Climate change

President Trump on Thursday announced that grocery stories and air conditioning companies will be allowed to keep using high-polluting refrigerants for longer than they would have under a law he signed during his first administration.

“This was a tremendous burden, a tremendous cost,” said Trump, surrounded in the Oval Office by executives from supermarket chains including Kroger, Fairway, Neimann Foods and Piggly Wiggly. “It was making the equipment unaffordable, and the actual benefit was nothing.”

The move loosens rules meant to restrict hydroflourocarbons, a class of climate-damaging chemicals used in cooling equipment. HFCs are known as “super pollutants” because their impact on climate change can be tens of thousands of times greater than carbon dioxide during their shorter lifespans.

In the move Thursday, the Environmental Protection Agency extends the deadline for companies to comply with a 2023 rule transitioning refrigerators and air conditioners off HFCs and onto new cooling technologies. Reducing these chemicals and moving to cleaner refrigerants has long been a bipartisan issue.

Trump is also proposing exemptions from a rule requiring leak repairs on large-scale refrigeration systems.

The administration framed the changes as part of its effort to bring down high grocery costs. EPA administrator Lee Zeldin said the actions will save $2.4 billion for Americans and safeguard 350,000 jobs.

“Americans who wanted to be able to fix their equipment were instead being required to buy far more costly new equipment and that just doesn’t make any sense,” said Zeldin.

David Doniger, senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the move will not only harm the climate, but U.S. competitiveness in global refrigerant markets as well.

“The EPA is catering to a small group of straggling companies by derailing the shift away from these climate super-pollutants,” he said. “The industry at large supports the HFC phasedown and has already invested in making new refrigerants and equipment, currently installed in thousands of stores.”

Danielle Wright, executive director of the North American Sustainable Refrigeration Council, an environmental nonprofit, said any perceived near-term savings from the rollbacks will be outweighed by the future costs.

“Business owners are far more worried about the escalating cost of keeping aging, high‑global-warming-potential equipment running than they are about the cost of installing new, compliant systems,” she said.

Trump dismissed the climate concerns, saying his changes “are not going to have any impact on the environment.”

He said he wants to get rid of the technology transition rule entirely in the future.

Saturday Night Live UK’s cold open featured Peter Serafinowicz in a guest cameo as Nigel Farage, spoofing the Reform UK leader as Prime Minister in 2046 following the party’s sweeping local election wins.

Shaun Of The Dead actor Peter Serafinowicz made a surprise appearance playing Reform UK leader Nigel Farage as prime minister in an SNL UK sketch set in the year 2046.

The comedy programme kicked off on Saturday evening with a political skit depicting Mr Farage occupying Number 10, pulling pints at his desk while US President Donald Trump has seized control as the nation’s king.

The sketch took aim at the party’s landslide victories during this week’s local council and Scottish and Welsh elections. It began with ‘Mr Farage’ recording a personalised 120th birthday message for much-loved naturalist Sir David Attenborough, before Conservative party leader Kemi Badenoch (Ayoade Bamgboye) appeared as his deputy.

READ MORE: Chilling footage shows the final moments of frail man, 93, before 28-hour torture ordealREAD MORE: WHO issues update to people of Tenerife where hantavirus-stricken ship is headed

“Big news day, Prime Minister. Thanks to our deportations, the population of London is finally down to single fingers,” she said, drawing uproarious laughter from Mr Farage.

Taking a swipe at the continuing tensions between the US and Iran, she went on: “One last thing, King Trump assures us he has almost negotiated a ceasefire over the Strait of Hormuz.”

Mr Farage responds: “Phew, for a minute there, it felt like we were on the brink of World War Four.”

The pair jest that since their parties joined forces, they have been “unstoppable”, drawing a comparison to the spreading hantavirus, referencing the outbreak that has dominated news coverage in recent days. After checking the weather forecast – which shows London engulfed in flames, satirising climate change – the pair head out for a stroll before Sir Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner emerge from behind a bookshelf, which turns out to be a time machine.

The former deputy leader, portrayed by Celeste Dring, warns Sir Keir (George Fouracres) that unless he allows her to run the government, “this future will come to pass”, to which he replies he will “seize every moment” as Prime Minister.

When Mr Farage returns to the office accompanied by Mrs Badenoch, he queries who Sir Keir is, declaring himself the “big chungus” of the “great United Kingdom and the middle part of Wales”.

They warn they’ll have the Labour party leaders removed from the building by security guards, but Mrs Badenoch jokes: “We deported security.”

