before,” said Suresh Kuchipudi, a professor and chair of the infectious diseases and microbiology department at the University of Pittsburgh’s School of Public Health.  Some, like Kuchipudi, say scaling up biosecurity operations can help the agricultural sector become more resilient to climate change. But it’s just one part of the complicated process of responding to the spread of viruses like the bird flu. This strain of avian influenza is called H5N1, and it’s highly pathogenic, meaning it’s deadly for poultry. First detected in the 1990s, it has surged over the last several years, spreading to birds and mammals across the world.  The spread to cattle is new.  “I’m a virologist by training, and my other virologist buddies and I all have to admit: None of us saw this coming,” said Kim Dodd, the director of the Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory at Michigan State University. Animals like foxes can contract the flu when they eat an infected carcass. But cattle don’t eat meat.  “We didn’t expect to find [highly pathogenic] avian influenza in dairy cattle, and to find that it amplifies so well, and that we have so much virus in the milk,” Dodd said. “And so that’s really a big part of trying to understand, you know, what do we do about that to be able to help control the outbreak.” The first confirmed case in cattle was reported in Texas earlier this year, and 11 more states have confirmed cases of the bird flu in dairy herds.  Michigan has reported the most cases in the country. As of Wednesday, the state had confirmed 25 instances of the flu in herds. It also has two of the three confirmed cases of the disease in people — the other was a dairy worker in Texas.  In May, state officials declared the flu an “extraordinary emergency,” calling it a threat to animal health, human health, trade and the economy.  Officials and researchers have said Michigan’s high case count is an example of robust testing in response to the outbreak. Overall, the response to the bird flu outbreak in cattle has been somewhat rocky. States have pushed back against federal efforts to address the virus, and public health experts have raised concerns about the lack of testing and warned that the true reach is likely greater that official counts. Those involved in Michigan’s response have said part of its response is collaboration with farmers. “That takes two sides,” said Dodd. “It takes the people who are looking and the people who are testing, but it also requires that the people who own the animals are opening their doors and allowing testing to occur.” H5N1 causes a reduction in cows’ milk production, among other symptoms. It can devastate the poultry industry; since it was detected in commercial flocks in the United States in 2022, it has led to the deaths of close to 100 million farmed birds.  Read Next Why can’t we just quit cows? Naoki Nitta The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have maintained that the danger to the public is relatively low. But dairy workers are now more at risk of exposure to the bird flu as they work with cows; the virus appears to be spreading largely through milk.  “We want to make sure that we’re limiting the further spread of the virus, so that we’re continuing to protect human health, and we don’t have so much virus in the environment that could potentially mutate and affect humans in a different way,” said Tim Boring, the director of the state Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. One of the ways the state is doing that is by urging farms to follow biosecurity measures. These are pretty low tech — like wearing protective gear and disinfecting equipment. How effective they are comes down to compliance.  “I’m sure they’re serious. I’m sure they’re not fooling around. It’s their livelihood, their investments,” said Jean-Pierre Vaillancourt, a professor of veterinary medicine at the University of Montreal. But “if they’re not sharing data, and they’re not doing good surveillance to figure out who’s where and what and all that, we already have a big problem.” Climate change coincides with the spread of certain diseases, as animals interact with one another in new settings. While biosecurity may play a role in prevention or response, it likely won’t stop the next pandemic, Vaillancourt said. He argues that we should actually be looking at disease from a regional perspective.   “What can we do to minimize the spread between sites?” he said. “That requires data sharing.” That’s where industry and institutions often fall short. Farms that have outbreaks can face stigma and lose money, and farm workers that test positive can deal with health and economic issues. Worker advocacy groups have also voiced concerns that testing isn’t reaching those on the front lines.  Some public health experts say the surge of bird flu in cattle is an opportunity to hone that response and protect animal and human life in the process.   “The fact is, [governments] need to learn how to get this right when the stakes are lower, because there are less forgiving bird flu viruses than this one,” said Amesh Adalja, a scholar at Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. The agricultural industry will have to be part of any response to infectious diseases as the climate changes. Humans often interact with animals in agricultural settings. Preventing and responding to viruses also requires establishing trust with farmers.  “This is going to be part of how you think about building resilience, is that you kind of have this integrated approach,” Adalja said. That approach is known as One Health, which many involved in public health have pointed to as a framework that acknowledges the connection between people, animals and the environment and seeks to address issues like disease in a holistic way.  Wildlife surveillance systems and vaccine programs can help track and control viruses like the bird flu.  Read Next As climate change disrupts ecosystems, a new outbreak of bird flu spreads to mammals Zoya Teirstein And the dairy industry can learn something from those working with pigs, Vaillancourt said. An effort called the Morrison Swine Health Monitoring Project has involved farmers and the industry in keeping track of disease in pigs. The big picture, he said, is that everyone involved in livestock needs to think about stopping the spread of disease. Say a farmer needs to move some cows. “How do we move them?” he said. “Which roads are we going to use to minimize contaminating a site on our way. How do we clean and disinfect the vehicles when we go from one site to another site?” A few efforts have been pushed forward as the virus has spread. The federal government announced that it would spend $824 million in emergency funding on its response, and the USDA just launched a voluntary pilot program to test cow milk in bulk. And agricultural officials in Michigan say more safety measures on farms could become a bigger part of the state’s approach to climate change. “Improving biosecurity in new ways that we hadn’t previously considered, I think, will increasingly be a component of robust climate resiliency actions,” said Boring, the director of the state agriculture department. “So we’re seeing a little bit of that in real time here with our response to H5N1 here in the state.” And back in Antrim County, Laurie Stanek said dealing with animal sickness is just part of running a farm; they’re paying attention to the new rules and doing what they’ve always done. “A lot of it’s just good herdsmanship — just common sense,” she said. “You keep your animals healthy so they in turn give you a healthy product.” That, she said, is what their livelihood depends on.  This story was originally published by Grist with the headline In Michigan: climate change, bird flu and dairy cows — and why ‘none of us saw this coming.’ on Jun 13, 2024.

