United News of Bangladesh

Pacific island nations are looking for ways to turn growing geopolitical interest in their strategically important region into funding to help them cope with the devastating effects of climate change. In Melekeok state on Palau's largest island, rough seas often push ocean water into people's homes. Residents have long called for communities to move inland, but a lack of funding has slowed the process. “We cannot move faster than climate change,” said Bol Sebalt, a 43-year-old resident of the low-lying coastal area. Sebalt has already moved to a new inland settlement being developed for Melekeok's roughly 300 residents. But she remains the only person living there because basic facilities, including plumbing, sewage systems and streetlights, are still incomplete due to slow and limited funding. Similar concerns are being raised by leaders from small Pacific island nations attending this week's Pacific Islands Forum summit in Palau. Many of these countries are among the most vulnerable to rising sea levels, stronger storms and other climate-related disasters. Pacific leaders renewed their call for major polluting countries to take stronger action to limit global warming and provide more financial support for countries already suffering climate damage. A recent United Nations report warned that the world is likely to cross the 1.5 degrees Celsius warming threshold set under the 2015 Paris climate agreement within the next few years. Vanuatu Climate Adaptation Minister Ralph Regenvanu said climate-related “loss and damage” is already a reality for his country, warning that the impact would include not only economic losses but also ancestral lands, cultural heritage and national identity. Tuvalu's climate change minister, Maina Talia, said keeping global warming as close as possible to 1.5 degrees Celsius remained essential for the survival of small island nations. “There is no other way out for us,” he said. “The only way out is to continue to push for 1.5, to stay alive, to stay in our countries.” Scientists in the region have also warned that warmer oceans could severely affect Pacific tuna fisheries, which account for about 30% of the world's tuna catch, as well as mangrove ecosystems that support marine life. Climate patterns such as El Niño have already brought drought to some parts of the Pacific and flooding to others. Climate change is often the main concern for Pacific leaders, but their annual summit is also increasingly affected by competition for influence between major powers, particularly China and its rivals. Palau President Surangel Whipps Jr. said countries seeking a greater role in the Pacific could instead demonstrate their commitment by funding climate projects. He has also promoted a plan to make Palau one of the world's first countries to run entirely on renewable energy. However, geopolitical tensions again surfaced at the summit after representatives from China and Taiwan were seated in the same row during the opening ceremony. Pacific leaders are also struggling to secure funding for the Pacific Resilience Facility, a regional fund designed to support community-based climate adaptation projects. The fund, which will be headquartered in Tonga, has yet to receive the level of financial support initially hoped for from major donors. Tongan Prime Minister Fatafehi Fakafanua said existing international financial institutions often take too long to deliver funds needed by Pacific communities. He said the Pacific Resilience Facility was designed to provide faster access to funding for urgent climate needs across the region. Meanwhile, smaller island nations are also questioning whether Australia and New Zealand, the Forum's two largest members and major aid donors, are doing enough to address climate change. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the country's shift away from fossil fuels could not happen overnight and would require greater renewable energy capacity. But Vanuatu's Regenvanu said Australia, as a major fossil fuel producer, should do more, including stopping future expansion of fossil fuel projects.

Light to moderate rain or thundershowers accompanied by temporary gusty winds are likely to occur at many places across the country in the next 24 hours from 9am Monday, said the Bangladesh Meteorological Department (BMD). According to a Met Office bulletin, rain or thundershowers are likely at many places in Khulna, Barishal, Chattogram and Sylhet divisions and at a few places in Rangpur, Rajshahi, Dhaka and Mymensingh divisions. Moderately heavy to heavy rainfall is also likely at places across the country, the bulletin said. The country’s highest rainfall of 58mm in the past 24 hours until 6am Monday was recorded at Kutubdia in Chattogram. Day and night temperatures may fall slightly across the country. The axis of the monsoon trough runs through Rajasthan, Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, the centre of the low over Assam and across the southern part of Bangladesh. The monsoon is fairly active over Bangladesh and strong over the North Bay, the bulletin said.  

The Trump administration has acknowledged in court filings that it canceled $7.6 billion in funding for hundreds of clean energy projects based on the political affiliation of the states receiving the grants. According to the court documents, the grants were canceled because the projects were located in 16 states that voted for Democrat Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election. The admission differs from previous statements by Energy Secretary Chris Wright and other administration officials, who had said the projects were dropped because they did not meet the country's energy priorities or represented poor use of taxpayer money. Democratic lawmakers and environmental groups criticized the disclosure, accusing the administration of using federal funding for political purposes. Representative Marcy Kaptur of Ohio and Senator Patty Murray of Washington said the court filing confirmed what they had long suspected—that nearly 300 energy projects were canceled simply because they were located in states that did not support President Donald Trump in the 2024 election. They called the move an abuse of power and urged congressional Republicans to hold the administration accountable. Last October, the Department of Energy announced that it had canceled 321 funding awards covering 223 projects, saying they failed to meet national energy needs or were not economically viable. The canceled projects included efforts to build battery manufacturing plants, develop hydrogen technology, modernize the electric grid and expand carbon capture systems. White House budget director Russell Vought defended the cuts at the time, saying funding intended to support what he described as the political left's climate agenda was being eliminated. The affected projects were located in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont and Washington—all states that supported Harris in the 2024 election. The funding cuts were challenged in court, while more than two dozen Democratic members of Congress requested a formal investigation by the Department of Energy's inspector general. The department's internal watchdog launched an inquiry in December. Earlier court filings had already indicated that grant selections were influenced by whether recipients were based in Democratic-leaning, or "blue," states. In the latest case, federal government lawyers also acknowledged using keywords related to diversity, gender, COVID-19 and vaccine hesitancy when reviewing projects to determine whether they conflicted with the administration's policy priorities. Environmental groups said the court filing showed the administration had prioritized politics over energy infrastructure. Holly Bender, chief program officer at the Sierra Club, said canceling the projects could lead to job losses, higher energy costs and increased pollution, while shifting billions of dollars toward fossil fuel projects instead of clean energy initiatives.

