漫步在有着中国“新能源汽车第一城”之称的深圳街头,你不会错过停放在路边的大量新能源汽车,以及宣传“绿色低碳”生活方式的标语。
深圳是一座紧邻香港的城市,有着1800万人口。这座城市因40多年前成为中国的改革开放试验田而闻名。
如今,它在碳减排方面也走在前列,是中国“低碳城市”建设的“试点”地区之一。
深圳是中国首个将公交车、出租车和网约车全部实现电气化的城市。2024年,深圳新车销量中有约77%为新能源汽车,远高于48%的全国平均水平。
深圳还率先设立了碳排放总量控制机制,推动“能耗双控”向“碳排放双控”转型——这比全国层面出台碳排放总量控制政策更早。
此外,深圳的地方性碳排放权交易市场(ETS)和“绿色债券”也都早于国家层面推出。
尽管深圳在碳减排领域很早就采取了措施,但一些专家对Carbon Brief表示,深圳的政策——这被当地政府称为“深圳模式”——很难在中国其他进行低碳转型的城市复制。
Carbon Brief回顾了深圳在低碳转型方面迄今为止所做的努力,并评估了其减排成效。
电动交通
官方智库中国(深圳)综合开发研究院财税贸易与产业发展研究中心主任韦福雷对Carbon Brief表示,深圳的低碳转型并非一蹴而就,而是建立在早期规划、政府支持和市场驱动相结合的基础上。
深圳的低碳转型始于21世纪初,当时该市的空气重污染天数达到峰值。
BBC新闻2017年的一篇报道称,经过十年的污染治理,深圳的空气污染程度“下降了近一半”。
报道称,这一成果很大程度上源于其“产业基础”的改变,也使深圳成为全国首批“低碳城市”之一。
这一时期,当地官员们制定了“低碳发展”战略,其中包括培育一批“战略性新兴产业”,如“信息通信技术”。这些产业后来为深圳包括新能源汽车行业在内的低碳行业提供了核心技术支持。
例如,目前全球领先的电动汽车巨头比亚迪,正是在这样的背景下诞生于深圳的。
韦福雷指出:“有了这种‘产业基因’,深圳只需把产业链重新梳理一遍,,就能快速满足新能源汽车行业(在2020年代)的新需求。”
尽管人口仅占全国约1%,但2025年深圳地方“两会”上的政府工作报告显示,该市在2024年的新能源汽车产量占到全国的22%。
报告同时称,深圳将在未来一年启动大约100个“气候投融资项目”,计划新增“绿色贷款”约1800亿元人民币(约合240亿美元)。
能源与清洁空气研究中心(CREA)分析师和中国团队负责人沈昕一对Carbon Brief说,深圳地方政府在扶持新兴产业方面经验丰富。
她说:“20年前,风电、太阳能发电,以及电动汽车,都还是需要大量投资和技术研发的新兴行业……当时的失败风险很高,但深圳市政府敢于推出很多创新政策加以扶持。”
新能源汽车企业的迅猛发展带动本地市场中新能源汽车占比持续上升。除了国家层面的补贴,地方政府也在生产和消费两端给予有力支持。
2024年,深圳销售的新车中约77%为新能源汽车,远高于48%的全国平均水平。
此外,深圳还率先实现了本市公交车、出租车和网约车全部电气化,是中国首个做到这一点的城市。
伦敦大学学院(UCL)可持续基建、经济与金融学讲师郑赫然向Carbon Brief指出,“更环保的交通车队”加快了深圳的低碳转型步伐,因为一座城市的低碳转型主要依赖两个关键方面——“交通转型”和“产业脱碳”。
他说:“一个城市在碳减排上的政策工具其实有限,但它可以推动更绿色的交通。比如,伦敦设立了超低排放区,鼓励人们使用公共交通和更清洁的车辆。城市也可以推动产业升级和减排,但这更难做到,因为很少有城市愿意放慢经济增长的步伐。”
郑赫然表示,深圳“与中国一些煤矿城市不同”,在产业转型方面具有“优势”,这使其可以设定“更具雄心”的排放目标。

碳控机制
中国将能源强度和碳强度(即单位国内生产总值GDP的能源使用量和排放量)作为其气候政策的关键指标。
此外,自2016年以来,中国一直实行“能耗双控”机制,即同时控制能源消费强度和能源消费总量。但中国政府已经宣布将在2024年起转向“碳排放双控”机制。
新机制将对二氧化碳排放总量设定约束性上限,并将成为2030年后的主要目标,而2030年前的主要指标——碳强度——将逐渐成为次要目标。