The sketch concluded with Al Nash emerging through the prime ministerial time machine portal dressed as Sir Winston Churchill to launch the show, leading into Ted Lasso star Hannah Waddingham’s opening monologue.

The award-winning actress made light of the “glamorous characters” she has portrayed throughout her career, before displaying pictures of less flattering parts such as her “sexy little turn as the shame nun” in hit TV series Game Of Thrones.

Throughout the episode, Waddingham took part in numerous sketches alongside the show’s inaugural cast, and was accompanied by Stargazing singer Myles Smith as the musical guest. The programme also marked Sir David’s landmark 100th birthday in its weekend news segment, with hosts Ania Magliano and Paddy Young sitting down to interview a rhino (Hammed Animashaun) for their take on the much-loved broadcaster.

The skit descended into mayhem when Sir David (Fouracres) burst onto the scene to grapple with the wild beast after it dared to criticise him.

The Sky Original production is filmed live in London, featuring a rotating guest host each week alongside the show’s regular cast, which comprises actor Hammed Animashaun and comedian Ania Magliano.

SNL UK returns to Sky and Now TV on May 16 for its series finale, with Sex Education star Ncuti Gatwa taking the hosting duties, accompanied by musical guest Holly Humberstone.

Saturday Night Live UK is available to watch on Sky and Now TV on Saturdays at 10pm.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom said his administration is “moving forward aggressively” to continue laying the groundwork for a giant tunnel beneath the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to replumb the state’s water system.

“We got to move faster. Move faster,” Newsom said to regulators during a speech Thursday at a conference held by the Assn. of California Water Agencies. “We all have to be held to a higher level of accountability.”

California’s 40th governor provided a chronological look back at his water policies since taking office in 2019 and asserted the need to continue his effort to modernize state infrastructure to provide for cities and farms into the future.

Newsom cast the tunnel as a “climate adaptation project,” noting that climate change is projected to shrink the amount of water the state can deliver with its current infrastructure.

With his term expiring at the end of the year, Newsom acknowledged that he will soon “pass the baton” on water policy to the next governor. Democrat or Republican, that person could decide the fate of his signature water project.

“The Delta Conveyance, if we had it last year alone, would have provided enough water, in terms of what we could have captured with an updated system, enough water for 9.8 million Californians’ needs for over a year,” Newsom said. “We’ve got to get that done.”

Water has been a focus of the Newsom administration since his first day in office, when the governor took his cabinet to Monterey Park Tract, a rural Central Valley community that lacked access to safe drinking water.

Described by Newsom as “the forever problem” in California, water policy is also among the most politically contentious issues in the state.

The tunnel would create a second route to transport water from new intakes on the Sacramento River to the south side of the Delta, where pumps send water into the aqueducts of the State Water Project.

The project is particularly acrimonious, drawing out geographical battles between north and south and thorny fights between officials who want to build the tunnel and environmentalists and Delta residents seeking to protect the local ecosystem and their way of life.

Newsom and other supporters have said the tunnel would protect the state’s water system as climate change intensifies severe droughts and deluges. Opponents call the project a costly boondoggle, arguing it’s not necessary and would destroy the Delta.

It’s been mired with regulatory hurdles and other challenges for years.

The State Water Resources Control Board is considering a petition by the Newsom administration to amend permits so water could be tapped where the tunnel intakes would be built.

There have also been other complications. A state appeals court in December rejected the state’s plan for financing the project, and the California Supreme Court in April declined to take up the case. The state Department of Water Resources said it still plans to issue bonds to finance the project.

Other court challenges by Delta-area counties and environmental groups are also pending.

Whether the project is ultimately built may hinge on whether large water agencies, including the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, decide to participate and pay for its building.

State officials have said that the tunnel, called the Delta Conveyance Project, ultimately would be paid for by participating water agencies.

The state estimated in 2024 that the tunnel would cost $20.1 billion, while opponents say it could cost three to five times more than that.

In the last seven years, California has invested $11 billion in water infrastructure, Newsom said.

The Democratic governor reflected on other parts of his water policies, saying he has prioritized securing funds to provide clean drinking water to more communities where Californians live with contaminated tap water.

He said while there has been progress in bringing safe drinking water to more communities, there is still “a lot more work to be done.”

Newsom touted his administration’s investment in replenishing groundwater in the Central Valley and its efforts supporting plans to build the Sites Reservoir near Sacramento.

Newsom said the Sites Reservoir is critical for the state’s future, and he indicated some frustration about the pace at which it’s advancing.

