The world is on track to breach the 1.5 degrees Celsius warming limit set in the Paris Agreement within the next two years, according to a new report from the World Meteorological Organization (WMO).
The WMO projects that the global average temperature will exceed 1.5°C above preindustrial levels by 2027, a full decade earlier than previously predicted, due to record-breaking heat and ongoing greenhouse gas emissions.
The shift is driven by compounding factors: stronger El Niño events, declining air pollution that had temporarily cooled the planet, and limited progress in reducing fossil fuel dependence despite the rise of renewables.
Scientists warn that sustained warming at this level could trigger irreversible climate tipping points, including the collapse of coral reefs and melting of polar ice, putting new pressure on policymakers to adjust global climate goals.
Key quote:
“There is no way, barring geoengineering, to prevent global temperatures from going over 1.5 degrees.”
— Zeke Hausfather, climate scientist and climate research lead at Stripe
Why this matters:
Passing the 1.5°C mark has serious consequences. At this level of warming, scientists expect more extreme and frequent weather events, including severe heat waves, crop failures, and ecosystem collapses. Coral reefs, already under stress, face near-total extinction. Polar ice loss could accelerate sea-level rise, putting coastal cities and small island nations at risk. Infectious diseases spread more readily in warmer conditions, and heat-related health problems multiply, especially in already vulnerable communities. Although the world agreed to try to limit warming below this threshold in 2015 at COP21 in Paris, fossil fuel emissions have continued largely unabated, and the energy transition remains too slow. The WMO’s new timeline pulls the future into the present, showing that climate change is no longer a distant threat — it’s here now, and speeding up. It will likely reshape global economies, health systems, and geopolitics in unpredictable and dangerous ways.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that federal agencies only need to consider the direct environmental impacts of major infrastructure projects, not their broader consequences, under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
The 8-0 ruling curbs how NEPA can be used, limiting environmental reviews to only the immediate effects of projects like rail lines and pipelines.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh emphasized that NEPA is procedural, not a weapon to block development, and courts must defer to agencies on what they include in their reviews.
Environmental advocates argue this decision ignores the full chain of climate and health harms — like pollution from oil refining or increased risks to frontline communities.
Key quote:
“Fossil fuel infrastructure projects do not exist in a vacuum and have far-reaching impacts on communities, especially those on the frontlines of climate change or those who face serious health harms from increased pollution.”
— Nathaniel Shoaff, senior attorney at the Sierra Club
Why this matters:
The Supreme Court just shrank one of the most important tools the public has to fight environmentally risky projects at a time when fossil fuel projects are expanding. NEPA has long been a way for communities to slow — or at least understand — the consequences of big infrastructure plans. But Justice Brett Kavanaugh and the rest of the bench are reframing it as a box-checking exercise. This ruling allows agencies to decide what counts as worth reviewing, and courts are told to back off.
A German court dismissed a Peruvian farmer’s lawsuit against energy giant RWE over climate-linked flooding but acknowledged, for the first time, that German companies could face civil liability for global emissions.
A German appeals court rejected Saúl Luciano Lliuya’s claim that RWE should pay for flood prevention measures near his Peruvian home, citing only a 1% flood risk to his property over 30 years.
The court, however, affirmed that German civil law could allow victims of climate change to hold major emitters accountable, setting a legal precedent for similar suits worldwide.
While RWE claimed the lawsuit was unfounded and outside German jurisdiction, climate advocates see the ruling as a turning point for global corporate climate liability cases.
Key quote:
“For the first time in history, a higher court in Europe has ruled that large emitters can be held responsible for the consequences of their greenhouse gas emissions.”
— Roda Verheyen, lawyer for plaintiff Saúl Luciano Lliuya
Why this matters:
As climate change escalates, courts are emerging as battlegrounds for accountability. Lawsuits like the one filed by Luciano Lliuya reflect the frustration of people whose homes and livelihoods are threatened by floods, fires, droughts, and other climate-related disasters, yet who see little recourse through politics or diplomacy. Though his specific claim failed, the German court’s recognition of potential corporate liability for emissions lays the groundwork for a wave of new climate litigation. Legal systems are starting to catch up with scientific consensus: Emissions don’t respect borders, and neither should responsibility. This is especially important as wealthier nations and corporations disproportionately contribute to global emissions, while the consequences often hit poorer communities hardest.
A massive glacier collapse in southern Switzerland has buried most of the evacuated village of Blatten under mud, rock, and ice, leaving one person missing and raising the threat of blocked river flows.
A large section of the Birch Glacier broke off above the Lötschental valley, releasing a surge of debris that covered about 90% of Blatten, a village of 300 people that had been evacuated on May 19.
Authorities said one person remains missing after the collapse, which also buried the Lonza riverbed and could lead to dammed water and further hazards.
Emergency services closed access to the valley, while Swiss President Karin Keller-Sutter expressed support for the displaced community, promising solidarity.
Key quote:
“An unbelievable amount of material thundered down into the valley.”