在这一领域,深圳依然是先行者。据“对话地球”(Dialogue Earth)报道,早在2023年,深圳就已成为中国首个明确承诺实行“(碳排放)双控机制”的城市。
为此,深圳市在2023年发布了两份《实施方案》,同时设定了市级碳排放总量控制目标。
与国家层面的方案相比,深圳在进程上更具雄心,其目标是在2025年建立起市级“碳排放双控”机制,并计划于2026年至2030年“全面实施”。
其中一份方案提出:“力争到2028年实现深圳碳市场制造业基本采用碳排放双控方式开展配额分配工作……力争到2030年实现市场调节能力显著提升。”
深圳还计划到2025年底,将能源强度在2020年的基础上降低14.5%,高于同期全国13.5%的目标。
郑赫然表示,深圳的这些目标是“量力而行的”。他解释道:“(就中国整体而言)碳减排主要集中在三个领域——钢铁、水泥和电力。深圳没有大型钢铁或水泥产业,因此只需将重心放在电力领域……而且它也不属于化石燃料城市,不位于供应链上游,无需担心煤炭开采等业务。深圳的产业结构主要以‘高附加值’行业为主,比如科技和新能源汽车,这些行业的碳排放更容易削减。”
“此外,深圳是科技中心,很多高碳排企业已搬到周边城市,比如汕尾。这就是所谓的‘排放外包’,受益于此,深圳的绿色转型面临的障碍更少。”
去年,郑赫然和同事在《自然》杂志上发表了一篇有关中国城市间碳排放外包的研究,指出“一些城市从其他城市的碳减排成果中获得大于其自身的收益”,并建议政策制定者正视其影响。
他还指出,深圳与其他城市相比还有一个“巨大差异”:“深圳拥有自己的核电站”,而这对深圳实现电力转型具有“重要”意义。电力行业是深圳在当前低碳转型中需要着力的最后一环。
低碳能源
根据2021年的一份报告,大亚湾核电站是深圳“最大的本地电力来源”,总装机容量达6.1吉瓦(GW)。
2021年,核电在深圳总发电量中的占比达到35%。
这也拉高了深圳的低碳能源使用水平。2024年,深圳一次能源消费中约47%来自清洁能源。
对深圳而言,核能发电量远超其他并入城市电网的清洁能源来源。市政府在2025年工作报告中提到,当前本地太阳能发电装机容量约为1吉瓦,风电装机并未被提及。
《深圳市应对气候变化“十四五”规划》写道,由于本地能源资源匮乏,加之风电、光伏“受土地和资源限制”,可再生能源的增长空间“有限”。
与此同时,深圳对外来电力的依赖程度也非常高——约七成的用电从外部进口。
这种依赖限制了深圳对电力行业碳排放的掌控,也给本地电网在用电高峰期的调度带来压力。
2024年,中国批准在毗邻深圳的惠州建设更多核电机组。
根据2022年一份研究报告,深圳市政府计划“到2025年将天然气、核能和可再生能源在能源结构中的总占比从当前的77%提升至90%,远高于全国52%的平均水平”。
郑赫然表示,“深圳与邻近的香港非常相似,香港的能源转型也不依赖太阳能和风能的建设”。
他补充说,深圳和香港应充分发挥自身作为“金融城市”的优势,以实现可持续的能源转型。

“绿色金融”
韦福雷表示,深圳一直善于利用“市场机制”,“在政府支持与市场驱动之间”成功找到平衡。其中,企业“担任主力角色,承担了90%的工作”,政府只在必要时出手干预。
在政府干预较少的情况下,深圳早在2013年就成为全国首批建立碳排放权交易市场“试点”的七个省市之一,远早于2021年全国碳市场的上线。
和全国层面的碳市场类似,深圳的本地碳市场并不以绝对排放量为基准,而是根据企业的排放强度(即单位产值的碳排放量),为企业分配可交易的排放配额。
深圳本地的碳排放权交易市场启动时覆盖了全市约38%的碳排放量。国际碳行动伙伴组织(ICPA)在一份报告中指出,这一比例到2020年已经提升至50%,并将进一步扩大。深圳还宣布将从2027年起为碳排放设置“绝对上限”。
(目前,国家层面的碳市场也未设置排放总量上限,但这也将在未来有所改变。)
不过,咨询公司ClearBlue Markets分析师秦炎对Carbon Brief说,虽然深圳碳排放权交易市场的覆盖范围还在扩大,但许多试点地区的碳排放权交易市场正在“收缩”,因为越来越多企业选择退出地方市场,转而加入国家碳市场。
