More stories

  • in

    Biden Administration Restricts Development in West to Protect Sage Grouse

    Limits on building energy projects on at least 34.5 million acres could strongly protect the iconic Western bird. But the incoming Trump administration may reverse the rule.The Biden administration on Friday issued final regulations designed to protect the greater sage grouse, a speckled brown bird with a sprawling habitat across 10 Western states.The move to safeguard the iconic species would limit drilling and mining on federal lands as well as the development of clean energy such as solar and wind power.But the plan could soon be upended: President-elect Donald J. Trump has pledged to increase oil and gas development on public lands, and he sought to weaken sage grouse habitat restrictions in his first term.The conservation effort is part of a long tug of war between environmentalists and the drilling and mining industries over wildlife habitat across the Western states. The habitat of the grouse has shrunk in recent years due to mining and other industrial activity, along with wildfire and drought linked to climate change. Once abundant, the greater sage grouse, a bulbous bird with a fan of tail feathers that nests on the ground, is teetering toward endangered status.The sage grouse population has declined about 80 percent since 1965, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.“For too long, a false choice has been presented for land management that aims to pit development against conservation,” Interior Secretary Deb Haaland said in a statement. “This administration’s collaborative work has demonstrated that we can do both successfully.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Israel Struck Air Defenses Around Critical Iranian Energy Sites, Officials Say

    Israel’s attacks on Iran early Saturday destroyed air-defense systems set up to protect several critical oil and petrochemical refineries, as well as systems guarding a large gas field and a major port in southern Iran, according to three Iranian officials and three senior Israeli defense officials.The sites targeted by Israel, according to the officials, included defenses at the sprawling Bandar Imam Khomeini petrochemical complex, in Khuzestan Province; at the major economic port Bandar Imam Khomeini, adjacent to it; and at the Abadan oil refinery. Air-defense systems were also struck in Ilam Province, at the refinery for the gas field, called Tange Bijar, said the officials, one of them with Iran’s oil ministry.The Iranian and Israeli officials familiar with the attacks spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence.Israel’s destruction of the air-defense systems has raised deep alarm in Iran, the three Iranian officials said, as critical energy and economic hubs are now vulnerable to future attacks if the cycle of retaliation between Iran and Israel continues.“Israel is sending a clear message to us,” said Hamid Hosseini, an expert on Iran’s oil and gas industry and a member of the Iran-Iraq Chamber of Commerce. “This can have very serious economic consequences for Iran, and now that we understand the stakes we need to act wise and not continue the tensions.”Iran’s military announced that four soldiers working with air defenses were killed in Israel’s attacks. The Iranian media said the casualty numbers would probably increase.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    U.N. Report on Climate Goals Says Countries Have Made No Progress

    An annual assessment by the world body tracks the gulf between what countries have vowed to do and what they’ve actually achieved.One year after world leaders made a landmark promise to move away from fossil fuels, countries have essentially made no progress in cutting emissions and tackling global warming, according to a United Nations report issued on Thursday.Global greenhouse gas emissions soared to a record 57 gigatons last year and are not on track to decline much, if at all, this decade, the report found. Collectively, nations have been so slow to curtail their use of oil, gas and coal that it now looks unlikely that countries will be able to limit global warming to the levels they agreed to under the 2015 Paris climate agreement.“Another year passed without action means we’re worse off,” said Anne Olhoff, a climate policy expert based in Denmark and a co-author of the assessment, known as the Emissions Gap Report.The report comes a month before diplomats from around the world are scheduled to meet in Baku, Azerbaijan, for annual United Nations climate talks, where countries will discuss how they might step up efforts to address global warming.Lately, those efforts have faced huge obstacles.Even though renewable energy sources like wind and solar are growing rapidly around the world, demand for electricity has been rising even faster, which means countries are still burning more fossil fuels each year. Geopolitical conflicts, from the U.S.-China rivalry to war in places like Ukraine and Gaza, have made international cooperation on climate change harder. And rich countries have failed to keep their financial promises to help poor countries shift away from oil, gas and coal.At last year’s climate talks in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, representatives from nearly every nation approved a pact that called for “transitioning away from fossil fuels” and accelerating climate action this decade. But the agreement was vague on how to do so and on which countries should do what, and so far there has been little follow-through.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Fuel Tanker Explosion Leaves at Least 90 Dead in Nigeria

    Residents of a nearby town came to scoop up gasoline that had spilled from an overturned tanker, but then it exploded, setting off an inferno — an echo of several similar disasters in recent years.It’s become an all too common scene on Nigeria’s roads: A truck driver losing control of a fuel tanker. Residents rushing to collect the spilled gasoline, a pricey commodity. An explosion turning into a deadly inferno.Such an incident in northern Nigeria on Tuesday left more than 90 people dead and at least 50 others injured, the latest in a series of similar catastrophes in a country where road accidents with death tolls in the dozens occur nearly every month.Although road-related deaths in Nigeria are below Africa’s average, 5,000 people died and 31,000 others were injured in traffic accidents in the country last year, according to the government’s data. Poorly maintained roads, aging vehicles and loosely enforced safety regulations such as adherence to speed limits or use of safety belts have all been cited among the causes.In early September, at least 59 people died when a passenger truck and two other vehicles hit a toppled-over fuel tanker that had caught fire. In April, more than 100 vehicles burned in a similar explosion. And in July last year, at least eight people died as they were trying to siphon off fuel from an overturned truck in the country’s southwest.The episode on Tuesday night was set off when the driver of a fuel tanker swerved to avoid colliding with a truck on an expressway in the northern state of Jigawa, according to Lawan Shiisu, a police spokesman.The tanker overturned, spilling fuel onto the roadway. Then, residents from the town of Majia rushed to scoop it up, in what seemed like an easy way to collect an increasingly expensive commodity in Nigeria, where fuel prices have spiked in recent months.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Fears of a Global Oil Shock if the Mideast Crisis Intensifies