The Bangladesh Meteorological Department (BMD) has predicted light to moderate rain or thundershowers, accompanied by temporary gusty winds and lightning, in many parts of the country in the 24 hours commencing at 9:00am on Friday. According to the forecast, moderately heavy to heavy rainfall is likely at places over Rangpur, Mymensingh, Khulna, Barishal, Chattogram and Sylhet divisions during the period. In addition, light to moderate rain or thundershowers with temporary gusty winds and lightning flashes are likely at many places over Chattogram and Sylhet divisions, and at a few places over Rangpur, Rajshahi, Mymensingh, Dhaka, Khulna and Barishal divisions. Day temperatures may rise slightly, while night temperatures are expected to remain nearly unchanged across the country. The highest rainfall in the past 24 hours until 6:00am on Friday was recorded at 72mm in Sylhet. The BMD said the monsoon trough axis extends from Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Gangetic West Bengal and the centre of the low over Assam across the southern part of Bangladesh. It added that the monsoon is fairly active over Bangladesh and moderate to strong over the North Bay.

Bangladesh Meteorological Department (BMD) has forecast rains in all the divisions in 24 hours commencing 9 am on Wednesday. “Light to moderate rain/thunder showers accompanied by temporary gusty wind and lightning flashes are likely at many places over Chattogram & Sylhet divisions, at a few places over Rangpur, Rajshahi, Dhaka, Mymensingh, Khulna & Barishal divisions with moderately heavy to heavy falls at places over the country,” said a Met office bulletin. Day temperatures are likely to remain nearly unchanged while night temperatures may fall slightly across the country.

Alaska’s glaciers are highly vulnerable to rising temperatures, with new research showing that every 1 degree Celsius increase in average summer temperatures can extend glacier melting by about three weeks. The study, published in the journal Nature, also found that advanced satellite radar technology can track glacier changes more accurately and consistently than traditional optical methods. Led by researcher Albin Wells of Carnegie Mellon University, the study analysed data from nearly all Alaska glaciers larger than half a square mile between 2016 and 2024. Co-authors included David Rounce and Mark Fahnestock. Using radar data from Europe's Sentinel-1 satellites, researchers measured the number of "melt days" experienced by glaciers. More melt days mean a longer melting season and greater loss of ice. Unlike optical imaging, which depends on clear skies and daylight, synthetic aperture radar (SAR) can collect data through clouds and darkness, allowing scientists to monitor glaciers throughout the year. The study also found that short periods of extreme heat can significantly reduce the snow cover that protects glaciers. During unusually warm spells, glaciers lost up to 28% more protective snow than they do in normal years, exposing more ice to melting. Researchers said snowlines, which separate areas where glaciers gain snow from areas where they lose ice, are important indicators of glacier health. Rising temperatures push these snowlines higher, increasing the amount of exposed ice. One striking example came during Alaska’s 2019 heat wave, which lasted from late June to early July. Temperatures in many areas were 20 to 30 degrees Fahrenheit above average, and several records were broken, including a temperature of 90°F in Anchorage. According to the study, the heat wave pushed glacier snowlines nearly 350 feet higher than normal. Typically, glaciers would not reach those levels until about two months later, leading to greater ice loss. The findings also showed that glaciers near Alaska’s coast behave differently from those located farther inland. Coastal glaciers generally experience more summer melting but also receive more snowfall during winter, while inland glaciers respond differently to changing climate conditions. Researchers say the results provide a clearer picture of how glaciers are likely to respond to future warming and highlight the sensitivity of Alaska’s ice fields to both long-term climate change and short-term heat waves. Source: Science Daily