国际碳行动伙伴组织的研究也发现,自2019年深圳碳排放权交易市场“向国家市场过渡”以来,发电已不再被纳入深圳碳排放权交易市场。
尽管如此,秦炎强调,这些地方试点“仍是一个重要的试验田,为国家碳排放权交易市场的成功落地铺平道路。(它们)会继续存在,覆盖中小企业以及国家市场尚未涉及的行业”。
国际碳行动伙伴组织称,截至2022年,深圳的地方碳排放权交易市场涵盖了水利、燃气、供热、制造业和交通等多个行业。
根据《深圳商报》报道,截至2024年,深圳已拥有全国最大的地方碳排放权交易市场,年交易量连续多年居全国首位。
与此同时,深圳也在“绿色金融”领域积极布局,将私人投资引入市场。
2021年,深圳在香港发行了中国首支面向海外市场的“绿色政府债券”,并出台了中国首部地方性“绿色金融法规”。国际绿色金融研究所(International Institute of Green Finance)在一份对该立法的评估中指出,其为规范“绿色市场”提供了“坚实的制度保障”。
相比之下,中国的首支主权绿色债券自2025年4月起才向国际买家发行。
深圳还推出了多种“绿色金融”产品。据官媒《经济日报》报道,2024年上半年,沪深两地交易所内新能源、新能源汽车及其他环保相关行业公司的市值达约4.6万亿元人民币(约合6,330亿美元)。
不过,郑赫然表示,“绿色债券”的效果“很难评估”。他说:“有很多项目,比如污水处理,也可以被归入‘绿色债券’的范畴。”
据官媒中央电视台报道,深圳2021年发行的“绿色债券”涵盖了“普通公办高中建设、城市轨道交通和水治理”等项目。
郑赫然表示,这些项目虽然在一定程度上与提高能效有关,但它们对碳减排的直接影响仍“有限”。
他补充说,市场引导在一座城市的低碳转型中“不可或缺”,但“目前尚无关于绿色金融产品在减排方面能发挥多大作用的研究”。
沈昕一则指出,“金融工具”在支持低碳转型方面仍发挥着重要作用。
她说:“低碳产业的成本往往高于化石燃料相关行业……通过政策支持和金融工具,才能够规模化,成本才能够降下来。”
“深圳模式”
深圳地方政府和媒体将深圳在气候领域取得的成就誉为“深圳模式”,意在其可以被推广到其他地区。
深圳市生态环境局党组成员许化表示,在去年的联合国气候变化大会(COP29)上,这一模式“向世界展示了成果”:“一是持续完善顶层设计,坚持立法先行,构建政策体系……二是聚焦重点领域转型升级……将新能源、安全节能环保等战略性新兴产业纳入重点产业集群,培育赋能……三是坚持开放共享,探索绿色低碳发展新路径。”
许化补充说,深圳的“绿色发展水平走在全国前列”,截至2023年底,深圳的“万元GDP能耗、水耗、碳排放分别降到了全国平均水平的1/3、1/8和1/5”。
不过,沈昕一指出,深圳的发展路径并非完全“可复制”,因为“深圳抓住了时代的机遇”。
她对Carbon Brief说:“比如,深圳的产业链优势和技术工人的聚集,给其高端制造业提供了很好的基础。”
郑赫然也认同这一观点。他认为,深圳只能代表中国一种特定类型的城市。
“深圳就像中国的硅谷,在高端科技领域投入巨大。它只能代表一线城市这一(特定)类别的中国城市,比如北京、上海、广州。中国有三百多个城市,每个城市都面临着独特的转型形势。依赖煤炭的工业城市照搬深圳的做法并不现实。”
与此同时,中国的其他城市也开始探索各自的可持续发展之路。
苏州建成了中国首批低碳工业园区试点之一的苏州工业园区。当地还建立了“市场化碳普惠交易体系”,鼓励居民和中小企业“自愿”参与碳排放交易。
据新华社报道,天津也与新加坡开展合作,“探索城市绿色低碳发展路径”。
沈昕一表示,其他城市必须“因地制宜地制定策略”。这种理念也体现在国务院于2023年发布的《新时代的中国绿色发展》白皮书中。
该文件指出,地方政府要“依托资源环境禀赋和产业发展基础……充分发挥各地区比较优势。”
The post 解读:何为中国城市低碳转型的“深圳模式”? appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Climate Change
A COP30 roadmap to inaction or ambition on climate finance?