    The threat of an escalating conflict between Israel and Iran has created an “extraordinarily precarious” global situation, sowing alarm about the potential economic fallout.As the world absorbs the prospect of an escalating conflict in the Middle East, the potential economic fallout is sowing increasing alarm. The worst fears center on a broadly debilitating development: a shock to the global oil supply.Such a result, actively contemplated in world capitals, could yield surging prices for gasoline, fuel and other products made with petroleum like plastics, chemicals and fertilizer. It could discourage investment, hiring, and business expansion, threatening many economies — particularly in Europe — with the risk of recession. The effects would be potent in nations that depend on imported oil, especially poor countries in Africa.The possibility of this calamitous outcome has come into focus in recent days as Israel plots its response to the barrage of missiles that Iran unleashed last week. Some scenarios are seen as highly unlikely, yet still conceivable: An Israeli strike on Iranian oil installations might prompt Iran to target refineries in Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates, both major oil producers. Iranian-supported Houthi rebels claimed credit for an attack on Saudi oil installations in 2019. The Trump administration subsequently pinned the blame on Iranian forces.As it has done before, Iran might also threaten the passage of tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, the critical waterway that is the conduit for oil produced in the Persian Gulf, the source of nearly one-third of the world’s oil production. Such a move could entail conflict with American naval ships stationed in the region.That, too, is currently considered to be improbable. But the upheaval in the region in recent months has pushed out the parameters of possibility, rendering imaginable scenarios that were once dismissed as extreme.As Israel plots its next move, it has other targets besides Iranian oil installations. Iran would have reason for caution in crafting its own retaliation. Broadening the war to its Persian Gulf neighbors would invite a punishing response that could push Iran’s own economy — already bleak — to the brink of collapse.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    What an Escalating Middle East Conflict Could Mean for the Global Economy

    The biggest risk is a sustained increase in oil prices.For nearly a year since the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7 and the start of the fighting in Gaza, investment strategists have warned that a wider war could break out in the Middle East, crimping the world’s oil supply and sending shock waves throughout the global economy.The markets have generally shrugged off the potential of a broader conflict: The price of oil has remained largely subdued, with traders reassured by the world’s plentiful supply.But after Iran launched a barrage of missiles at Israel on Tuesday, oil prices began to rise as the market appeared to factor in the risk of a growing regional conflict. After President Biden said on Thursday that there had been “discussions” about support for an Israeli attack on Iran’s oil facilities, the price of Brent crude, the global oil benchmark registered its biggest weekly gain in more than a year.“Investors are finally paying attention to the Middle East after having decided it wasn’t going to move the needle,” said Tina Fordham, a former chief global political analyst at Citi who now runs an independent consultancy.“It’s not a perfect storm yet,” she said, “but it’s a constellation of risks coming together at a time when market systems still haven’t gotten comfortable that we’ve avoided a hard economic landing.”Everyone is watching Israel’s next move. Attacking Iran’s oil infrastructure or nuclear facilities, for example, would intensify the conflict. Biden has said he will not support an attack on Iran’s nuclear sites, and yesterday cautioned Israel against hitting Iran’s oil fields. “The risk is not zero, which means it’s high enough to consider different scenarios that range from all-out conflict that curtails energy access to a peaceful off-ramp,” said Ronald Temple, the chief market strategist for Lazard’s financial advisory and asset management business.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    What to Know: How Israel Could Retaliate Against Iran

    Iran has a number of sensitive sites, including oil infrastructure, military installations and nuclear facilities.Iran and Israel avoided direct confrontation for years, fighting a shadow war of secret sabotage and assassinations. But the two countries are now moving closer to open conflict, after the Israeli invasion of southern Lebanon this week and Tehran’s ballistic missile barrage on Israel, its second in less than six months.Israel seems prepared to strike Iran directly, in a more vigorous and public way than it has before. Iran has a number of sensitive targets, including oil production sites, military bases and nuclear sites.Here’s an overview of what an Israeli attack could look like.Iran’s oil industry More

  • in

    Across the World, Diplomats Gird for a Trump Assault on Climate Action

    Some leaders insist that the global clean energy transition will happen with or without the United States.Climate negotiators from Europe, Latin America and some island nations are bracing for the potential return to the world stage of Donald J. Trump, who withdrew the United States from the fight against global warming during his first term.Nations will press forward without the United States if they must, according to climate negotiators who gathered in New York last week during the United Nations General Assembly. But the first Trump presidency was a setback in the climate fight, and a repeat would slow things down at a critical point when scientists say efforts need to speed up.“I don’t want this to happen, of course,” said Laurence Tubiana, who served as France’s climate ambassador during the creation of the 2015 Paris agreement, referring to a potential Trump victory. “But I think there will be a sentiment that we have to double down on the Paris agreement framework. I think everybody’s preparing for that.”The night before Donald J. Trump won the presidency in 2016, an adviser to developing nations in global climate negotiations declared, “No one believes Trump can win, so no real Plan B here!”After he beat Hillary Clinton to win the White House, Mr. Trump kept the world guessing for months about whether the United States would remain a global partner on climate change. Many leaders reserved early judgment, hopeful that people like Mr. Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, would convince him to stay in. They didn’t.Mr. Trump, who has dismissed global warming as a “hoax,” made the United States the first and only country to withdraw from the 2015 Paris agreement that calls on countries to cut the pollution from oil, gas and coal that is dangerously heating the planet. The Trump administration also worked with major oil producers like Saudi Arabia to weaken global pledges around fossil fuels. President Biden rejoined the Paris agreement on his first day in office.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More