Connect with us

Published

on

继中国的二氧化碳(CO2)排放量在2024年第二季度出现下降后,第三季度碳排放量与去年同期持平或略低。

Carbon Brief基于官方和商业数据进行的最新分析显示,三季度的数字意味着今年中国全年碳排放量仍有可能下降。

上微信关注《碳简报》

然而,最近创纪录的高温导致九月份的排放量上升,加之新的经济刺激措施出台,使得中国的排放轨迹现在面临更大的不确定性。

在今年八月和九月的大部分时间里,肆虐的热浪导致空调用电需求大幅上升,再加上水电出力不足,导致第三季度燃煤发电量增长2%,燃气发电量增长13%,尽管风电和太阳能发电量的增长继续打破纪录。

电力部门的排放量增加被钢铁、水泥和石油使用产生的排放量减少、以及电力部门以外的天然气需求停滞所抵消。因此,中国第三季度的碳排放量较去年同期基本持平或略有下降。

该分析的其他关键调研结果包括:

  • 第三季度太阳能发电量同比增长44%,风电增长24%,两者的新增装机容量继续创纪录。
  • 与去年受干旱影响的数据相比,水力发电量增长了11%,但仍未达到预期水平。核电增长了4%。
  • 由于建筑活动减少、电动汽车和天然气卡车的增加以及消费疲软,石油需求下降了约2%。
  • 第三季度,钢铁和水泥行业的排放量分别下降了3%和12%,这两个行业都继续受到建筑活动下降的影响。
  • 煤化工行业获得了新的政策支持,导致该行业的煤炭消费量年初至今增长近五分之一。

若要使中国2024年总排放量低于2023年水平,第四季度三个月的碳排放量需至少下降2%。工业用电需求增长放缓以及空调季的结束将助力实现这一目标。

然而,北京在九月底宣布的新经济刺激计划并未明显强调碳排放问题,这给排放量下降的前景增加了不确定性。

无论如何,中国仍将偏离其2025年“碳强度”目标,该目标要求该国在2020至2023年碳排放快速增长之后,在2024年和2025年排放量都需减少至少2%。

就未来而言,决策者最近透露了中国在碳达峰和减排方面的新计划,表明该国将采取渐进而谨慎的方式,这与实现《巴黎协定》目标所需要的水平有差距。

但是,如果中国清洁能源的快速增长能够持续,它有可能更快地实现减排。

清洁能源扩张满足夏季全部电力需求增长

尽管此前有预测显示中国的电力需求增速将放缓,但2024年第三季度实际电力需求同比增长了7.2%,高于第二季度的6.9%。

然而,电力需求增长的构成有所变化,大约60%的需求增长来自住宅和服务行业,其中家庭需求猛增了15%。

工业电力需求增长继续放缓,七月至九月增长了4.6%,低于第二季度的5.9%。

与此同时,太阳能发电量同比增长44%,风电增长了24%。尽管水电利用率不足,但仍同比增长了11%。核电的增长仅为4%,主要是由于新建核电机组较少。

电力需求的迅速增长超过了低碳能源供应的增长。为填补供需之间的缺口,燃煤发电量增长了2%、燃气发电量增长了13%,如下图所示。

这导致该季度电力部门的碳排放量增加了3%。

八月和九月的热浪推高了电力需求和煤炭使用量

然而,纵观整个夏季,无论是从五月到九月,还是从六月到八月,清洁能源的扩张都足以覆盖电力需求的全部增长。

今年八月和九月比去年更热,导致空调用电需求迅速增长。相比之下,去年六月和七月气温更高。

尽管住宅用电需求快速上升,但夏季燃煤和燃气发电量总体上有所减少,六月下降了7%,七月下降了5%,八月上升了4%,九月上升了9%。单月的增长率受极端高温出现时间的影响显著。

就新增发电装机容量而言,太阳能持续打破去年纪录,2024年初至九月新增装机容量达163GW,相当于德国、西班牙、意大利和法国四个拥有最多太阳能装机容量的欧盟国家的总和。第三季度中国太阳能装机同比增长22%。

到2024年,中国风电和光电增长将继续打破纪录

根据今年前九个月的增速,仅今年中国太阳能发电量的增长就可能相当于澳大利亚或越南在2023年的总发电量。

风电装机也加速增长,截至九月新增了38GW,同比增长10%,超过英国的总风电装机容量(30GW)。

今年八月,国务院一次性核准了11台新核电机组,获批项目的总发电装机容量约13GW。继2022年和2023年各核准10台核电机组后,2024年迄今批准的11台机组标志着中国下一批核电产能正在启动,将助力清洁能源增长。

在第三季度,水电装机仅同比增长2%,意味着11%的发电量增长主要源自利用率的恢复。由于严重干旱,水电利用率在2022年跌至十年来最低,2023年仅部分恢复,今年的反弹已接近预期平均水平。

2024年上半年,中国新核准的煤电项目骤降了80%,仅批准9GW,相比去年同期的52GW大幅下降。然而,根据能源资讯提供商Polaris Network的数据,第三季度有八个大型煤电项目获批,显示核准量可能在下半年有所增加。