Mariana Paoli, from Brazil, is the Global Advocacy Lead at Christian Aid and Iskander Erzini Vernoit, from Morocco, is the Executive Director at the IMAL Initiative for Climate and Development.
Government negotiators in Bonn will discuss in the coming two weeks how to put into practice an idea that emerged from the corridors of the COP29 climate talks: “the Baku to Belém Roadmap to $1.3 Trillion”.
This exercise, that aims to propose approaches for scaling climate finance flows for developing countries to over a trillion dollars per year by 2035, is due to be presented at COP30 in Brazil this November. The origins of its mandate offer insights into its perils – as well as its promise.
Brazil seeks early deals on two stalled issues at Bonn climate talks
Initially, negotiators from the G77+China countries united behind Africa’s call for $1.3 trillion as the replacement for the $100-billion goal for annual mobilisation of climate finance by developed countries for developing nations, set 15 years ago. Faithful to this, some G77 countries originally called for a roadmap to indicate actions that developed countries might take to raise public finance resources for this provision and mobilisation for the Global South.
There were, however, those in the Global North who pushed for a broader, less well-defined $1.3 trillion target that would include other sources and types of finance. These forces ultimately won the day, resulting in a final decision on $1.3 trillion that calls for “all finance” from “all … sources”, establishing a “roadmap” process toward this.
Exceedingly disappointing for the Global South, this new formulation obfuscates the responsibility of wealthy historical emitters to pay their fair share of public finance to tackle a proble they have caused and risks shifting the burden to developing countries.
Loss and damage threat
In this context, the Roadmap to 1.3T has the potential to be a milestone in the global governance of climate finance. Yet it faces risks and opportunities, being essentially at the discretion of Azerbaijan and Brazil as the COP29 and COP 30 presidencies.
There is a very real risk that the Roadmap will fall short of sending a strong signal of what level of ambition is required, in terms of public finance from contributor countries. If that happens, the Roadmap could entrench injustice, increase debt burdens, and delay urgent action on climate change.
In terms of injustice, poorer countries, while largely not responsible for climate change, could face loss and damage of $450 billion-$900 billion per year before 2030, not including the costs of reducing emissions and adapting to global warming.
Loss and damage fund to hand out $250 million in initial phase
Within this, Africa’s nomadic pastoral communities are one real-life example of those whose livelihoods and way of life are being destroyed by the choices of others. The COP29 decision on the new climate finance goal disregarded their needs by not including a target for loss and damage funding, but the Roadmap need not.
Heavy debt burden
The Roadmap must not ignore that external debts are at record highs, with repayment costs now higher than capacities for repayment in two-thirds of developing countries, according to UNCTAD.
In 2023, African governments paid around 17% of their revenues on servicing debts, the highest levels in decades, equalling 15% of African export earnings. By comparison, after the Second World War, inspired by the work of Keynes and others, it was decided to cap Germany’s debt repayments at 3% of its exports earnings, to allow recovery.
In this context, Global South countries may lack the fiscal space to invest in essential climate action – or may prioritise other areas, such as healthcare or education.
COP30 President-designate Andrea Corrêa do Lago is correct in his assertion that there is too often a denial of the economic benefits of climate action – yet Global South countries are not always able to pursue economically beneficial investments. Markets are not always efficient, economic benefits do not always equal revenues for investors , and the cost of capital is higher in Global South countries, heightening the need for support, especially with upfront costs.