And why we should have.

This coverage is made possible through a partnership between IPR and Grist, a nonprofit environmental media organization.

Earlier this month, Laurie Stanek shoveled hay to a group of young black-and-white Holstein cows, just a few among the roughly 200 cattle on her family dairy farm. Located in northern Michigan’s Antrim County, she has worked there for almost 50 years now. 

The farm day starts early. 

“We’re out here at 5 o’clock every morning to get started feeding the babies,” she said.

But there are some additional chores for farmers in Michigan, now that avian influenza, or bird flu, has made the jump to cattle. 

New state requirements include limiting the number of visitors and increasing disinfection practices like cleaning boots and vehicles. Michigan also has prohibited poultry or lactating cows from being shown at events like fairs. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has required that lactating cows moving across state lines receive a negative test result on bird flu. 

“We are conscious that the threat is there, and we wouldn’t let just anybody come in,” Stanek said, referring to the state requirement to limit visitors. 

With outbreaks of bird flu in dairy cattle across the country, health officials are emphasizing biosecurity — that is, efforts to prevent the introduction and spread of disease. 

Researchers are still working to understand how climate change is affecting the spread of the bird flu. But, as Grist has previously reported, H5N1 has spread outside its typical seasons as migratory patterns have changed. And research has shown that generally, climate change could join a host of other factors in making the transmission of viruses between species more likely — something called “viral spillover.” 

“We are in a place where the threat of emerging pathogens is much greater than ever before. So therefore, the need for biosecurity is even more significant than it has ever been before,” said Suresh Kuchipudi, a professor and chair of the infectious diseases and microbiology department at the University of Pittsburgh’s School of Public Health. 

Some, like Kuchipudi, say scaling up biosecurity operations can help the agricultural sector become more resilient to climate change. But it’s just one part of the complicated process of responding to the spread of viruses like the bird flu.