建筑和石油需求放缓继续拉低总排放

虽然电力行业的碳排放在2024年第三季度出现了小幅增长,但工程量的持续萎缩拉低了总排放量。

因此,第三季度中国的碳排放量保持平稳,与去年同期水平持平或略低,如下图所示。

2024年第三季度中国C02排放量保持平稳

如果剖析建筑业导致的除电力行业以外的排放下降会发现,第三季度钢铁产量下降9%,水泥产量下降12%,房地产投资萎缩10%,与上半年持平。

这导致与2023年同期相比,水泥相关碳排放量减少了11%(24MtCO2),如下图所示。

尽管钢铁产量下降了9%,但钢铁相关排放量仅下降了3%(13MtCO2),原因在于需求下降的冲击主要由电弧炉炼钢厂承担,而不是排放强度高得多的燃煤高炉炼钢厂。

中国钢铁行业缺乏优先发展电弧炉的激励机制。电弧炉使用回收废钢,排放量较低。理论上,将钢铁纳入中国的碳排放权交易市场可能会促进转型。

然而,如果对该行业采取与电力行业相同的方式,对燃煤高炉炼钢和电炉炼钢设定不同的基准,则难以激励电力转型。

为推动钢铁行业结构性变革,中国工信部颁布政策,暂停所有新增钢铁产能的核准,将年初以来的实际停止审批变成正式禁令。直至去年,该行业仍在大规模投资煤基炼钢产能。

石油和建筑业排放量下降抵消了电力排放量的增加

另一个排放下降的主要领域是石油消费,第三季度石油相关碳排放下降了2%(13MtCO2),如上图所示。该数据来自国家统计局。

石油需求和相关二氧化碳排放量的减少可能更多。石油产品供应量(以炼油厂扣除进出口后的产量计算)降幅更大。该指标显示,第三季度燃烧石油产生的碳排放下降了10%(63MtCO2),表明中国的二氧化碳总排放量或下降2%。

统计局报告的降幅要温和得多,这可能反映了中国统计数据趋于平缓化的特点。另一种可能的解释是,炼油厂以前的产量超出了消费需求,现在不得不削减产量以减少库存。

无论石油消费量下降的幅度如何,其下降原因已显而易见。工程量减少是重要因素,因为很大一部分柴油用于建筑工地和运输建筑材料。

电动车份额的增加也侵蚀了汽油需求量。家庭消费支出疲软也推动了需求减少,直到十月政府刺激政策出台后才出现回升迹象。

使用液化天然气的卡车的普及也对柴油需求形成抑制。2024年初至九月,液化天然气卡车销量占卡车总销量的20%,但天然气整体需求增长缓慢,表明这一影响有限。

天然气消费量增速从今年上半年的10%放缓至第三季度的3%。增量集中在电力行业,其他行业需求停滞,可能是由于工业需求疲软。

在经历了一二月排放量上升、三月至八月下降、九月再次增加后,年末三个月排放量需要至少下降2%,方能使中国的年度总排放量低于2023年水平。

由于工业电力需求增长的持续放缓和空调季的结束,这种情况很有可能发生。但即便如此,中国仍将偏离2025年的碳强度目标。该目标要求,在2020年至2023年中国排放量快速增长之后,在2024年和2025年都需至少下降2%。

排放量没有更快下降——甚至可能在第三季度根本没有下降——的根本原因是:今年能源消费量增速继续远超历史趋势。

第三季度,能源消费总量(包括但不限于电力消费量)增长了5.0%,快于GDP增长4.6%。

在疫情前,中国的能源需求增长一直低于GDP增速,这意味着经济的能源强度在下降。

然而,疫情后以制造业为重点的经济政策似乎扭转了这一趋势。

煤化工行业获得新的政策支持

中国碳排放前景中新增的一个变数是煤化工行业。该行业将国内煤炭转化为进口石油和天然气的替代品,尽管碳足迹要高得多。

国家发改委最近出台的政策要求“加快”煤化工行业的发展,包括“加快煤制油气战略基地建设”。

政策发布后数周,山西一个大型煤制油项目和陕西一个煤化工园区已开工建设,新疆也有类似项目获得核准。

据咨询公司中信建投期货称,2024年,煤化工行业的煤炭消费量预计将占中国煤炭总消费量的7%以上。

万得金融终端(Wind Financial Terminal)的数据表明,2024年前八个月煤化工行业的煤炭消费量增长了18%,2023年增长了9%。在今年一至八月期间,煤化工行业煤炭消费量增长所带来的排放占化石燃料碳排放总量增长的三分之二(总增幅为0.9%)。

然而,该行业的煤炭消费量增速在七月至八月放缓至5%,九月化工产品产量也继续放缓。上图(“化工”)显示了这个对碳排放量增长的较小推动因素。

近期油气价格上涨、加上中国增加国内煤炭产量和压低国内煤炭价格的努力,共同提振了对油价和煤价敏感的煤化工行业。

煤化工行业体现了中国是将能源安全,还是减排置于优先事项的直接矛盾。

经济刺激计划为排放前景增添不确定性

今年夏季的经济数据显示中国经济持续放缓、GDP增长未达目标,因此市场对当局出台刺激计划的预期随之增强。

政府在九月下旬宣布了一系列刺激措施,其主要针对金融市场,但也承诺要“稳定”房地产市场。

尽管该刺激计划的规模对于中国而言并不算大,进一步的细节也让那些希望政策出现更激烈转向的人感到失望,但该方案显然是经过深思熟虑后协调进行的,让外界得以一窥中国最高决策者正计划如何应对经济下行。