Framework to scale up finance
Of course, in addition to underscoring the necessity of rich countries increasing their provision of grant-equivalent public funds for poorer countries, for the reasons cited above, the Roadmap can point to opportunities to build the architecture for scaling finance.
Reforming the international financial architecture is important, but, to achieve this, wealthy countries must relinquish their current hegemony and drop their resistance to reform in the negotiations for a UN tax convention and in those around the potential UN sovereign debt workout mechanism that could be agreed at the upcoming Financing for Development (FFD) Conference in Seville.
Climate shocks and volatile currencies hike debt burden for poor countries
Further additions to the financial architecture could include country platforms, aimed at unlocking finance, particularly private investment – but these require resourcing to administer and will only reaffirm the need for catalytic public resources, whether for technical assistance, project preparation, or making finance more affordable.
Of course, current politics are not conducive to increasing international provision of grant-equivalent finance, with recent short-sighted decisions taking overseas aid even further away from the global target for countries to provide assistance equal to 0.7% of their gross national income, established over fifty years ago, despite public support.
Naturally, Global South countries should not hold their breath waiting for others to come to their senses, but should do what they can, including South-South cooperation.
Bold signal needed
And yet, if global temperature goals are not to slip out of reach, if climate action is to be enhanced and injustice and indebtedness curtailed, richer countries must step up on finance. Will the Roadmap affirm this? The COP presidencies have yet to give a firm indication, though have called for inputs from finance ministers and other key groupings through ongoing consultations.
To be successful, there must be a willingness to depart from the status quo — just as was demonstrated with the Paris Agreement and the UAE Consensus, which set ambitious goals to limit global temperature rise and accelerate energy transition, respectively. Even amid uncertainty, these agreements raised the standard for ambition instead of passively allowing low expectations to go unchallenged.
A comparable approach is now needed for international public finance – the Baku-to-Belem Roadmap must send a bold signal of what is required, lest a key opportunity be lost.
The post A COP30 roadmap to inaction or ambition on climate finance? appeared first on Climate Home News.
Climate Change
DeBriefed 13 June 2025: Trump’s ‘biggest’ climate rollback; UK goes nuclear; How Carbon Brief visualises research
Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.
This week
Trump’s latest climate rollback
RULES REPEALED: The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has begun dismantling Biden-era regulations limiting pollution from power plants, including carbon dioxide emissions, reported the Financial Times. Announcing the repeal, climate-sceptic EPA administrator Lee Zeldin labelled efforts to fight climate change a “cult”, according to the New York Times. Politico said that these actions are the “most important EPA regulatory actions of Donald Trump’s second term to date”.
WEBSITE SHUTDOWN: The Guardian reported that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)’s Climate.gov website “will imminently no longer publish new content” after all production staff were fired. Former employees of the agency interviewed by the Guardian believe the cuts were “specifically aimed at restricting public-facing climate information”.
EVS TARGETED: The Los Angeles Times reported that Trump signed legislation on Thursday “seeking to rescind California’s ambitious auto emission standards, including a landmark rule that eventually would have barred sales of new gas-only cars in California by 2035”.
UK goes nuclear
NEW NUCLEAR: In her first spending review, UK chancellor Rachel Reeves announced £14.2bn for the Sizewell C new nuclear power plant in Suffolk, England – the first new state-backed nuclear power station for decades and the first ever under a Labour government, BBC News reported. The government also announced funding for three small nuclear reactors to be built by Rolls-Royce, said the Times. Carbon Brief has just published a chart showing the “rise, fall and rise” of UK nuclear.
MILIBAND REWARDED: The Times described energy secretary Ed Miliband as one of the “biggest winners” from the review. In spite of relentless negative reporting around him from right-leaning publications, his Department of Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) received the largest relative increase in capital spending. Carbon Brief’s summary has more on all the key climate and energy takeaways from the spending review.
Around the world
- UN OCEAN SUMMIT: In France, a “surge in support” brought the number of countries ratifying the High Seas Treaty to just 10 short of the 60 needed for the agreement to become international law, according to Sky News.
- CALLING TRUMP: Brazil’s president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said he would “call” Trump to “persuade him” to attend COP30, according to Agence France-Presse. Meanwhile, the Associated Press reported that the country’s environmental agency has fast tracked oil and highway projects that threaten the Amazon.