This strain of avian influenza is called H5N1, and it’s highly pathogenic, meaning it’s deadly for poultry. First detected in the 1990s, it has surged over the last several years, spreading to birds and mammals across the world. 

The spread to cattle is new. 

“I’m a virologist by training, and my other virologist buddies and I all have to admit: None of us saw this coming,” said Kim Dodd, the director of the Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory at Michigan State University. Animals like foxes can contract the flu when they eat an infected carcass. But cattle don’t eat meat. 

“We didn’t expect to find [highly pathogenic] avian influenza in dairy cattle, and to find that it amplifies so well, and that we have so much virus in the milk,” Dodd said. “And so that’s really a big part of trying to understand, you know, what do we do about that to be able to help control the outbreak.”

The first confirmed case in cattle was reported in Texas earlier this year, and 11 more states have confirmed cases of the bird flu in dairy herds. 

Michigan has reported the most cases in the country. As of Wednesday, the state had confirmed 25 instances of the flu in herds. It also has two of the three confirmed cases of the disease in people — the other was a dairy worker in Texas. 

In May, state officials declared the flu an “extraordinary emergency,” calling it a threat to animal health, human health, trade and the economy. 

Officials and researchers have said Michigan’s high case count is an example of robust testing in response to the outbreak. Overall, the response to the bird flu outbreak in cattle has been somewhat rocky. States have pushed back against federal efforts to address the virus, and public health experts have raised concerns about the lack of testing and warned that the true reach is likely greater that official counts.

Those involved in Michigan’s response have said part of its response is collaboration with farmers. “That takes two sides,” said Dodd. “It takes the people who are looking and the people who are testing, but it also requires that the people who own the animals are opening their doors and allowing testing to occur.”

H5N1 causes a reduction in cows’ milk production, among other symptoms. It can devastate the poultry industry; since it was detected in commercial flocks in the United States in 2022, it has led to the deaths of close to 100 million farmed birds. 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have maintained that the danger to the public is relatively low. But dairy workers are now more at risk of exposure to the bird flu as they work with cows; the virus appears to be spreading largely through milk. 

“We want to make sure that we’re limiting the further spread of the virus, so that we’re continuing to protect human health, and we don’t have so much virus in the environment that could potentially mutate and affect humans in a different way,” said Tim Boring, the director of the state Department of Agriculture and Rural Development.

One of the ways the state is doing that is by urging farms to follow biosecurity measures. These are pretty low tech — like wearing protective gear and disinfecting equipment. How effective they are comes down to compliance. 

“I’m sure they’re serious. I’m sure they’re not fooling around. It’s their livelihood, their investments,” said Jean-Pierre Vaillancourt, a professor of veterinary medicine at the University of Montreal. But “if they’re not sharing data, and they’re not doing good surveillance to figure out who’s where and what and all that, we already have a big problem.”

Climate change coincides with the spread of certain diseases, as animals interact with one another in new settings. While biosecurity may play a role in prevention or response, it likely won’t stop the next pandemic, Vaillancourt said. He argues that we should actually be looking at disease from a regional perspective.  

“What can we do to minimize the spread between sites?” he said. “That requires data sharing.”

That’s where industry and institutions often fall short. Farms that have outbreaks can face stigma and lose money, and farm workers that test positive can deal with health and economic issues. Worker advocacy groups have also voiced concerns that testing isn’t reaching those on the front lines. 

Some public health experts say the surge of bird flu in cattle is an opportunity to hone that response and protect animal and human life in the process.  

“The fact is, [governments] need to learn how to get this right when the stakes are lower, because there are less forgiving bird flu viruses than this one,” said Amesh Adalja, a scholar at Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

The agricultural industry will have to be part of any response to infectious diseases as the climate changes. Humans often interact with animals in agricultural settings. Preventing and responding to viruses also requires establishing trust with farmers. 

“This is going to be part of how you think about building resilience, is that you kind of have this integrated approach,” Adalja said.

That approach is known as One Health, which many involved in public health have pointed to as a framework that acknowledges the connection between people, animals and the environment and seeks to address issues like disease in a holistic way. 