近年来广受关注的直接向家庭转移政府资金的措施,如今也将开始尝试。

这些措施旨在提振家庭消费,而非此前刺激政策重点的高能耗制造业和建筑业,若得以实施将让中国在更低能耗、低碳排的方式下实现增长。

然而,与整个一揽子计划的规模相比,直接转移资金的规模较小,且大部分资金用于汽车和家电补贴。这些补贴释放了家庭现金流,但同时也引导了家庭支出向最高耗能的领域集中。

大部分刺激资金仍通过地方政府借贷和银行贷款等传统渠道进行,这些资金通常用于工业和基础设施项目。

该刺激计划并没有明确着墨于气候。尽管相当一部分资金可能会流向与清洁能源相关的领域,但这只是因为这些投资最近在中国的投资流中占据主导地位,但该计划并未有额外政策推动此类投资。

决策者不认为碳排放会“提前”达峰

尽管清洁能源的快速增长似乎表明中国可能很快实现碳达峰,但决策者仍然预期碳排放量将在2030年之前继续增长,然后趋于平稳或逐渐下降。

今年八月,国家能源局在回应记者就有分析显示中国可能已实现碳达峰的问题时,淡化了这一可能性。

国家能源局相关部门负责人在回答这一问题时强调,国家领导层已确定“2030年前”为实现碳达峰的时间点,暗示该机构并无授权改变这一目标。

中共中央也在一份《意见》中重申,该国的目标是到2035年前让碳排放进入“下降趋势”。

国务院此前的一项计划表明,中国将在碳达峰后重点控制二氧化碳排放总量,而非排放强度,并表示这不会在2026至2030年期间发生。

根据中国目前在《巴黎协定》中的承诺,其允许采取一种非常渐进的方法来实现碳达峰并在达峰后减少排放,将更大幅度的减排留到未来几十年。

然而,这种路径将消耗全球1.5°C温控目标下90%的碳预算。若要限制全球气温上升至比工业化前高1.5°C以内,中国的排放量需在2035年之前至少比2023年水平下降30%。

国际能源署(IEA)最新分析指出,到2035年,中国等新兴市场需要将排放量减少到比2022年水平低35至65%的水平,以实现在COP28气候大会上做出的全球承诺或国家净零目标。

与中国决策者所传递的谨慎态度相反,若中国能保持当前的清洁能源扩展速度并推进电气化,到2035年,化石燃料的二氧化碳排放量将在2023年的水平上减少30%。

同样,国际能源署最新发布的《世界能源展望》(World Energy Outlook)发现,根据目前的政策方案,清洁能源的增长将有助于到2035年将中国的二氧化碳排放量减少到比2023年水平低24%。国际能源署表示,如果中国实现其宣布的雄心和目标,到2035年,碳排放量的削减将增加到45%。

根据《巴黎协定》,中国将于2025年2月前向联合国提交国家自主贡献(NDC)承诺,预计其将更清楚地说明决策者正在追求的减排途径。

关于数据

分析数据汇编自中国国家统计局、国家能源局、中国电力企业联合会和中国海关的官方数据发布,以及行业数据提供商万得资讯(WIND Information)的数据。

风能和太阳能发电量,以及按燃料划分的火电发电量系通过将每月末的发电装机乘月利用率计算得出,数据来自万得金融终端提供的中电联报告数据。

火电总发电量以及水电、核电发电量来自国家统计局月度发布数据。

由于没有生物质的月利用率数据,因此采用了2023年52%的年平均值。电力部门的煤炭消费量估算基于燃煤发电量和每月燃煤电厂的平均热耗率,以避免有争议的官方煤炭消费数据对近期其他产量数据的影响。

当数据来自多个来源时,本文对不同来源的数据交叉引用,并尽可能使用官方来源,调整总消费量以匹配国家统计局报告的第一季度、上半年和前三季度的消费增长和能源结构变化。数据调整对所有能源的影响不到1%。未经调整的数据显示,第三季度的排放量减少了1%。

二氧化碳排放量的估算基于国家统计局的默认燃料热值和中国最新的2018年国家温室气体排放清单中的排放因子。水泥的二氧化碳排放因子基于截至2023年的年度估算。

对于石油消费,表观消费量是根据炼油加工量计算的,并减去石油产品的净出口量。

The post 分析:尽管煤电反弹,但中国2024年三季度碳排放未增长 appeared first on Carbon Brief.

分析:尽管煤电反弹,但中国2024年三季度碳排放未增长

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Interview: COP31 president says electrification is ‘surest way to protect citizens’

Published

on

Last month, COP31 president-designate Murat Kurum launched a target for 35% of the world’s final energy to come from electricity by 2035.

In an interview with Carbon Brief, Kurum says that the target was not a political choice, but instead reflects the latest evidence on “what is needed to keep 1.5C within reach”.

The ongoing Hormuz crisis means there is an “urgent” need for renewables and electrification, which are the “surest and cleanest way to protect citizens” from high energy prices.

Kurum says that the Brazilian and Ethiopian presidencies of COP30 and COP32, as well as the EU, UK and Canada, have welcomed the target.

He adds that “all have confirmed it will be central to discussions at COP31”.

In the interview, Kurum – who is also Turkey’s minister of environment, urbanisation and climate change – tells Carbon Brief where the target came from and what he expects to happen next.

Carbon Brief: You recently launched a target for 35% of the world’s final energy to come from electricity by 2035. Where did this idea come from?

Murat Kurum: The “35 by 35” target is grounded in technical data and based on the IEA [International Energy Agency] and IRENA [International Renewable Energy Agency] analysis of what is needed to keep [the 1.5C Paris Agreement target] within reach. The level was not chosen politically. Rather, it reflects what the science and the energy modelling tell us is required.

CB: Why do you think an electrification target is important right now?

MK: The case for the target is urgent right now. The latest war in the Gulf has made energy diversification – and, in particular, renewable energy transition and electrification – a top global priority, because it is the surest and cleanest way to protect citizens around the world from high and volatile energy prices.

