Newspapers across the UK report on the Met Office’s latest annual state of the climate report, which confirms that the nation’s 10 hottest years have all occurred since 2002 – as first reported in a Carbon Brief guest post from the agency’s science manager in January. The Daily Telegraph reports that despite the freezing temperatures brought by the so-called “Beast from the East”, last year’s summer heatwave pushed 2018 into the top 10 at number seven. The Met Office data also shows that none of the nation’s coldest years have taken place since a cold spell in 1962. In its coverage, the Daily Mail includes a quote from climate scientist Michael Byrne that “the science of climate change is now clear”. The Sun has comments from the same researcher, with additional context linking the extreme weather to the rise in “global emissions of greenhouse gases”. The Times features the news as its front page splash, while the BBC, Financial Times, Evening Standard and Sky News all have the story. The news comes shortly after BBC News and various other outlets reported the Met Office had officially confirmed the UK’s highest ever temperature record, after Cambridge University Botanic Garden measured 38.7C last week.

Besides its coverage, the Guardian also features an additional piece by science journalist Nicola Davis examining the trend. She notes that not only is Britain’s weather getting hotter, it is becoming wetter as well, and reports comments from Met Office report author Mike Kendon that: “Climate change is not some abstract thing in the future that we are predicting is going to happen. The point is that climate change is happening and it is happening now”.

None of the roughly 300 weather stations in Alaska have recorded a temperature below freezing since the end of June, the longest such streak for at least a century, according to the Washington Post. As wildfires burn across the state, the paper reports comments from climatologist Brian Brettschneider that the high pressure, warm sea surface temperatures related to early sea ice melt and high humidity are “basically off the charts.” Meanwhile, CNN reports that the recent heatwave that brought record temperatures to Europe is now threatening to accelerate Greenland ice melt. According to the World Meteorological Organization, the same weather front is drifting towards the landmass, and forecasts indicate this could be the second largest ice melt since 1950. Elsewhere, Reuters reports on concerns from Russians about the enormous wildfires currently burning their way through much of Siberia, which Greenpeace has described as an “ecological catastrophe on the scale of the entire country”. Scientific American includes a list of the environmental issues that will arise this summer as extreme heat “bakes the Arctic”.

Industrial polluters in Britain could see their carbon taxes cut nearly in half if the nation leaves the EU without a deal later this year, according to Climate Home News. As it stands, the UK is part of the EU’s Emissions Trading System, where permit prices are currently close to €30 ($33) per tonne of CO2 emitted from power stations and industrial sites. But under updated no-deal guidelines released on Monday, the UK government would introduce a domestic tax of £16 ($19) per tonne of CO2 if the country leaves the EU at the end of October without a withdrawal agreement. “Together with a falling pound, it raises the prospect of a significantly lower carbon price in Britain than on the continent,” the news site reports. [UK power stations – but not industrial sites – would continue to pay an additional “carbon price support” of £18/tCO2.]

Several newspapers have covered comments from the Duke of Sussex that he only wants “two kids, maximum”, which the Sun attributes to his desire “to help save the planet”. The Daily Mirror features the story on its front page, and includes comments from Prince Harry about the number of natural disasters taking place, in the context of climate change. “How many clues does nature have to give us before we actually learn, or wake ourselves up to the damage and the destruction that we’re causing?” he says. The Mirror’s editorial picks up on these comments, saying the prince “Haz” a point about limiting carbon footprints by having fewer children. “Some will see this as the worst form of virtue signalling from someone who lives in luxury. Yet Harry has added to the critical debate about how we safeguard our planet – the most pressing issue of our time,” it says. The Metro also has the story.

The New York Times features a piece by a former senior federal employee accusing the US government of blocking his report on the threat posed by climate change. Rod Schoonover, who worked as a government intelligence analyst for 10 years prior to his recent resignation, writes that he had not been comfortable with some of Trump administration’s policies, but that it had never before attempted to influence his work. “That changed last month, when the White House blocked the submission of my bureau’s written testimony on the national security implications of climate change to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The stated reason was that the scientific foundation of the analysis did not comport with the administration’s position on climate change,” he writes. Noting the “wide-ranging” impacts including extreme weather and rising sea levels, Schoonover notes these are “hardly new” conclusions for the intelligence community. “In blocking the submission of the written testimony, the White House trampled not only on the scientific integrity of the assessment but also on the analytic independence of an arm of the intelligence community. That’s why I recently resigned from the job I considered a sacred duty, and the institution I loved,” he continues.

CNN and the Guardian include news stories off the back of the op-ed, leading on the claim that the White House is “undercutting evidence” of climate change. The Guardian says Schoonover is “one of a stream of scientists sidelined or forced out over what critics of the Trump administration characterise as a war on science”.

A piece in the Columbia Journalism Review documents the rising public interest in climate change and the impact this is having on journalism. “For years, conventional wisdom has held that climate coverage is not especially good for business,” it begins, noting that “it’s easy to see the news media’s unwillingness to confront looming catastrophe”. However, the writer Andrew McCormick goes on to note that publications are beginning to notice that their audiences are increasingly engaged with climate stories, citing examples from around the world.

Policies for increasing “bioplastic” production could inadvertently lead to increased greenhouse gas emissions due to land-use changes, a study says. “Bioplastic” is plastic made from plant-based sources, such as sugar crops, rather than fossil fuels, which form the base of regular plastic. The study looks at two possible policies for boosting bioplastic production: a a subsidy on bioplastics and a tax on fossil-fuel-based plastic consumption. It finds that both policies would increase greenhouse gas emissions – by 0.96% with the subsidy and 5.01% with the tax. This is because bioplastic production would require more of the land to be converted for crop growth, the authors say.

Introducing new information online – rather than facts that are already known –could make people less likely to believe that climate change is caused by humans, a study finds. The researchers invited participants to take part in an online chat concerning the role of humans in driving climate change. “Participants reported feeling more competent and knowledgeable about the topic and felt less ostracised from others in the chat when participants were already familiar with information others discussed than when information discussed by others in the chat was new information,” the authors say.