“We’ve got to do the groundbreaking at Sites,” he said. “If you can’t agree to an off-stream investment in this world of weather whiplash, we’re as dumb as we want to be.”

He said his administration has also made progress on environmental projects including restoring wetlands around the shrinking Salton Sea, removing dams on the Klamath River, and developing a strategy to help salmon, which have suffered major declines in recent years.

Touching on issues that generate heated debate, Newsom talked about a controversial plan for new water rules in the Delta that relies on so-called voluntary agreements in which water agencies would contribute funding for wetland habitat restoration projects and other measures.

Newsom described the approach, called the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes program, as a solution to break away from the traditional conflict-ridden regulatory approach and improve the Delta’s ecological health.

“Got to maintain the vigilance on these voluntary agreements. At peril, we go back to our old ways,” he said.

Environmental advocates argue that the proposed approach, which is widely supported by water agencies, would take too much water out of the Delta and threaten native fish that are already in severe decline.

Newsom said climate change is increasingly driving “weather whiplash” in California and that the state must prepare. He noted that his tenure included the extreme drought from 2020-22, followed by extremely wet conditions in 2023, which revived Tulare Lake on thousands of acres of farmland.

He said the state needs to manage water differently because the effects of climate change have been apparent over the last several years: “The hots were getting a lot hotter, the dries were getting a lot drier, and the wets were getting a lot wetter.”

In June 2017, with President Trump newly installed in office for the first time, one of the biggest battles with the administration was about oil. He’d just named the chief executive of Exxon Mobil, Rex Tillerson, as his secretary of State, even though great reporting — in this newspaper among others — had recently shown that the company knew all about, and lied all about, climate change as far back as the 1980s.

Back east, the attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts were trying to take the oil giant on, initiating investigations of the company to try to hold it accountable. Environmental advocates and consumer groups were pressing hard for California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris to join in, and she seemed to be considering it. Then she left the office to assume her new U.S. Senate seat, and the decision fell to her replacement, Xavier Becerra — now a leading candidate for California governor.

As I wrote in these pages at the time, it was a great test for him, and a great curiosity that he was staying silent, “since the rest of Sacramento is hard at work dealing with climate change.” I was not the only one who noticed. Seventy thousand Californians signed petitions demanding action. Eight California representatives in Congress — including Jared Huffman and Ted Lieu — sent him a letter demanding a “vigorous” inquiry and pointing out that it was particularly important because the newly elected Trump administration was clearly favoring the oil industry. “California has led the world in responding to the dangers of climate change, and we know that it will continue to do so,” they wrote. “You now have a leading role in that effort.” But ultimately Becerra did not have a leading role, or indeed any role at all: He punted, as this editorial page pointed out. What Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) is now trying to do by statute — immunize the big oil companies from prosecution for climate liability — Becerra accomplished by sheer silence.

In the years since, of course, California has paid a huge price for our inaction on climate. Just looking at wildfire, there were of course the great blazes that Los Angeles County will never forget in 2025, but also the 2020 August Complex fire in Humboldt and Mendocino counties, the 2021 Dixie fire up north, the 2017 conflagration across Napa and Sonoma counties, the 2017 Thomas fire in Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, the 2018 Camp fire that devastated Paradise — the list goes sadly on and on and on.

Meanwhile, Big Oil and its friends at Big Utility have racked up huge profits, and Californians have faced ever higher bills. An unhobbled oil industry played a huge role in reelecting Trump in 2024 and in taking us to war with Iran.

And through it all, during his years as attorney general, Becerra did little or nothing to help. As I said all those years ago, it’s a mystery why, though I fear the mystery gets clearer with each campaign funding filing over his long career. As California’s top prosecutor, he took big donations from oil industry giants such as Chevron, and also from energy companies Sempra and Southern California Edison. As a member of Congress, he took larger checks from Pacific Gas and Electric and Edison International.

This time around, as he seeks the governor’s office, Chevron has maxed out its contributions to his campaign, the first time they’ve found a gubernatorial candidate to back in a decade. Meanwhile, across the country, leading progressives have signed a pledge refusing fossil fuel donations. Another gubernatorial contender, Katie Porter, is among them. Needless to say, Becerra is not.

The California chapters of Third Act — a group of Americans over 60 that I helped found — canvassed their members last month and issued an endorsement of Tom Steyer, on the grounds that he had worked hard over the years to address energy and climate issues. Instead of taking money from Big Oil, he’s given money, time and counsel to those of us volunteering in the fight against the industry. In fact, I think that whether one is most concerned about lowering utility bills with clean energy or protecting California’s forests, beaches and insurance rates from the global warming threat, he’d be the most climate-conscious elected official in America.