At a time of real fragmentation in international relations, a single, shared target is needed to focus global efforts by aligning governments, businesses and investors behind a common benchmark and to send a clear market signal.

CB: Which countries are supporting this target so far?

MK: The reaction so far has been extremely positive and, while we presented our target at the UN June climate meetings in Bonn, our earlier conversations with parties at both the Petersberg and Copenhagen climate dialogues paved the way for this launch.

For example, the EU, UK, and Canada have welcomed the target, as have the Brazilian COP30 and Ethiopian COP32 presidencies. All have confirmed it will be central to discussions at COP31.

This support has been reflected in the business community as well, with polling by the We Mean Business Coalition showing that 90% of businesses expect to have largely electrified their operations by 2035 and that 88% expect electrification will make their business more competitive.

CB: How do you hope and expect to see this taken forward at the COP? Could it be in the formal COP outcomes, or part of the second global stocktake?

MK: We are now taking electrification forward as an “action agenda” initiative to bring actors together and drive progress. The action agenda and the [formal COP] negotiations are separate, but complementary, with different processes and thresholds, and it is too early to say what all countries might be able to agree in the negotiations. That is for parties to determine as the year progresses.

We are focused and determined to use COP31 as a moment to spark a global conversation about electrification.

CB: What are the key priorities for reaching the target?

MK: The critical sectors for reaching the target are buildings, transport and industry, which together account for around 45% of global emissions. Financial support for the developing world and investment in grids and infrastructure is also crucial.

The target also builds on COP28’s target to triple renewable energy capacity and seeks to take advantage of the tumbling cost of renewable power and other technologies critical to the energy transition. This is a journey that Turkey itself is taking ambitious steps on, including our plan to reach 120GW [gigawatts] of renewable capacity by 2035.

This interview was first published in the 10 July 2026 edition of Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed weekly newsletter. Sign up for free.

The post Interview: COP31 president says electrification is ‘surest way to protect citizens’ appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Interview: COP31 president says electrification is ‘surest way to protect citizens’

Continue Reading

Climate Change

DeBriefed 10 July 2026: Deadly Europe heat | EU electrification leak | COP31 president interview

Published

on

Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed. 
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.

This week

‘Catastrophic’ climate impacts

RECORD HEAT: Western Europe experienced its hottest June on record – some 3C above average – according to analysis covered by the Guardian. It said the finding came “as the UK enters its third heatwave of the year and wildfires ravage France and Spain”. Le Monde said 10,000 people had been evacuated due to wildfires in southern France.

‘EXCESS DEATHS’: The June heatwave killed more than 2,700 people in France, according to a guest post analysis for Carbon Brief. Similar analysis for Germany said there had been more than 5,000 “excess deaths”, reported Bloomberg. Meanwhile, an ongoing heatwave in the US has killed at least 30 people, said USA Today.

STORM TEST: Floods have killed 39 people in Guangxi province in southern China, said state-run newspaper China Daily. Scientists warned that climate change and the weather phenomenon El Niño are exposing China to “catastrophic storms” that will test its resilience in 2026, reported Reuters. The nation’s latest official climate report found that “extreme weather and climate events…have become more frequent and severe”, said China National Radio.

Around the world

  • EU ELECTRIFICATION: The European Commission is set to unveil a 2040 target for EU electrification on 17 July, reported Bloomberg. Citing a leaked draft, it said the plan would aim to cut oil use in half and gas use by two-thirds.
  • PEAKING PLAN: China has published an “action plan” for peaking emissions during the 15th five-year plan period to 2030, reported Xinhua. It lists targets including “new energy vehicles” making up 30% of cars on the road by 2030, said Reuters.
  • CLIMATE ‘FLAT EARTHER’: The Trump administration has appointed Matthew Wielicki, described by Politico as a “climate critic”, to lead the office in charge of the US national climate assessment. Common Dreams quoted a scientist describing the move as “like putting a flat-earther in charge of NASA”.
  • UGANDAN SUIT: A group of farmers from Uganda have launched a legal suit in London against the East African oil pipeline, according to Climate Home News.

23%

The share of Irish electricity used by data centres in 2025, reported the Irish Times.

2%

The share of global electricity used by data centres in the same year, according to Carbon Brief analysis of the Energy Institute statistical review.


Latest climate research

  • Meltwater from the western Himalayan glaciers will peak at around 2C of warming, before declining at higher warming levels | Environmental Research Letters
  • Current coral restoration efforts may be unsuitable for temperate reefs, including those in the Mediterranean | Nature Ecology & Evolution
  • People tend to underestimate the level of “broad public support” for climate action | Nature Climate Change

(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)

Captured

Average number of days per year with a daily maximum temperature of at least 30C in a selection of major European cities, for each decade since the 1950s

Carbon Brief explained – via eight facts – why air conditioning rates in some parts of Europe are relatively low, as the technology emerges as a new front in the global “culture war” over climate action. Analysis for the article illustrated that, in many parts of the world’s fastest-warming continent, air conditioning simply was not needed in the past.

Spotlight

COP31 president speaks to Carbon Brief on electrification

This week, Carbon Brief interviews Murat Kurum, president-designate of the COP31 UN climate talks in November and Turkey’s minister of environment, urbanisation and climate change, on his target to boost global electrification.

Carbon Brief: You recently launched a target for 35% of the world’s final energy to come from electricity by 2035. Where did this idea come from?

