Report The Panel agreed on the outline of the 2027 IPCC Methodology Report on Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies, Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (Additional guidance) at its 63rd Session held in Lima, Peru from 27-30 October 2025 (Decision IPCC-LXIII-6). The report will be a single Methodology Report comprising an Overview Chapter and six volumes consistent with the format of the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. The structure of the Methodology Report is consistent with the 2006 IPCC Guidelines so as to make it easier for inventory compilers to use this Methodology Report with the 2006 IPCC Guidelines. Topics that will be addressed include: Transport, injection and sequestering of CO2 in relation to enhanced oil, gas, and coal-bed methane recovery Production of products containing or derived from captured and/or removed CO2 Carbonation of cement and lime-based structures Soil carbon sinks and related emissions enhanced through biochar and weathering and other elements Coastal wetlands carbon dioxide removal types not in previous IPCC Guidelines as well as additional information on mangroves, tidal marshes and seagrass in coastal waters Durable biomass products Carbon dioxide capture from combustion and process gases Direct air capture Carbon dioxide utilisation Carbon dioxide transport including cross border issues Carbon dioxide injection and storage CO2 removal through direct capture of CO2 from water already processed by inland and coastal facilities; and related elements across the range of categories of the IPCC Guidelines. The national greenhouse gas inventory includes sources and sinks occurring within the territory over which a country has jurisdiction. Over 150 experts are expected to participate in the writing process, which will be completed by 2027. The participants will be selected by the Task Force Bureau taking into account scientific and technical expertise, geographical and gender balance to the extent possible in line with Appendix A to the Principles Governing IPCC Work. The First Lead Authors’ meeting will be held in Rome, Italy, in April 2026. Preparatory Work The decision by the Panel to prepare this Methodology Report was informed by the work of experts at the scoping meeting held in Copenhagen, Denmark, from 14-16 October 2024. Prior to the scoping meeting, an expert meeting was held at Vienna, Austria 1-3 July 2024. These meetings considered Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) methods mentioned in the AR6 WGIII Report as a starting point for discussion and noted that several CDR activities have been already covered by the existing IPCC Guidelines. More Information The IPCC Secretary has written to national government focal points inviting nominations of authors by 12 December 2025.

Fast Facts Medicaid programs that cover prescription drugs are generally required to cover drugs that are (1) FDA approved and (2) made by a manufacturer that participates in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. 13 Medicaid programs didn’t cover Mifeprex and its generic equivalent, Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg, when required. These drugs are used for medical abortion. We recommended the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services ensure Medicaid programs comply with federal requirements for covering Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg. We also reiterated our 2019 recommendation on Mifeprex, which hasn’t been implemented. White pills spilling from a pill bottle. Skip to Highlights Highlights What GAO Found Medicaid programs that choose to cover outpatient prescription drugs are required to cover all Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drugs for their medically accepted indications when those drugs are made by a manufacturer that participates in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program (MDRP), except as outlined in federal law. The FDA has approved two drugs—Mifeprex in 2000 and its generic equivalent in 2019, referred to as Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg—for the medical termination of an intrauterine pregnancy, known as a medical abortion. Danco Laboratories and GenBioPro are the exclusive manufacturers of Mifeprex and Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg, respectively, and both manufacturers participate in the MDRP. Medicaid programs in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico cover prescription drugs and participate in the MDRP. According to officials from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)—the federal agency within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) responsible for ensuring Medicaid programs’ compliance—none of the MDRP’s statutory exceptions apply to Mifeprex or Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg. Thus, these 52 Medicaid programs must cover these drugs when prescribed for medical abortion in circumstances eligible for federal funding, such as when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. GAO identified gaps in Medicaid programs’ coverage of Mifeprex and Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg. Officials from 35 of the 49 programs who responded to GAO questions said their programs covered Mifeprex and Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg for medical abortion, as of December 31, 2024. In contrast, officials from 13 programs told GAO their programs did not cover either drug for medical abortion. An official from the remaining program did not specify the medical indications for which its program covered the drugs. Medicaid Programs’ Coverage of Danco Laboratories’ Mifeprex and GenBioPro’s Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg, as of December 31, 2024 Note: For more details, see fig. 1 in GAO-25-107911. State officials’ responses to GAO’s questions indicated that some states may not be complying with the MDRP requirements for covering Mifeprex and Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg. However, CMS has not determined the extent to which states comply with the MDRP requirements for these drugs. CMS officials told GAO they were not aware of the following: Nine programs did not cover Mifeprex and Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg for any medical indication, as of December 31, 2024; GAO reported four of these programs did not cover Mifeprex in 2019. Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg was not available at the time of GAO’s 2019 report. Four additional Medicaid programs did not cover either drug when prescribed for medical abortion, as of December 31, 2024. CMS was not aware of these coverage gaps, in part, because it had not implemented GAO’s 2019 recommendation to take actions to ensure Medicaid programs comply with MDRP requirements to cover Mifeprex. CMS also has not taken actions related to the coverage of Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg, as of August 2025. Without such actions, CMS lacks assurance that Medicaid programs comply with MDRP requirements and Medicaid beneficiaries may lack access to these drugs when appropriate. Why GAO Did This Study GAO was asked to describe Medicaid programs’ coverage of mifepristone. This report examines Medicaid programs’ coverage of Mifeprex and Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg, among other things. GAO reviewed laws and CMS guidance on the MDRP, and coverage of Mifeprex and Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg. GAO also sent written questions to officials from the 52 Medicaid programs that participate in the MDRP regarding their coverage of these drugs, and reviewed officials’ responses from the 49 programs that provided GAO information. Recommendations GAO reiterates its 2019 recommendation that CMS take actions to ensure states’ compliance with MDRP requirements to cover Mifeprex. GAO also recommends that CMS determine the extent to which states comply with federal Medicaid requirements regarding coverage of GenBioPro’s Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg, and take actions, as appropriate, to ensure compliance. In response to the recommendation, HHS noted it is reviewing applicable law and will determine the best course of action to address it moving forward. Recommendations for Executive Action Agency Affected Recommendation Status Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services The Administrator of CMS should determine the extent to which states comply with federal Medicaid requirements regarding coverage of GenBioPro's Mifepristone Tablets, 200 mg, and take actions, as appropriate, to ensure compliance. (Recommendation 1) Open Actions to satisfy the intent of the recommendation have not been taken or are being planned. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information. Full Report Full Report (11 pages)

We run in-person continuing professional development (CPD) sessions for primary teachers from our London and Keyworth offices. If you’re a teacher following the National Curriculum in England or Wales and want to get to grips with rocks, fossils, mountains, volcanoes and other geology teaching in the primary curriculum, join us for a session of lessons and demos you can take straight into the classroom. There are Primary Science Teacher CPD sessions on Rocks, fossils and soils on Wednesday 4th and Thursday 5th March 2026 The following sessions are available, please click on the links to reserve your place: Wednesday 4th March – Natural History Museum, London Rocks, fossils and soils Thursday 5th March – BGS Keyworth Rocks, fossils and soils Tuesday 17th March – BGS Keyworth Plate tectonics, volcanoes and earthquakes Relative topics public engagement

05.12.2025 – The European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change, established under the European Climate Law, will continue to be supported in its second term (2026-2030) by Ottmar Edenhofer. The Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) has now been appointed by the Management Board of the European Environment Agency in Copenhagen for another four-year term on the Advisory Board, beginning on 24 March 2026. Advising EU policymakers on the path to the declared goal of climate neutrality: PIK Director Ottmar Edenhofer. Photo: PIK/Karkow The Advisory Board gives independent advice and produces reports on EU policies, and their coherence with the Climate Law and the EU’s commitments under the Paris Agreement. It consists of 15 high-level scientific experts covering a wide range of relevant fields. Edenhofer is serving as the Advisory Board’s current Chair during its first term (2022-2026). Highlights during this period have included scientific recommendations for an ambitious EU climate target for 2040, an analysis of the action needed to achieve climate neutrality, and a study on scaling up atmospheric carbon removals. “I am very thankful for the great opportunity to continue supporting EU climate policy in this service role for the next four years,” says Edenhofer, who is also Professor for The Economics and Politics of Climate Change at the Technische Universität Berlin. “The European Union has taken some important steps in recent years towards its declared goal of climate neutrality by 2050. It remains important to make climate policy cost-effective, socially balanced and consistent with the requirements of an internationally competitive economy. As a member of the Advisory Board, I will do my best to provide scientific advice to policymakers on this task.” The composition of the Advisory Board for the next four-year term has now been decided through an open, fair and transparent selection process lasting several months. The decision on who will chair the body in future is not expected until beginning of the second term. The other members of the Advisory Board in the second term are: • Annela Anger-Kraavi – University of Cambridge • Constantinos Cartalis – National and Kapodistrian University of Athens • Suraje Dessai – University of Leeds’ School of Earth, Environment, and Sustainability • Laura Díaz Anadón – University of Cambridge • Vera Eory – Scotland’s Rural College • Lena Kitzing - Technical University of Denmark • Kati Kulovesi – University of Eastern Finland • Lars J. Nilsson – Lund University • Åsa Persson – KTH Royal Institute of Technology’s Climate Action Centre • Keywan Riahi – International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis • Jean-François Soussana – French National Research Institute for Agriculture, Food and the Environment • Giorgio Vacchiano – University of Milan • Detlef van Vuuren – PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency • Zinta Zommers – University of Toronto