But Third Act was also founded to help protect our democracy. And that means disconnecting public policy from campaign donations. We need leaders who will do the right thing for us, not for their donors. Steyer has called on Becerra to return his donations from Big Oil. That would be a start, but it doesn’t really make up for the wasted decade we’ll never get back.

Bill McKibben is the founder of Third Act and the author, most recently, of “Here Comes the Sun: A Last Chance for the Climate, a Fresh Chance for Our Civilization.”

As he reaches 100, broadcaster and naturalist Sir David Attenborough has spoken of the changes he has seen in his lifetime – and the horrifying consequences of climate change in the years to come

Legendary broadcaster Sir David Attenborough made a worrying prediction for 2030 – and predicted the state of the planet is likely to get worse after that. The iconic naturalist celebrates his 100th birthday on Friday (May 8) and he has long been heralded as the natural world’s biggest champion.

He has also been vocal about the threats facing the Earth. In 2020, as the world was in lockdown as a precaution against Covid-19, Sir David made what he called a “personal witness statement” about the threat of climate change. Many of the dire predictions he made about the world are beginning to come true.

Back in 2020 he warned that 10 years from that date, with much of the Amazon rainforest becoming a dry desert and the polar icecaps shrinking, the effects of climate change will become truly irreversible – and threaten the extinction of humanity.

As he released his Netflix documentary, A Life on Our Planet, Sir David made a personal appeal to world leaders. He said: “There are short-term problems and long-term problems. Politicians are tempted to deal with short-term problems all the time and neglect long-term problems.

“{Climate change] is not only a long-term problem, it is the biggest problem humanity has ever faced. Please examine it, and please respond.”

The prognosis for the rest of the century looks pretty bleak if Sir David’s predictions are to be believed. He said that if he had been born in 2020, instead of 1926, he would be witness to the full range of climate collapse: “In the 2030s, The Amazon Rainforest, cut down until it can no longer produce enough moisture, degrades into a dry savannah, bringing catastrophic species loss… and altering the global water cycle.

“At the same time, the Arctic becomes ice-free in the summer. Without the white ice cap, less of the sun’s energy is reflected back out to space. And the speed of global warming increases.”

By the 2040s, just 14 years from today, Sir David predicts: “Throughout the north, frozen soils thaw, releasing methane, a greenhouse gas many times more potent than carbon dioxide, accelerating the rate of climate change dramatically.”

Through the 2050s, as today’s schoolchildren reach middle age, the world’s seas will become a sterile desert: “As the ocean continues to heat and becomes more acidic, coral reefs around the world die. Fish populations crash.”

Into the 2080s, mankind truly becomes an endangered species: “Global food production enters a crisis as soils become exhausted by overuse. Pollinating insects disappear… and the weather is more and more unpredictable.”

The stable climate that has endured longer than human civilisation will be lost forever by 2100, Sir David says.

“Our planet becomes four degrees Celsius warmer,” he adds, “Large parts of the earth are uninhabitable. Millions of people rendered homeless. A sixth mass extinction event… is well underway.”

He describes these various tipping-points as “a series of one-way doors,” with each bringing irreversible change.”

As he muses on his long life, Sir David warren that someone born today who lives as long as he has will see almost unimaginable change: “Within the span of the next lifetime, the security and stability of the Holocene, our Garden of Eden… will be lost.”

Average global temperatures have risen by more than 1C since the 1850s. Since 2015, every successive year has brought record high temperatures – causing heatwaves, floods, droughts, and fires as well as irrevocable habitat loss for many species.

Sir David thinks that humanity is the species most under threat. He said: “I used to think this was about saving the planet, and now I realise it’s not …nature will always look after itself. It’s about saving us.”

He was one of the first to sound the alarm about humanity’s impact on the environment. In 1937, the total human population was around 2.3billion. Carbon in the atmosphere was measured at 280 parts per million, and 66% of the planet remained unspoiled wilderness: “Everywhere you’d go, there was wilderness. Sparkling coastal seas. Vast forests. Immense grasslands. You could fly for hours over the untouched wilderness,” Sir David said.

Sir David was one of the first to sound the alarm about humanity’s impact on the environment. In 1937, the total human population was around 2.3billion. Carbon in the atmosphere was measured at 280 parts per million, and 66% of the planet remained unspoiled wilderness: “Everywhere you’d go, there was wilderness. Sparkling coastal seas. Vast forests. Immense grasslands. You could fly for hours over the untouched wilderness,” Sir David said.