Murat Kurum: The “35 by 35” target is grounded in technical data and based on the IEA [International Energy Agency] and IRENA [International Renewable Energy Agency] analysis of what is needed to keep [the 1.5C Paris Agreement target] within reach. The level was not chosen politically. Rather, it reflects what the science and the energy modelling tell us is required.

CB: Why do you think an electrification target is important right now?

MK: The case for the target is urgent right now. The latest war in the Gulf has made energy diversification – and, in particular, renewable energy transition and electrification – a top global priority, because it is the surest and cleanest way to protect citizens around the world from high and volatile energy prices.

At a time of real fragmentation in international relations, a single, shared target is needed to focus global efforts by aligning governments, businesses and investors behind a common benchmark and to send a clear market signal.

COP31 president-designate Murat Kurum. Credit: Supplied by COP31 secretariat
COP31 president-designate Murat Kurum. Credit: Supplied by COP31 secretariat

CB: Which countries are supporting this target so far?

MK: The reaction so far has been extremely positive and, while we presented our target at the UN June climate meetings in Bonn, our earlier conversations with parties at both the Petersberg and Copenhagen climate dialogues paved the way for this launch.

For example, the EU, UK, and Canada have welcomed the target, as have the Brazilian COP30 and Ethiopian COP32 presidencies. All have confirmed it will be central to discussions at COP31.

This support has been reflected in the business community as well, with polling by the We Mean Business Coalition showing that 90% of businesses expect to have largely electrified their operations by 2035 and that 88% expect electrification will make their business more competitive.

CB: How do you hope and expect to see this taken forward at the COP? Could it be in the formal COP outcomes, or part of the second global stocktake?

MK: We are now taking electrification forward as an “action agenda” initiative to bring actors together and drive progress. The action agenda and the [formal COP] negotiations are separate, but complementary, with different processes and thresholds, and it is too early to say what all countries might be able to agree in the negotiations. That is for parties to determine as the year progresses.

We are focused and determined to use COP31 as a moment to spark a global conversation about electrification.

CB: What are the key priorities for reaching the target?

MK: The critical sectors for reaching the target are buildings, transport and industry, which together account for around 45% of global emissions. Financial support for the developing world and investment in grids and infrastructure is also crucial.

The target also builds on COP28’s target to triple renewable energy capacity and seeks to take advantage of the tumbling cost of renewable power and other technologies critical to the energy transition. This is a journey that Turkey itself is taking ambitious steps on, including our plan to reach 120GW [gigawatts] of renewable capacity by 2035.

Watch, read, listen

HEATED: A Financial Times long read asked if Europe – the world’s fastest-warming continent – is “prepared for a world of extreme heat”.

LITIGATED: The Outrage and Optimism podcast spoke to Prof Joana Setzer and Catherine Higham about the latest trends in climate litigation.

‘SHATTERED’: Confidence in fossil-fuel exports via the strait of Hormuz has been “shattered”, wrote IEA chief Fatih Birol for Foreign Policy.

Coming up

Pick of the jobs

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 10 July 2026: Deadly Europe heat | EU electrification leak | COP31 president interview appeared first on Carbon Brief.

DeBriefed 10 July 2026: Deadly Europe heat | EU electrification leak | COP31 president interview

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Eight facts about air conditioning amid an overheated global debate

Published

on

As successive heatwaves hit Europe, air-conditioning (AC) has emerged as a new front in the international “culture war” over climate action.

France, Germany and the UK have experienced record-breaking heat and thousands of heat-related deaths this summer, with June temperatures in many regions passing 40C.

This has drawn attention to the relatively low rates of AC use in these countries – and in Europe as a whole – especially when compared to its widespread adoption in the US.

Legacy newspapers, bloggers and even Elon Musk have all weighed in on “European hostility” to AC, criticising Europe’s “cultural conservatism” and “overbearing governments”.

Right-wing politicians, including National Rally in France and the UK Conservatives, have styled themselves as champions of AC, while opposing efforts to tackle climate change.

Missing from most of these interventions is the fact that human-caused climate change has made once-rare heat far more common, in what is the world’s fastest warming continent.

Carbon Brief analysis for this article shows that, until the 2020s, it was rare for many European cities to see days above 30C, making AC an unnecessary expense.

Here, Carbon Brief explains – via eight facts – why AC rates in some parts of Europe are relatively low, as well as clarifies and contextualises some of the misleading claims circulating about the technology.

Much of Europe has not needed AC in the past

AC installation rates in northern parts of Europe are very low. The best available estimates suggest that 6% of households in Germany and just 4% in England use AC.

However, these rates are largely explained by the historical climates in these nations.

Unlike the US, much of the housing stock and infrastructure in Europe was built at a time when AC did not exist and was not necessary.

Moreover, nations such as France, Germany and the UK have only started to regularly experience extreme heat in recent decades.

The chart below shows the average number of days per year, in each decade since the 1950s, when maximum temperatures have exceeded 30C in major European cities. Capitals such as London and Paris have seen a significant jump since around 2000.

Average number of days per year with a daily maximum temperature of at least 30C in a selection of major European cities, for each decade since the 1950s
Average number of days per year with a daily maximum temperature of at least 30C in a selection of major European cities, for each decade since the 1950s. Source: Copernicus ERA5, Carbon Brief analysis by Dr Zeke Hausfather.

Prof Jan Rosenow, an energy and climate researcher at the University of Oxford, tells Carbon Brief:

“For most of the 20th century, northern Europe simply didn’t need cooling. Homes in Britain and Germany were built to keep heat in, not out, because winters were cold and summers rarely hot.”