Wildlife surveillance systems and vaccine programs can help track and control viruses like the bird flu. 

And the dairy industry can learn something from those working with pigs, Vaillancourt said. An effort called the Morrison Swine Health Monitoring Project has involved farmers and the industry in keeping track of disease in pigs.

The big picture, he said, is that everyone involved in livestock needs to think about stopping the spread of disease. Say a farmer needs to move some cows.

“How do we move them?” he said. “Which roads are we going to use to minimize contaminating a site on our way. How do we clean and disinfect the vehicles when we go from one site to another site?”

A few efforts have been pushed forward as the virus has spread. The federal government announced that it would spend $824 million in emergency funding on its response, and the USDA just launched a voluntary pilot program to test cow milk in bulk.

And agricultural officials in Michigan say more safety measures on farms could become a bigger part of the state’s approach to climate change.

“Improving biosecurity in new ways that we hadn’t previously considered, I think, will increasingly be a component of robust climate resiliency actions,” said Boring, the director of the state agriculture department. “So we’re seeing a little bit of that in real time here with our response to H5N1 here in the state.”

And back in Antrim County, Laurie Stanek said dealing with animal sickness is just part of running a farm; they’re paying attention to the new rules and doing what they’ve always done.

“A lot of it’s just good herdsmanship — just common sense,” she said. “You keep your animals healthy so they in turn give you a healthy product.”

That, she said, is what their livelihood depends on. 

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline In Michigan: climate change, bird flu and dairy cows — and why ‘none of us saw this coming.’ on Jun 13, 2024.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Fire Disrupts UN Climate Talks Just as Negotiators Reach Critical Final Days

Fire has disrupted United Nations climate talks, forcing evacuations of several buildings with just two scheduled days left and negotiators yet to announce any major agreements

BELEM, Brazil (AP) — Fire disrupted United Nations climate talks in Brazil on Thursday, forcing evacuations of several buildings with just two scheduled days left and negotiators yet to announce any major agreements. Officials said no one was hurt.The fire was reported in an area of pavilions where sideline events are held during the annual talks, known this year as COP30. Organizers soon announced that the fire was under control, but fire officials ordered the entire site evacuated for safety checks and it wasn't clear when conference business would resume.Viliami Vainga Tone, with the Tonga delegation, had just come out of a high-level ministerial meeting when dozens of people came thundering past him shouting about the fire. He was among people pushed out of the venue by Brazilian and United Nations security forces.Tone called time the most precious resource at COP and said he was disappointed it's even shorter due to the fire.“We have to keep up our optimism. There is always tomorrow, if not the remainder of today. But at least we have a full day tomorrow,” Tone told The Associated Press.A few hours before the fire, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres urged countries to compromise and “show willingness and flexibility to deliver results,” even if they fall short of the strongest measures some nations want.“We are down to the wire and the world is watching Belem,” Guterres said, asking negotiators to engage in good faith in the last two scheduled days of talks, which already missed a self-imposed deadline Wednesday for progress on a few key issues. The conference, with this year's edition known as COP30, frequently runs longer than its scheduled two weeks.“Communities on the front lines are watching, too — counting flooded homes, failed harvests, lost livelihoods — and asking, ‘how much more must we suffer?’” Guterres said. "They’ve heard enough excuses and demand results.” On contentious issues involving more detailed plans to phase out fossil fuels and financial aid to poorer countries, Guterres said he was “perfectly convinced” that compromise was possible and dismissed the idea that not adopting the strongest measures would be a failure.Guterres was more forceful in what he wanted rich countries to do for poor countries, especially those in need of tens of billions of dollars to adapt to the floods, droughts, storms and heat waves triggered by worsening climate change. He continued calls to triple adaptation finance from $40 billion a year to $120 billion a year.“No delegation will leave Belem with everything it wants, but every delegation has a duty to reach a balanced deal,” Guterres said.“Every country, especially the big emitters, must do more,” Guterres said.Delivering overall financial aid — with an agreed goal of $300 billion a year — is one of four interconnected issues that were initially excluded from the official agenda. The other three are: whether countries should be told to toughen their new climate plans; dealing with trade barriers over climate and improving reporting on transparency and climate progress.More than 80 countries have pushed for a detailed “road map” on how to transition away from fossil fuels, like coal, oil and natural gas, which are the chief cause of warming. That was a general but vague agreement two years ago at the COP in Dubai. Guterres kept referring to it as already being agreed to in Dubai, but did not commit to a detailed plan, which Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva pushed for earlier in a speech.The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.This story was produced as part of the 2025 Climate Change Media Partnership, a journalism fellowship organized by Internews’ Earth Journalism Network and the Stanley Center for Peace and Security.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Nov. 2025