By 1960, less than 30 years later, the change was already measurable. The global population was now three billion, atmospheric carbon was measured at 315 parts per million, and the remaining wilderness had shrunk to 62%.

Fast forward to 1997, the population had more than doubled to almost six billion, carbon in the atmosphere had increased to 360 parts per million, and much more wilderness had been lost – now down to 46%.

“The global air temperature had been relatively stable till the ’90s,” Sir David said. “But it now appeared this was only because the ocean was absorbing much of the excess heat, masking our impact. It was the first indication to me that the earth was beginning to lose its balance.”

Unsustainable logging, overfishing, and above all the reckless use of fossil fuels was pushing the planet to a tipping point, he warned: “The average global temperature today is one degree Celsius warmer than it was when I was born,” he said in A Life on Our Planet,” speed of change that exceeds any in the last 10,000 years. Summer sea ice in the Arctic has reduced by 40% in 40 years.”

The wildlife that has been Sir David’s lifelong interest has been pushed to the margins: “Half of the fertile land on earth is now farmland. 70% of the mass of birds on this planet are domestic birds. The vast majority, chickens.

“We account for over one-third of the weight of mammals on earth. A further 60% are the animals we raise to eat. The rest, from mice to whales, make up just 4%.”

Despite the bleak outlook, Sir David says all hope is not lost. One is to stabilise population growth and another is to switch to renewable energy.

Environmentalists had something in their arsenal for Tuesday’s election they never did before: a billionaire benefactor willing to empty his pockets of tens of millions of dollars to bring climate change to the forefront of political debate and elect candidates committed to fighting global warming.

But California hedge fund titan Tom Steyer’s $74-million bet — most of it from his own wallet — yielded little payoff. On Tuesday, voters elected the most hostile Congress environmentalists have faced in years.

The Republicans who won control are already making plans to roll back President Obama’s signature emission reduction efforts, green-light the controversial Keystone XL pipeline that would transport Canadian tar sands oil to the U.S. Gulf Coast, and cancel subsidies for renewable energy.

Steyer says he has no regrets.

“I feel great,” he said by phone from his organization’s San Francisco office. “We set out to put climate on the ballot in a bunch of states, to build an organization and to build a relationship with a bunch of voters.”

He argued that all of that happened, pointing to hundreds of thousands of climate-minded voters newly enlisted in his organization, NextGen Climate, the emergence of global warming in the debate in several races, and the retreat by various GOP candidates from a platform of outright denial of climate science.

He chalked up Tuesday’s results to “that part of the world we don’t control.” Steyer said there was no approach that would have overcome the Republican tide that gave the party control of Congress and defeated several of the candidates NextGen backed.

But the election results raise new questions about the approach deep-pocketed, green-minded donors are taking toward electoral politics. Despite their best efforts, and the huge amount of money invested, they are failing to get voters to set aside other concerns and cast their ballots on environmental issues. This time out, the president’s record and the economy were the forefront issues, with all others receding.

“The take-away here is this was not a successful strategy,” said Josh Freed, vice president for clean energy at Third Way, a group that seeks a middle path between the two warring parties. “Candidate positions on climate do not move the overwhelming majority of voters to pull the lever for or against them. I hope these organizations take a step back and come up with a different approach.”

Steyer’s group saw its candidates victorious in U.S. Senate races in Michigan and New Hampshire, and in state legislative races, including in Oregon. But candidates they backed lost in hotly contested Senate races in Colorado and Iowa. NextGen also failed to unseat the governors of Florida and Maine, targeted by the organization for their outspoken skepticism of climate science.

The unpopular GOP governor of Pennsylvania, Tom Corbett, which Steyer’s group campaigned against, lost. But even in that race — won by NextGen’s candidate, Democrat Tom Wolf — global warming hardly was a factor, according to G. Terry Madonna, who directs the Franklin & Marshall College Poll in Lancaster.

Steyer’s impact was “Zero. None. Zero,” he said. Climate change “was not an issue at all. It has literally no salience with voters. It didn’t ever come up.”

University of New Hampshire pollster Andrew Smith said much the same with regard to the Senate race in his state, which Democratic incumbent Jeanne Shaheen won. “I don’t think anybody paid any attention to global warming this election,” he said.

In part that is because much of Steyer’s money was spent airing ads on issues his organization thought were more likely to turn out the Democratic faithful. But that too sometimes backfired.