- GERMAN FOSSIL SURGE: Due to “low” wind levels, electricity generation from renewables in Germany fell by 17% in the first quarter of this year, while generation from fossil-fuel sources increased significantly, according to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.
- BATTERY BOOST: The power ministry in India announced 54bn rupees ($631m) in funding to build 30 gigawatt-hours of new battery energy storage systems to “ensure round-the-clock renewable energy capacities”, reported Money Control.
-19.3C
The temperature that one-in-10 London winters could reach in a scenario where a key Atlantic ocean current system “collapses” and global warming continues under “intermediate” emissions, according to new research covered by Carbon Brief.
Latest climate research
- A study in Science Advances found that damage to coral reefs due to climate change will “outpace” reef expansion. It said “severe declines” will take place within 40-80 years, while “large-scale coral reef expansion requires centuries”.
- Climatic Change published research which identified “displacement and violence, caregiving burdens, early marriages of girls, human trafficking and food insecurity” as the main “mental health” stressors exacerbated by climate change for women in lower and middle-income countries.
- The weakening of a major ocean current system has partially offset the drying of the southern Amazon rainforest, research published in Environmental Research has found, demonstrating that climate tipping elements have the potential to moderate each other.
(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)
Captured

Aerosols – tiny light‑scattering particles produced mainly by burning fossil fuels – absorb or reflect incoming sunlight and influence the formation and brightness of clouds. In this way they have historically “acted as an invisible brake on global warming”. New Carbon Brief analysis by Dr Zeke Hausfather illustrated the extent to which a reduction in aerosol emissions in recent decades, while bringing widespread public health benefits through avoided deaths, has “unmasked” the warming caused by CO2 and other greenhouse gases. The chart above shows the estimated cooling effect of aerosols from the start of the industrial era until 2020.
Spotlight
How Carbon Brief turns complex research into visuals
This week, Carbon Brief’s interactive developer Tom Pearson explains how and why his team creates visuals from research papers.
Carbon Brief’s journalists will often write stories based on new scientific research or policy reports.
These documents will usually contain charts or graphics highlighting something interesting about the story. Sometimes, Carbon Brief’s visuals team will choose to recreate these graphics.
There are many reasons why we choose to spend time and effort doing this, but most often it can be boiled down to some combination of the following things.
Maintaining editorial and visual consistency
We want to, where possible, maintain editorial and visual consistency while matching our graphical and editorial style guides.
In doing this, we are trying to ease our audience’s reading experience. We hope that, by presenting a chart in a way that is consistent with Carbon Brief’s house style, readers will be able to concentrate on the story or the explanation we are trying to communicate and not the way that a chart might have been put together.
Highlighting relevant information
We want to highlight the part of a chart that is most relevant to the story.
Graphics in research papers, especially if they have been designed for a print context, often strive to illustrate many different points with a single figure.
We tend to use charts to answer a single question or provide evidence for a single point.
Paring charts back to their core “message”, removing extraneous elements and framing the chart with a clear editorial title helps with this, as the example below shows.

Ensuring audience understanding
We want to ensure our audience understands the “message” of the chart.
Graphics published in specialist publications, such as scientific journals, might have different expectations regarding a reader’s familiarity with the subject matter and the time they might be expected to spend reading an article.
If we can redraw a chart so that it meets the expectations of a more general audience, we will.
Supporting multiple contexts
We want our graphics to make sense in different contexts.
While we publish our graphics primarily in articles on our website, the nature of the internet means that we cannot guarantee that this is how people will encounter them.
Charts are often shared on social media or copy-pasted into presentations. We want to support these practices by including as much context relevant to understanding within the chart image as possible.
Below illustrates how adding a title and key information can make a chart easier to understand without supporting information.

When we do not recreate charts
When will we not redraw a chart? Most of the time! We are a small team and recreating data graphics requires time, effort, accessible data and often specialist software.
But, despite these constraints, when the conditions are right, the process of redrawing maps and charts allows us to communicate more clearly with our readers, transforming complex research into accessible visual stories.
Watch, read, listen
SPENDING $1BN ON CLIMATE: New Scientist interviewed Greg de Temmerman, former nuclear physicist turned chief science officer at Quadrature Climate Foundation, about the practicalities and ethics of philanthropic climate-science funding.