Engineered microbes could tackle climate change – if we ensure it’s done safely

Engineering microbes to soak up more carbon, boost crop yields and restore former farmland is appealing. But synthetic biology fixes must be done thoughtfully

Yuji Sakai/GettyAs the climate crisis accelerates, there’s a desperate need to rapidly reduce carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, both by slashing emissions and by pulling carbon out of the air. Synthetic biology has emerged as a particularly promising approach. Despite the name, synthetic biology isn’t about creating new life from scratch. Rather, it uses engineering principles to build new biological components for existing microorganisms such as bacteria, microbes and fungi to make them better at specific tasks. By one recent estimate, synthetic biology could cut more carbon than emitted by all passenger cars ever made – up to 30 billion tonnes – through methods such as boosting crop yields, restoring agricultural land, cutting livestock methane emissions, reducing the need for fertiliser, producing biofuels and engineering microbes to store more carbon. According to some synthetic biologists, this could be a game-changer. But will it prove to be? Technological efforts to “solve” the climate problem often verge on the improbably utopian. There’s a risk in seeing synthetic biology as a silver bullet for environmental problems. A more realistic approach suggests synthetic biology isn’t a magic fix, but does have real potential worth exploring further. Engineering microorganisms is a controversial practice. To make the most of these technologies, researchers will have to ensure it’s done safely and ethically, as my research points out. What potential does synthetic biology have? Earth’s oceans, forests, soils and other natural processes soak up over half of all carbon emitted by burning fossil fuels. Synthetic biology could make these natural sinks even more effective. Some researchers are exploring ways to modify natural enzymes to rapidly convert carbon dioxide gas into carbon in rocks. Perhaps the best known example is the use of precision fermentation to cut methane emissions from livestock. Because methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, these emissions account for roughly 12% of total warming potential from greenhouse emissions. Bioengineered yeasts could absorb up to 98% of these emissions. After being eaten by cattle or other ruminants these yeasts block production of methane before it can be belched out. Synthetic biology could even drastically reduce how much farmland the world needs by producing food more efficiently. Engineered soil microbes can boost crop yields at least by 10–20%, meaning more food from less land. Precision fermentation can be used to produce clean meat and clean milk with much lower emissions than traditional farming. Engineered microbes have the potential to boost crop yields considerably. Collab Media/Unsplash, CC BY-NC-ND If farms produce more on less land, excess farmland can be returned to nature. Wetlands, forests and native grasslands can store much more carbon than farmland, helping tackle climate change. Synthetic biology can be used to modify microbe and algae species to increase their natural ability to store carbon in wetlands and oceans. This approach is known as natural geoengineering. Engineered crops and soil microbes can also lock away much more carbon in the roots of crops or by increasing soil storage capacity. They can also reduce methane emissions from organic matter and tackle pollutants such as fertiliser runoff and heavy metals. Sounds great – what’s the problem? As researchers have pointed out, using this approach will require a rollout at massive scale. At present, much work has been done at smaller scale. These engineered organisms need to be able to go from Petri dishes to industrial bioreactors and then safely into the environment. To scale, these approaches have to be economically viable, well regulated and socially acceptable. That’s easier said than done. First, engineering organisms comes with the serious risk of unintended consequences. If these customised microbes release their stored carbon all at once during a drought or bushfire, it could worsen climate change. It would be very difficult to control these organisms if a problem emerges after their release, such as if an engineered microbe began outcompeting its rivals or if synthetic genes spread beyond the target species and do unintended damage to other species and ecosystems. It will be essential to tackle these issues head on with robust risk management and forward planning. Second, synthetic biology approaches will likely become products. To make these organisms cheaply and gain market share, biotech companies will have an incentive to focus on immediate profits. This could lead companies to downplay actual risks to protect their profit margins. Regulation will be essential here. Third, some worthwhile approaches may not appeal to companies seeking a return on investment. Instead, governments or public institutions may have to develop them to benefit plants, animals and natural habitats, given human existence rests on healthy ecosystems. Which way forward? These issues shouldn’t stop researchers from testing out these technologies. But these risks must be taken into account, as not all risks are equal. Unchecked climate change would be much worse, as it could lead to societal collapse, large-scale climate migration and mass species extinction. Large scale removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is now essential. In the face of catastrophic risks, it can be ethically justifiable to take the smaller risk of unintended consequences from these organisms. But it’s far less justifiable if these same risks are accepted to secure financial returns for private investors. As time passes and the climate crisis intensifies, these technologies will look more and more appealing. Synthetic biology won’t be the silver bullet many imagine it to be, and it’s unlikely it will be the gold mine many hope for. But the technology has undeniable promise. Used thoughtfully and ethically, it could help us make a healthier planet for all living species. Daniele Fulvi receives funding from the ARC Centre of Excellence in Synthetic Biology, and his current project investigates the ethical dimensions of synthetic biology for climate mitigation. He also received a small grant from the Advanced Engineering Biology Future Science Platform at CSIRO. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and are not necessarily those of the Australian Government or the Australian Research Council.