Scientists say the most extreme climate change scenarios once used in global projections are becoming less realistic, with both the worst and best-case futures now largely ruled out, reflecting how global emissions trends have shifted over time. A new set of seven climate scenarios suggests that while the most catastrophic warming outcomes are now less likely due to the gradual rise of renewable energy, the world is also no longer on track to meet the Paris Agreement’s most ambitious target of limiting warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas remain the primary driver of global warming. Although the growing use of cleaner energy sources like solar and wind has reduced the probability of the most extreme warming pathways, scientists say the transition has not been fast enough to prevent significant long-term temperature rise. The updated scenarios replace earlier projections that included both very high-emission futures and highly optimistic pathways. Researchers now say the upper-end projection has been revised downward to about 3.5°C of warming by the end of the century, compared to earlier estimates of around 4.5°C. However, even the most optimistic scenario now exceeds the 1.5°C threshold set in 2015 under the Paris climate accord. Scientists say the planet is currently about 1.3°C warmer than pre-industrial levels and is warming at a rate of roughly 0.1°C every five years. Even small increases, they warn, are intensifying extreme weather, water shortages and biodiversity loss. “There is kind of a narrowing of the futures. It cannot be as bad as we thought, but it cannot be as good as we hoped,” said Johan Rockström of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. Researchers say the world is now likely headed toward a “middle” pathway of around 3°C warming by 2100 if current policies continue. Experts also warn that even the best-case scenario would likely see temperatures overshoot 1.5°C for decades before any potential decline, assuming future carbon-removal technologies become viable at scale. “This is just physics,” said climate scientist Bill Hare. “We are losing the ability to limit warming even by two degrees without strong action.” Others stress that exceeding 1.5°C carries serious consequences, particularly for vulnerable nations such as small island states facing rising sea levels. The revision of older high-end scenarios, once widely used in climate research, has also sparked debate. Some scientists argue that extreme coal-heavy projections were never realistic, while others say they were useful as upper-bound possibilities for planning. Despite improvements in renewable energy costs and adoption, scientists caution that emissions are still high enough to lock in significant long-term warming. They also warn that natural climate feedbacks—such as carbon released from oceans, forests and permafrost—could add additional warming beyond human control. “The risks of climate change have not disappeared,” said study author Detlef van Vuuren. “We are still heading towards a future with significant climate impacts that we should avoid.”

Dhaka ranked 3rd among the world’s most polluted cities on Friday morning, with an Air Quality Index (AQI) of 144 recorded at 11:40 am. The air quality was categorised as ‘unhealthy for sensitive groups’, indicating a significant risk to public health, according to AQI standards. India’s Delhi topped the list with an AQI of 183 , Beijing’s China(149) is the second position. An AQI reading between 101 and 150 is considered ‘unhealthy for sensitive groups’, while 151–200 is classified as ‘unhealthy’. Levels of 201–300 are deemed ‘very unhealthy’, and readings above 301 are labelled ‘hazardous’, posing severe health risks. The AQI, which tracks daily air quality, indicates how polluted the air is and the potential health impact on residents. In Bangladesh, AQI measurements are based on five key pollutants: particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide (NO₂), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO₂), and ozone. Dhaka has long battled air pollution, with conditions typically worsening in winter and improving during the monsoon season. According to the World Health Organization, air pollution is responsible for an estimated seven million deaths worldwide each year, mainly from stroke, heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lung cancer, and acute respiratory infections.

Dhaka, the densely populated capital of Bangladesh, ranked 7th among the world’s most polluted cities on Wednesday morning, with an Air Quality Index (AQI) of 109 at 08:53 am. The air was classified as ‘Unhealthy for sensitive groups’, means air quality is poor enough to cause health effects in vulnerable people, such as breathing discomfort, but the general public is unlikely to be affected, according to the AQI scale. India’s Delhi, Pakistan’s Lahore and Nepal’s Kathmandu were the three most polluted cities, with AQI scores of 273, 208 and 190. An AQI between 101 and 150 is considered ‘unhealthy for sensitive groups’, while 151–200 is ‘unhealthy’, 201–300 is ‘very unhealthy’, and anything above 301 is ‘hazardous’ and can cause serious health problems. The AQI measures daily air quality, showing how clean or polluted the air is and what health effects people might experience. In Bangladesh, the AQI is based on five main pollutants: particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide and ozone. Dhaka has long faced serious air pollution. The situation usually gets worse in winter and improves during the monsoon season. The World Health Organization says air pollution causes around seven million deaths worldwide each year, mainly due to stroke, heart disease, chronic respiratory illness, lung cancer and acute infections.

Dhaka, the densely populated capital of Bangladesh, ranked fourth among the world’s most polluted cities on Wednesday morning, recording an Air Quality Index (AQI) of 151 at 11:58 am. The air quality was classified as ‘unhealthy’, indicating potential health risks for the general population, according to the AQI scale. Chiang Mai in Thailand,Hanoi in Vietnam and Kathmandu in Nepal occupied the top three positions on the list, with AQI scores of 175, 165 and 160 respectively. According to AQI standards, a reading between 101 and 150 is considered ‘unhealthy for sensitive groups’, 151 to 200 ‘unhealthy’, 201 to 300 ‘very unhealthy’, while levels above 301 are deemed ‘hazardous’, posing serious health risks. The AQI, which reports daily air quality, informs residents how clean or polluted the air is and highlights potential health effects. In Bangladesh, the AQI is calculated based on five key pollutants: particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and ozone. Dhaka has long struggled with air pollution. Air quality usually deteriorates in winter and improves during the monsoon season. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that air pollution causes about seven million deaths worldwide each year, primarily from stroke, heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lung cancer, and acute respiratory infections.