GENDER HURDLES: Research director Tracy Kajumba has written for Climate Home News about the barriers that women still face in attending and participating in COPs.
OCEAN HEATWAVES: The New York Times presented a richly illustrated look at how marine heatwaves are spreading across the globe and how they affect life in the oceans.
Coming up
- 16-26 June: Bonn climate talks, Bonn, Germany
- 16 June: 79th meeting of the World Meteorological Organization executive council, Geneva, Switzerland
- 17 June: International Energy Agency (IEA) Oil 2025 report launch
Pick of the jobs
- Inside Climate News, California environmental reporter | Salary: Unknown. Location: Southern California
- Natural Resources Wales, lead marine and energy policy advisor | Salary: £45,367-£50,877. Location: Wales
- Children’s Investment Fund Foundation, senior manager, climate | Salary: £82,000. Location: London/hybrid
- Green Party,social media and digital content officer | Salary: £33,211. Location: London/remote
DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
The post DeBriefed 13 June 2025: Trump’s ‘biggest’ climate rollback; UK goes nuclear; How Carbon Brief visualises research appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Climate Change
Chart: The rise, fall and rise of UK nuclear power over eight decades
The UK’s chancellor Rachel Reeves gave the green light this week to the Sizewell C new nuclear plant in Suffolk, along with funding for “small modular reactors” (SMRs) and nuclear fusion.
In her spending review of government funding across the rest of this parliament, Reeves pledged £14.2bn for Sizewell C, £2.5bn for Rolls-Royce SMRs and £2.5bn for fusion research.
The UK was a pioneer in civilian nuclear power – opening the world’s first commercial reactor at Calder Hall in Cumbria in 1956 – which, ultimately, helped to squeeze out coal generation.
Over the decades that followed, the UK’s nuclear capacity climbed to a peak of 12.2 gigawatts (GW) in 1995, while electricity output from the fleet of reactors peaked in 1998.
The chart below shows the contribution of each of the UK’s nuclear plants to the country’s overall capacity, according to when they started and stopped operating.
The reactors are dotted around the UK’s coastline, where they can take advantage of cooling seawater, and many sites include multiple units coded with numbers or letters.
Since Sizewell B was completed in 1995, however, no new nuclear plants have been built – and, as the chart above shows, capacity has ebbed away as older reactors have gone out of service.
After a lengthy hiatus, the Hinkley C new nuclear plant in Somerset was signed off in 2016. It is now under construction and expected to start operating by 2030 at the earliest.
(Efforts to secure further new nuclear schemes at Moorside in Cumbria failed in 2017, while projects led by Hitachi at Wylfa on Anglesey and Oldbury in Gloucestershire collapsed in 2019.)
The additional schemes just given the go-ahead in Reeves’s spending review would – if successful – somewhat revive the UK’s nuclear capacity, after decades of decline.
However, with the closure of all but one of the UK’s existing reactors due by 2030, nuclear-power capacity would remain below its 1995 peak, unless further projects are built.
Moreover, with the UK’s electricity demand set to double over the next few decades, as transport, heat and industry are increasingly electrified, nuclear power is unlikely to match the 29% share of generation that it reached during the late 1990s.
There is an aspirational goal – set under former Conservative prime minister Boris Johnson – for nuclear to supply “up to” a quarter of the UK’s electricity in 2050, with “up to” 24GW of capacity.
Assuming Sizewell B continues to operate until 2055 and that Hinkley C, Sizewell C and at least three Rolls-Royce SMRs are all built, this would take UK capacity back up to 9.0GW.
Methodology
The chart is based on data from the World Nuclear Association, with known start dates for operating and retired reactors, as well as planned closure dates announced by operator EDF.
The timeline for new reactors to start operating – and assumed 60-year lifetime – is illustrative, based on published information from EDF, Rolls-Royce, the UK government and media reports.
The post Chart: The rise, fall and rise of UK nuclear power over eight decades appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Chart: The rise, fall and rise of UK nuclear power over eight decades
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change1 year ago
嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Carbon Footprint1 year ago
US SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Why airlines are perfect targets for anti-greenwashing legal action
-
Climate Change Videos1 year ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Some firms unaware of England’s new single-use plastic ban