Exclusive-Europe Plans Service to Gauge Climate Change Role in Extreme Weather

By Alison Withers and Kate AbnettCOPENHAGEN (Reuters) -The EU is launching a service to measure the role climate change is playing in extreme...

By Alison Withers and Kate AbnettCOPENHAGEN (Reuters) -The EU is launching a service to measure the role climate change is playing in extreme weather events like heatwaves and extreme rain, and experts say this could help governments set climate policy, improve financial risk assessments and provide evidence for use in lawsuits.Scientists with the EU's Copernicus Climate Change Service told Reuters the service can help governments in weighing the physical risks posed by worsening weather and setting policy in response. "It's the demand of understanding when an extreme event happens, how is this related to climate change?" said the new service's technical lead, Freja Vamborg.The European Commission did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.The service will perform attribution science, which involves running computer simulations of how weather systems might have behaved if people had never started pumping greenhouse gases into the air and then comparing those results with what is happening today.Funded for about 2.5 million euros over three years, Copernicus will publish results by the end of next year and offer two assessments a month - each within a week of an extreme weather event.For the first time, "there will be an attribution office operating constantly," said Carlo Buontempo, director of Copernicus Climate Change Service. "Climate policy is unfortunately again a very polarized topic," said Friederike Otto, a climate scientist at Imperial College London who helped to pioneer the scientific approach but is not involved in the new EU service. She welcomed the service's plans to partner with national weather services of EU members along with the UK Met and the Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre."From that point of view, it also helps if the governments do it themselves and just see themselves really the evidence from their own weather services," Otto said. Some independent climate scientists and lawyers cheered the EU move. "We want to have the most information available," said senior attorney Erika Lennon at the non-profit Center for International Environmental Law."The more information we have about attribution science, the easier it will be for the most impacted to be able to successfully bring claims to courts."By calculating probabilities of climate change impacting weather patterns, the approach also helps insurance companies and others in the financial sector.In a way, "they're already using it" with in-house teams calculating probabilities for floods or storms, said environmental scientist Johan Rockstroem with the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research."Financial institutions understand risk and risk has to be quantified, and this is one way of quantifying," Rockstroem said.In litigation, attribution science is also being used already in calculating how much a country's or company's emissions may have contributed to climate-fuelled disasters.The International Court of Justice said in July that attribution science is legally viable for linking emissions with climate extremes - but it has yet to fully be tested in court. A German court in May dismissed a Peruvian farmer's lawsuit against German utility RWE for emissions-driven warming causing Andean glaciers to thaw. The case had used attribution science in calculating the damage claim, but the court said the claim amount was too low to take the case forward.So "the court never got to discussing attribution science in detail and going into whether the climate models are good enough, and all of these complex and thorny questions," said Noah Walker-Crawford, a climate litigation researcher at the London School of Economics. (Reporting by Ali Withers in Copenhagen and Kate Abnett in Belem, Brazil; Writing by Katy Daigle; Editing by David Gregorio)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Billionaire hedge fund founder Tom Steyer is running for governor