Join us for Geo-Explorers, our brand new after-school kids’ club for children aged eight to eleven based at our main campus in Keyworth, Nottinghamshire. The clubs run in five-week cohorts and cost £30 for all five sessions. Courses will run between 16:00 and 17:00 on: Programme 1 – 25 February to 25 March Programme 2 – 22 April to 20 May Relative topics public engagement

24 February 2026 7 min read Key points Countries that align investment signals with electricity system build-out will convert spending into delivered capacity faster and at lower cost. CSIRO’s role is to reduce technical and cost risks so industry can adopt lower-emissions solutions with confidence. The scale of our current and historic greenhouse gas emissions means carbon capture and storage is imperative. CSIRO director of energy, Dr Dietmar Tourbier, is often asked about 2050 – Australia’s long-term net-zero destination. But as 2026 begins, his focus is drawn to a much closer horizon. “It’s often easy to focus on 2050 as that all-important target,” Dr Tourbier said. “But there’s a nearer-term deadline posing more questions.” According to data from the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO), renewables made up 51 per cent of the National Electricity Market (NEM) in the fourth quarter of 2025. This is a significant achievement but brings Australia’s goal of reaching 82 per cent renewable electricity by 2030 firmly under the microscope. © Australian Government (Austrade) Growing renewable capacity comes as global investment in energy systems accelerates at an unprecedented pace. According to the International Energy Agency, global energy investment was slated to reach a record $3.3 trillion in 2025 , with clean energy technologies attracting more than twice the investment flowing to fossil fuels. Yet even as spending on renewable generation surges, investment in grids and system integration continues to lag, and system constraints are emerging as a shared challenge across advanced economies. Renewables are becoming the default source of new supply, so the decisive question is no longer whether clean energy can be built cheaply, but who has the capability, coordination and institutional leverage to navigate system bottlenecks? “Internationally, capital investment in clean energy is becoming more selective not because clean energy is unproven, but because the risks now sit in grid integration, approvals, execution and operation rather than the generation technology itself,” Dr Tourbier said. “Countries that can align investment signals with system build-out – rather than generation alone – will convert spending into delivered capacity faster and at lower cost. What will determine success by 2030, Dr Tourbier argued, is whether Australia can successfully engage with communities, develop and reskill workforces and ultimately build the necessary infrastructure. Dr Dietmar Tourbier, CSIRO Energy Director. The electricity transition While Australia’s electricity sector remains the fastest-moving part of the transition, Dr Tourbier is clear that scaling renewables is no longer just about building more generation. “We need to move from where we are now – around 50 per cent renewables – to more than 80 per cent by 2030 while rapidly expanding capacity and doubling or even tripling energy throughput by 2050,” he said. “And we have to do that while keeping the grid stable and reliable.” That systems-level challenge sits at the heart of the Australian Research in Power Systems Transition (AR-PST) initiative, a collaboration between CSIRO, AEMO, universities and international research partners. The work focuses on how a highly distributed, renewables-dominated grid can operate securely at scale. “In industries such as aerospace, people understand that distributed systems are often more reliable than centralised ones,” Dr Tourbier said. “In energy, there’s still a perception that moving away from centralised generation makes the system less stable. From a systems perspective, that’s not true – if you do it right.” Australia’s long, geographically stretched grid means it is encountering challenges earlier than many other countries – making the next five years even more decisive. “By 2030, Australia needs to make distributed generation work, supporting the grid services that currently depend on large scale synchronous generators,” Dr Tourbier said. “The technologies around grid-forming inverters, demand response, and time-shifting consumption need to be in place as large scale coal retires.” Industry and transport Beyond electricity, Dr Tourbier sees significant opportunities for near-term gains in industry and transport, particularly where emissions are tied to heat. CSIRO’s role, he said, is to reduce technical and cost risks so industry can adopt lower-emissions solutions with confidence. “For Australia’s energy-intense industries, lower-temperature processes can be electrified or served by solar thermal, and higher-temperature processes can also be addressed using direct renewable heat,” Dr Tourbier said. Concentrated solar thermal technologies, which directly convert sunlight into heat, offer promise for industrial applications where high temperatures – not electrons – are the primary requirement. Dr Tourbier points to concentrated solar thermal approaches capable of reaching temperatures above 1000°C, with the potential to deliver industrial heat at a lower cost than gas. “If heat is what you need, solar thermal can make a lot of sense as converting heat directly can be much more efficient,” he said. In transport, the most immediate gains remain in electrification. “Electric vehicles are on a good trajectory, but it’s critical charging infrastructure keeps pace,” Dr Tourbier said. Other parts of the transport system are more complex. Sectors such as aviation, shipping and rail face harder-to-solve challenges, with fewer near-term alternatives. But progress wherever possible still matters. “Every gain we make now buys us time,” Dr Tourbier said, “and creates space for the more difficult parts of the system to catch up.” The most immediate sustainability gains in transport remain in electrification. Carbon management: An unavoidable reality Even with rapid electrification, Dr Tourbier was unequivocal that carbon management technologies will be essential to meeting Australia’s climate goals. While acknowledging the valid concerns around cost and corporate accountability, the scientific consensus is clear: carbon capture and storage is a proven and necessary solution to achieve deep emissions reductions. “Reaching net zero will require carbon capture,” Dr Tourbier said. “The scale of our current and historic greenhouse gas emissions means there’s no way around that.” Hydrocarbons represent the majority of Australia’s energy flows , providing a significant contribution to the national economy with more than three quarters of Australia’s coal, gas and oil production exported. Australia’s geology offers significant potential for long-term carbon storage – for domestic purposes and potentially as a future foreign investment revenue stream. The challenge is cost, scale and social licence. “Our target is to get carbon capture from air (direct air capture) below $100 per tonne,” Dr Tourbier said, comparing this to current costs of closer to $1000 per tonne. “By 2030, I’d like to see a demonstrated project achieving a much lower cost. “Augmenting global industry knowledge on how CO2 reacts when stored in geological formations over time is another driver, helping to build confidence in the long-term integrity of storage sites.” The real challenge Across all three pillars, Dr Tourbier returns to a consistent theme: technology is not the limiting factor. “We need to bring the public along with this – not just to accept infrastructure, but to participate in the transition,” he said. CSIRO’s social science research, including a 2024 national survey of over 6700 Australians, shows support for renewables alongside clear priorities around affordability, energy security and emissions reduction. Combined with CSIRO’s applied science, such research informs the agency’s residential energy efficiency work. Australia’s ~12 million homes account for a quarter of our nation’s electricity use and 10 per cent of our total carbon emissions. CSIRO’s housing research continues to drive energy efficiency, comfort and sustainability across 90 per cent of new Australian homes. This work is being extended to existing homes through collaboration with the banking and real estate sectors, and government. Looking to 2030, CSIRO’s new National Energy Analysis Centre (NEAC) combines whole-of-system modelling with a “living lab” concept, allowing households and businesses to share energy data and receive insights into how they use, manage and reduce their energy costs. “At the end of the day, what matters most to people is cost,” Dr Tourbier said. “CSIRO’s role is to keep innovating and drive down the cost of the transition – for industry, for households, and for government.” While much of CSIRO’s focus is domestic, Dr Tourbier sees the next five years as a critical window for Australia to step into a stronger regional leadership role, particularly in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific. “Rather than doing everything ourselves, the bigger impact comes from working with other countries, multinational companies and supply chains to align research capability, international investment and industrial demand,” he said. “This is something we must accelerate now – not in another decade.” A marathon, not a sprint Dr Tourbier is conscious that the transition risks public momentum if it feels endless. “This is a marathon, not a sprint,” he said. “Don’t think about the whole run; think about smaller milestones instead.” For him, 2030 is one of those milestones. CSIRO’s flagship GenCost report highlights the challenges and opportunities of reaching 2030 targets just in the electricity sector, and recent government programs show that progress there can be both rapid and unpredictable. Home battery installations, for example, have surged since July 2025, when systems became eligible for the Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme . In just one year, the scale of battery capacity being installed is set to match the storage capacity of the Snowy Hydro scheme. This rapid uptake demonstrates the fluidity of Australia’s energy transition and the ability for Australia’s households to collectively drive major change. “The technologies and the drive to innovate is there,” Dr Tourbier said. “That gives me confidence that the energy transition can evolve, sometimes faster than we expect and in areas that are challenging or complex." The question now is whether Australia can align investment, policy, and community trust quickly enough to turn potential into reality – within the next five years. This article was originally published by Energy Magazine . Discover more about Australia's energy research Coming up next23 Feb 2026 Reading the enemy: how genome science is reshaping the fight against wheat stem rust Previous post18 February 2026 Genomics: decoding the blueprints for Australia’s biodiversity