— Matthias Ebener, spokesperson for local authorities in the southwestern canton of Valais
Why this matters:
Switzerland’s Alpine villages have long been seen as stable havens, but melting glaciers and destabilized mountain slopes are turning these once-predictable landscapes into zones of mounting risk. Climate change accelerates glacial melt, reducing the ice that once held rocky slopes in place and increasing the chances of sudden collapses. What happened in Blatten is a warning: As permafrost thaws and weather patterns shift, communities built on centuries of tradition may face more frequent and violent geological threats. It’s not only about property loss or emergency response — these disasters also reshape the land and alter water systems, from river flow to potable water supplies.
China invested more in overseas wind and solar energy projects than in coal from 2022 to 2023, a first for its Belt and Road Initiative, though older coal projects are still coming online.
A Boston University analysis found 68% of China’s overseas energy investments in 2022–2023 went to solar and wind, up from just 13% between 2000 and 2021.
While new coal plant financing has stopped, earlier investments continue to result in new coal power plants coming online, which could emit as much CO₂ annually as Austria.
China’s shift is partly driven by a need to export surplus renewable technology amid economic challenges and has included a recent $51 billion pledge to support low-carbon energy in Africa.
Key quote:
China has built “the world’s largest and fastest-growing renewable energy system as well as the largest and most complete new energy industrial chain.”
— Xi Jinping, president of China
Why this matters:
The shift in China's overseas energy financing has far-reaching implications for both global carbon emissions and the geopolitics of clean energy. While Beijing's move away from coal-backed infrastructure projects aligns with climate goals, the follow-through on existing fossil fuel investments continues to embed long-term carbon pollution in developing nations. These coal projects, built decades after wealthy nations began cutting back on such infrastructure, risk locking lower-income countries into emissions-intensive economies just as the global push to decarbonize accelerates. Environmental groups remain concerned about how this dual strategy affects vulnerable regions, especially as countries in Africa and Southeast Asia weigh economic growth against environmental health. With the U.S. government retreating from global climate cooperation under the Trump administration, China’s approach may increasingly shape which technologies and environmental practices take hold in emerging markets.
President Donald Trump’s National Energy Dominance Council, created to expand fossil fuel infrastructure and reduce regulations, has remained largely opaque in its actions and leadership nearly 100 days after its launch.
The National Energy Dominance Council, chaired by Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, has no public meeting records, clear staffing details, or website, raising questions about its transparency and daily operations.
The council has supported major fossil fuel projects, including the stalled Constitution pipeline and Alaska liquefied natural gas, while pushing agencies to accelerate infrastructure permits and remove regulatory hurdles.
Critics say the reliance on executive orders limits long-term policy impact, especially for infrastructure that takes years to develop, and point to policy whiplash between administrations as a deterrent to investment.
Key quote:
“It’s not particularly transparent.”
— Roger Pielke Jr., senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute
Why this matters:
How a president shapes energy policy can have deep, lasting effects on both the environment and the economy — but how that policy gets made matters just as much. The National Energy Dominance Council is a high-level advisory body with significant influence over U.S. energy decisions, yet its operations are largely hidden from public view. This lack of transparency makes it difficult for citizens, advocates, and even lawmakers to track how energy strategies are being crafted and who is making those decisions. At stake are major fossil fuel infrastructure projects — pipelines, LNG terminals, and drilling operations — that can contribute to climate change, air and water pollution, and community disruption. While supporters of the council tout reduced energy prices and streamlined permitting, critics argue that bypassing legislative processes weakens oversight and creates instability for developers and communities alike.
Cities are taking the lead on climate change, rolling out tangible solutions like green spaces, clean energy, and weatherized housing even as the Trump administration pulls back on environmental efforts.
Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb is pushing to place every resident within a 10-minute walk of a park by 2045, while also targeting net-zero emissions for all buildings by 2050.
Cities including New York, Seattle, Boston, and D.C. are investing in energy-efficient housing, solar incentives, and heat pumps to cut costs and emissions.
As federal climate policy stalls, mayors are leveraging local momentum to improve health, lower living costs, and stimulate regional economies through green jobs.
Key quote:
“We as elected officials have to do a better job of articulating how this important part of public policy is connected to the everyday lived experience.”
— Justin Bibb, mayor of Cleveland
Why this matters:
As federal climate initiatives recede under the Trump administration, cities are stepping up as engines of environmental action, using their nimbleness and proximity to communities to reshape daily life. Urban heat, air pollution, and unaffordable utilities hit low-income residents hardest — often compounding the health impacts of environmental injustice. By making neighborhoods greener and buildings more efficient, mayors aim to ease the cost of living while improving public health for everyone. That’s critical in cities like Cleveland, where asthma, heat vulnerability, and economic inequality collide. Local actions such as planting trees, installing solar panels, and replacing gas stoves with electric alternatives reduce emissions but also clean the air and make homes safer.
These improvements ripple outward: Urban demand for renewables drives rural solar development, while electric school buses made in Appalachian factories get kids to class without belching diesel fumes. As cities absorb the shocks of climate change and federal indifference, the choices mayors make now could shape not just local resilience, but national economic and environmental futures.