Billionaire hedge fund founder, climate change warrior and major Democratic donor Tom Steyer is running for governor. Fossil fuel and migrant detention facility investments will likely draw attacks from his fellow Democrats.

Billionaire hedge fund founder Tom Steyer announced Wednesday that he is running for governor of California, arguing that he is not beholden to special interests and can take on corporations that are making life unaffordable in the state.“The richest people in America think that they earned everything themselves. Bulls—, man. That’s so ridiculous,” Steyer said in an online video announcing his campaign. “We have a broken government. It’s been bought by corporations and my question is: Who do you think is going to change that? Sacramento politicians are afraid to change up this system. I’m not. They’re going to hate this. Bring it on.” Protesters hold placards and banners during a rally against Whitehaven Coal in Sydney in 2014. Dozens of protesters and activists gathered downtown to protest against the controversial massive Maules Creek coal mine project in northern New South Wales. (Saeed Khan / AFP/Getty Images) Steyer, 68, founded Farallon Capital Management, one of the nation’s largest hedge funds, and left it in 2012 after 26 years. Since his departure, he has become a global environmental activist and a major donor to Democratic candidates and causes. But the hedge firm’s investments — notably a giant coal mine in Australia that cleared 3,700 acres of koala habitat and a company that runs migrant detention centers on the U.S.-Mexico border for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement — will make him susceptible to political attack by his gubernatorial rivals. Steyer has expressed regret for his involvement in such projects, saying it was why he left Farallon and started focusing his energy on fighting climate change. Democratic presidential candidate Tom Steyer addresses a crowd during a presidential primary election-night party in Columbia, S.C. (Sean Rayford / Getty Images) Steyer previously flirted with running for governor and the U.S. Senate but decided against it, instead opting to run for president in 2020. He dropped out after spending nearly $342 million on his campaign, which gained little traction before he ended his run after the South Carolina primary.Next year’s gubernatorial race is in flux, after former Vice President Kamala Harris and Sen. Alex Padilla decided not to run and Proposition 50, the successful Democratic effort to redraw congressional districts, consumed all of the political oxygen during an off-year election.Most voters are undecided about who they would like to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom, who cannot run for reelection because of term limits, according to a poll released this month by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by The Times. Steyer had the support of 1% of voters in the survey. In recent years, Steyer has been a longtime benefactor of progressive causes, most recently spending $12 million to support the redistricting ballot measure. But when he was the focus of one of the ads, rumors spiraled that he was considering a run for governor.In prior California ballot initiatives, Steyer successfully supported efforts to close a corporate tax loophole and to raise tobacco taxes, and fought oil-industry-backed efforts to roll back environmental law.His campaign platform is to build 1 million homes in four years, lower energy costs by ending monopolies, make preschool and community college free and ban corporate contributions to political action committees in California elections.Steyer’s brother Jim, the leader of Common Sense Media, and former Biden administration U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy are aiming to put an initiative on next year’s ballot to protect children from social media, specifically the chatbots that have been accused of prompting young people to kill themselves. Newsom recently vetoed a bill aimed at addressing this artificial intelligence issue.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.