In Colorado, independent pollster Floyd Ciruli suggested Steyer’s heavy TV advertising, which seized on a Democratic theme emphasizing abortion rights, may have actually hurt Democratic Sen. Mark Udall, who lost to GOP Rep. Cory Gardner.

“It was probably a net negative,” Ciruli said. “It turned out to be one of those things that threw Udall on the defensive. He was being parodied and mocked for it and criticized for it.”

Even Steyer’s strategists acknowledge that climate change is not a top-tier issue now. The question is whether it ever will be. Advocates such as Freed say the push seems to be futile, and well-funded green political groups should shift their strategy to more narrowly focused efforts with bipartisan appeal. They might start, he said, by being more open to such GOP-favored options as nuclear energy.

The green campaign efforts instead focus on getting Congress back to where it was in 2010, when it almost passed a California-style law that would have capped greenhouse gas emissions nationwide.

NextGen officials say they are confident in their strategy — and persistent. “This is a multi-cycle effort,” said Chris Lehane, Steyer’s lead political strategist. “If it was easy, it already would have been done…. Social change like this is not like switching on a light bulb.”

The GOP takeover of the Senate occurs as the science of climate change has grown more definitive and the predictions of widespread effects more detailed and dire. On Sunday, a panel of hundreds of climate scientists convened by the United Nations warned that climate change driven by the burning of fossil fuels was already affecting life on every continent and in the oceans and that the window was closing rapidly for governments to avert the worst damage expected later this century.

Yet skepticism of climate science remains Republican orthodoxy. North Carolina Sen.-elect Thom Tillis said in a primary debate that climate change is not “a fact.” Sen. James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma, who is expected to take the helm of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, has called climate change “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people” and dismissed the U.N. science panel “as a front for the environmental left.”

Obama moved to cut greenhouse gas emissions by issuing new rules for power plants and the nation’s vehicle fleet. The GOP-run Congress will not be able to nix the rules outright. But it could so thoroughly weaken or delay them through riders to key legislation that they’d be rendered ineffective, analysts said. Deeper cuts to the nation’s emissions would probably require congressional action, and the current GOP position on climate change makes such action improbable.

Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune acknowledged there was a “copious amount of bad news” in Tuesday’s election. But he says there was “significant good news” as well.

“Candidates who formerly denied climate science are now saying they are not scientists and instead talk about clean energy and associate themselves with it,” he said.

“The money from Tom Steyer made a difference in elevating climate science and pushing all these lawmakers to move off a denial platform,” Brune said.

evan.halper@latimes.com

mark.barabak@latimes.com

Halper reported from New Orleans, Barabak from Los Angeles. Times staff writer Neela Banerjee in Washington contributed to this report.

It’s so big that it crosses two different continents

The world’s biggest lake is so large that it is the same size as Japan. There are more than 304 million lakes worldwide, filled with slowly moving or standing water.

Many of the largest in the world can even be classed as inland seas. However, the lakes are still landlocked and connected to the oceans via rivers or narrow channels.

The Caspian Sea is the largest lake in the world, with a surface area of 386,400 sq km (149,200 sq mi). It sits across both Europe and Asia.

The huge lake is bordered by Kazakhstan, Russia, Azerbaijan, Iran and Turkmenistan. Its surface is about 27 metres below sea level.

In comparison, the Caspian Sea is almost five times as large as Lake Superior, which lies on the border of Canada and the US and covers 82,000 sq km (31,660 sq mi).

The Caspian Sea is so large that it accounts for up to 44% of the world’s lake waters.

The Caspian Sea is believed to be around 30 million years old and became landlocked about 5.5 million years ago. Europe’s longest river, the Volga, flows into the Caspian Sea and is the main freshwater source.

Due to this flow, the Caspian Sea’s water is almost fresh. Over 130 rivers go into the Caspian Sea, including the Ural River and the Kura River.

There are several small islands in the lake, with most of them in the North. Some islands are near the coasts, but none are found in the deeper parts.

Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, is the largest city by the Caspian Sea, with others also including Astara in Iran, Atyrau in Kazakhstan and Derbent in Russia.

The lake is home to a wide range of species, and it is particularly known for its caviar and oil.

Sadly, pollution from the oil industry and dams on rivers that drain into the lake have harmed its ecosystem.

Due to global warming, it has been reported that the depth of the sea will decrease by nine to 18 meters.

About 850 animal and more than 500 plant species live in the Caspian, many of which are endemic. Six critically endangered species of sturgeon live in its waters, as well as the unique Caspian seal and beluga.