Much of the commentary about the relatively low rates of European AC use focuses on cultural or “ideological” factors. (See: Some European nations have ‘resisted’ AC – but its popularity is growing.)

However, Rosenow says people’s views on AC in these countries likely stem from their historically colder climates. He adds:

“Attitudes formed around those facts, not the other way round…There is a cultural element, but it is the product of climate, not of some green ideological project.”

In the past, many in Europe relied on traditional methods to keep buildings cool. Richard Black, head of communications at Climate Analytics, made this point in a post on LinkedIn:

“Once, residents of cities such as Paris could cope with summer heatwaves by opening shutters and windows during the night, and closing them again in the morning to trap the cool air inside…We’ve reached a limit to this sort of adaptation.”

Now, with Europe around 2.5C warmer than pre-industrial levels, climate change is routinely driving record-breaking heatwaves, even in the north of the continent.

This is forcing a reappraisal of societies that were “built for a climate that no longer exists”, as the UK’s Climate Change Committee (CCC) put it in a recent report.

Experts broadly agree that much of Europe will indeed need more AC, particularly in spaces housing the most vulnerable populations, such as care homes, schools and hospitals.

At the same time, they also emphasise broader, “passive” efforts to make cities and homes cooler alongside increased AC use. (See: AC is not the only answer to overheating cities.)

Back to top

AC is already widely used in hotter parts of Europe

During periods of extreme heat, articles criticising “European hostility” towards the technology frequently note that “only about 20%” of households in Europe have AC.

Often, this is contrasted with the US, where more than 90% of households have AC installed. (In fact, the US is something of a global outlier, matched only by Japan.)

However, the continent-wide figure for Europe obscures the reality. In southern Europe – where temperatures are and have always been higher – AC is relatively common.

The map below, based on official EU data, shows that southern European nations use far more household energy for “space cooling” than those in the north.

Percentage share of household energy consumption used for “space cooling”, including AC, in EU member states and the Balkans
Percentage share of household energy consumption used for “space cooling”, including AC, in EU member states and the Balkans. Source: Eurostat.

Government figures show that nearly 60% of Italian households have AC. Household-level data in many countries is patchy, but various analyses have placed that figure at 70-80% in Greece and 41% in Spain – with higher penetration in the hotter, southern part of the country.

The same pattern can be seen within France. International coverage has stressed the country’s “cultural resistance to AC”, citing a nationwide figure from 2020 that suggests “only” 25% of French households have AC.

However, polling data from customers of the Hello Watt energy app suggests that there is a distinct north-south divide in French uptake. At least 60% of households in Mediterranean regions of France are equipped with AC, according to these figures.

This can be seen in the map below, with households across northern regions, including Paris, reporting far lower AC installation rates, often below 5%.

Percentage share of households equipped with AC in departments of mainland France
Percentage share of households equipped with AC in departments of mainland France, according to polling data. Source: Hello Watt.

Finally, when making such comparisons to Europe, it is worth noting that high rates of AC use reported for the entire US also obscure significant differences between – and within – US states. This, too, aligns with differences in regional climate.

Hotter states in the US south have near-universal AC access. But in Washington, a north-western state with a climate more comparable to that of western Europe, 66% of people have AC in their homes.

Back to top

Some European nations have ‘resisted’ AC – but its popularity is growing

International commentators have written extensively about Europe’s “longstanding resistance to cooling technology”, especially when compared to the US.

Newspaper editorials in the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal, alongside numerous op-eds and blog posts, have added fuel to this “culture war”. Elon Musk has even promoted an AI-generated message stating that Europeans “should just install AC”.

Often, European attitudes are attributed to “guilt” about AC’s energy demand, “cultural conservatism” or “overbearing governments”. One commentator ascribed divergent attitudes in Europe and the US to “different ideas about physical suffering and sacrifice”.

Meanwhile, right-leaning commentators and climate-sceptic groups have blamed “climate policies, which view AC as an unnecessary luxury”.

In general, these critiques often fail to consider the most obvious explanation, which is that AC adoption is low in northern Europe because the historical climate made AC unnecessary.

Critical articles have instead drawn attention to restrictions on AC use in some European countries, as well as the lack of support for AC in official heatwave guidance.

For France, in particular, polling has indeed highlighted widespread disapproval of AC, both on environmental grounds and due to alleged health impacts. Such messages have also been voiced regularly in French media and by left-leaning and green politicians.

However, across Europe there are plenty of signs that such attitudes are shifting, following successive spells of extreme heat.

Amid the June heatwave, there were reports from Germany, France and the UK of “skyrocketing” AC sales. This surge was even acknowledged by the foreign ministry in China, due to the nation’s role in supplying many of these products.

The shift is taking place in politics as well. Marine Tondelier, leader of the French Green party – which has traditionally opposed AC – recently stated that “there are places where we just can’t do without AC anymore”.

Overall, AC has been on the rise across Europe, with France, Spain and the Netherlands all using more than twice as much energy for AC and other “space cooling” technologies in 2024 as they did in 2015.

AC production in Germany has also risen by at least 75% in recent years and a growing share of German homes are being built with it installed.

Notably, there is little evidence that “climate policies” are blocking Europeans from installing AC. Polling in Germany shows that, while people are concerned about environmental impacts, the high costs of installing and running it are perceived as greater barriers.

Finally, there is an important distinction between individual AC units in people’s homes and installing them in public spaces, such as hospitals, care homes and schools.

While neither is widespread in France, support for the latter can increasingly be found across the political spectrum, from Greens to the far-right National Rally (RN).

Back to top

AC emissions are growing, but its climate impact could be limited

Some people have noted that a wider rollout of AC in Europe could drive up emissions.

As noted in the Financial Times by columnist and chief data reporter John Burn-Murdoch, there is a logic to this argument, “at least superficially”. He writes:

“AC uses a lot of energy; if the proposed defence against emissions-driven global warming means emitting more, then we have an obvious problem.”

The emissions impact of AC depends heavily on the generation mix of a country’s power sector.

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), “space cooling” – mostly AC, but this does include some fans – used 2,100 terawatt-hours (TWh) of power globally in 2022.

As such, it was responsible for 1bn tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) from electricity use globally. This equates to around 2.7% of total CO2 emissions globally from fossil fuels and industry.

(As well as indirect emissions through power use, AC units can also directly release greenhouse gases – used as AC refrigerants – when they leak or are improperly disposed of. Following the 2016 Kigali Amendment, countries are progressively trying to phase down the use of potent greenhouse gases in AC units.)

In a LinkedIn post, Lauri Myllyvirta, lead analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air and regular Carbon Brief contributor, says:

“There is a lot of alarmist messaging about how much electricity AC uses. However, on an annual basis, the demand is not that substantial. Currently, AC uses about 1% of electricity in the EU and catching up to adoption rates in the US would double this.”

According to the IEA estimates from 2018, “if left unchecked, energy demand from AC will more than triple by 2050”, reaching 6,200TWh of power.

By mid-century, households would contribute the most to the increase (70%), with at least two-thirds of the world’s households potentially having AC, according to the Paris-based agency.

Decarbonising electricity grids and energy-efficiency improvements can reduce AC emissions and their impact on climate.

For instance, in countries with a low-carbon electricity mix – such as France, where nuclear energy accounts for 67% of its electricity generation – expanding AC would have a more limited climate impact than in other countries.

In countries such as India, there could be a more significant increase in emissions as AC is adopted, due to the role coal plays in the country’s energy mix, especially during the night. Demand is growing fast – following low access historically – and many AC units are inefficient, with high electricity use.

According to a new working paper from the India Energy and Climate Center (IECC) at the University of California, Berkeley, “room AC” – portable plug-in units, as opposed to those permanently installed in buildings – already accounts for nearly one-quarter of India’s peak electricity demand (60-70GW) – and this is before the majority of Indian households have bought their first AC unit.

Dr Nikit Abhyankar, co-faculty director of the IECC, tells Carbon Brief that, as AC use is expanded across the world, it should be paired with solar and battery storage, where the “economics have completely shifted” in the last few years. This will help to cut both energy bills and emissions.

According to the IEA, accelerating energy efficiency improvements could deliver more than one-third of all CO2 emission reductions between now and 2030.

The global energy demand needed to run ACs alone in 2050 could be reduced by 1,300GW – the equivalent of all of China and India’s coal plants – through energy efficiency measures, it estimates.

Aditya Valiathan Pillai, a climate adaptation researcher at King’s College London, tells Carbon Brief that, as the use of AC expands, there is a conversation to be had about where and “what type of technology [is used] and who gets access” to it.

A final point is that many AC units are air-to-air heat pumps, which can efficiently heat homes, as well as keeping them cool. As such, wider AC adoption could boost the adoption of electrified heat, helping to cut emissions from gas boilers.

Back to top

Heat from AC can contribute to directly warming cities

Some critics of AC mention its electricity demands and associated CO2 emissions from fossil-fuel combustion, which contribute to raising the temperature of the entire planet. (See: AC emissions are growing, but its climate impact could be limited.)

But AC also has a localised impact. It works by removing heat from indoor air and pushing it outdoors, raising temperatures on the street and exacerbating the “urban heat island” effect.

Left-leaning French politicians are among those citing this as an argument against AC, particularly in cities. Indeed, Emmanuel Grégoire, the Socialist mayor of Paris, appeared to be making this point in an interview with Le Monde, during the June heatwave:

“[AC] can be useful for cooling collective spaces and protecting the most vulnerable populations, but individual AC is a scourge – it makes the problem worse by heating the city even more.”

One study concludes that, in a city such as Phoenix, Arizona, where the technology is widespread, AC use during a heatwave can raise night-time temperatures by 1-1.5C.

Another models a nine-day heatwave in Paris – in a future with “massive” AC use – and finds an increase in external temperature of more than 2C, due to heat emitted by the units.

Given this, some scientists argue that AC can be a form of climate “maladaptation” – referring to actions that backfire and make people more vulnerable to global warming.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has highlighted this issue, concluding:

“AC may constitute a maladaptation because of its high demands on energy and associated heat emissions, especially in high-density cities.”

Compared to the US, more people in Europe live in dense, urban areas. According to Dr Vincent Viguié, a climate change economist at École des Ponts ParisTech, this could leave Europeans more exposed to heat from AC units. He tells Carbon Brief:

“If you live in a neighbourhood that is not dense, like in a suburban neighbourhood or in the countryside, you don’t care about this…So, once again, there is a key difference between US and European cities.”

Viguié is among the experts arguing that other climate-adaptation measures should be considered alongside AC, to keep entire cities cool – not just individual homes. He says:

“It’s not to say that the heat released by AC by itself is a reason to forbid AC…It’s just that not taking that into account may lead to bad decisions.”

Back to top

More AC could help to reduce heat deaths in Europe

Heatwaves can be deadly, especially for older or vulnerable members of society.

According to climate scientists at World Weather Attribution, “heatwaves cause more deaths in Europe than all other natural hazards combined”.

The heatwave in June 2026 is estimated to have killed more than 20,000 people in Europe. In France – which has seen some of the hottest temperatures – the heatwave caused more than 2,700 heat-related deaths, according to analysis published by Carbon Brief.

AC does help to protect people from the effects of extreme heat. A 2021 study found that globally, AC averted an estimated 190,000 heat-related deaths annually during 2019-21.

With its much higher penetration of AC, the US has fewer deaths due to extreme heat than Europe.

Heat kills around 11 people out of every 100,000 in Europe, compared to around two people in the US, according to analysis by data scientist Dr Hannah Ritchie from Our World in Data.

Several publications have pointed out that “Europe’s heatwaves are deadlier than American gun violence”. While this is technically accurate in absolute terms, Ritchie says the comparison is “a bit silly” for a number of reasons, not least because on a per-capita basis, US gun deaths are higher.

Average annual deaths per 100,000 for heat and gun deaths in the US (red) and Europe (blue) to as close to the end of 2024 as possible
Average annual deaths per 100,000 for heat and gun deaths in the US (red) and Europe (blue) to as close to the end of 2024 as possible. Heat deaths are based on excess death methodology, not death certificates. Source: By the Numbers.

However, experts suggest that AC is only one part of a wider effort to protect people from extreme heat.

A 2020 study looking at heat-related mortality in Canada, Japan, Spain and the US, found that excess deaths due to heat decreased between 1972 and 2009.

For example, the proportion of deaths due to extreme heat fell from 1.7% to 0.5% over the period in the US and 3.5% to 2.8% in Spain.

However, an increase in AC only explained 16.7% of the drop in the US and 14.3% in Spain.

The research concludes that “other factors have played an equal or more important role in increasing the resilience of populations”. This is supported by research that shows changes to cities, such as planting more trees, as well as behavioural shifts and public-health measures, can all protect people from dangerous heat.

Additionally, across Europe there is already a range of policies and measures in place to protect the most vulnerable from heatwaves. Many of these were brought in following the unprecedented summer of 2003, when 70,000 died from extreme heat.

These policies were highlighted by French environment minister Agnès Pannier-Runacher, in response to the far-right National Rally (RN) party’s AC proposals:

“The incompetent RN has just found out that nursing homes need air-conditioned rooms. Thank you, but it’s actually been mandatory since 2004.”

Another study found that measures that have already been rolled out in France would cut the projected death toll of a 2003-like heatwave by more than 75%. This is in part due to the expansion of AC in places such as nursing homes, but also other approaches, such as heat action plans.

For example, France has a multi-tiered action plan, which includes local governments ensuring access to cooled spaces and water, keeping a list of vulnerable individuals for targeted interventions, as well as national information campaigns.

According to the UN’s office for disaster risk reduction, this French plan has led to a “significant reduction in heat-related mortality”.

While action plans have proved successful in a number of nations, less than half of European countries have such a plan in place.

Back to top

‘Net-zero rules’ are not blocking AC installation in the UK

In the UK, Conservative politicians and right-leaning media have tried to pit the adoption of AC against net-zero policy.

Writing in the climate-sceptic Daily Telegraph, columnist Matthew Lynn claimed falsely:

“Strict net-zero rules now mean that aircon is effectively banned in the UK.”

(Further down the article, he concedes: “AC is not strictly speaking banned in new-build homes in the UK. But tough environmental rules mean that it is very hard, and expensive, to install in practice.”)

The same narrative has been used in articles by GB News, the Sun and others. A separate article in the Daily Telegraph’s “money” section goes further, claiming that AC had been “torn from homes under net-zero clampdown”.

A blog post from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government rebuts these claims, stating:

“There has been media coverage this week suggesting that AC is banned in homes. This is incorrect.”

For the UK, while it is true that fewer than 5% of homes currently have AC, this is largely due to the fact that it was not hot enough in the past to warrant the expense. Historically, the focus has therefore been on keeping buildings warm, rather than cool.

Extreme heat has previously been rare in the country, so homes were built with insulation and other measures to keep heat in during the “dank winters”. (See: Much of Europe has not needed AC in the past.)

Current regulations do not ban the installation of AC outright. However – as the government’s blog post notes – there is no blanket rule, meaning there are some localised differences.

Certain areas – or certain kinds of properties – may be subject to additional complications for installing AC.

In a 2025 video on Instagram, shadow secretary of state for energy security and net-zero Claire Coutinho referenced the London plan, for example, which is a framework for development in the capital launched in 2021. She said:

“[London mayor] Sadiq Khan says no. The London plan says we shouldn’t have air con because it uses too much energy. But this is mad! This is a poverty mindset that we need to get away from.”

The London Plan does not stop homes from having AC. It simply says that, for new buildings, passive design measures should be prioritised, such as the orientation of the building, the window design and incorporation of measures such as external shading and trees.

A recent response from the mayor added further measures, such as the need to “minimise the necessity for the operation of mechanical measures including AC, which would further add to the heat island effect within urban areas and add operational cost to residents”.

Elsewhere, new-build homes across England must meet the requirements of “part O” of the 2022 building regulation updates. This includes addressing overheating in buildings through energy-efficient design and prioritising passive cooling, with AC as a last resort.

For existing buildings, most AC units fall under “permitted development rights”, meaning no planning application is required to install them.

Additionally, regulations were relaxed in 2025 to make it easier to install an air-to-air heat pump – which can both heat and cool air – without planning permission.

This means that, far from blocking the expansion of AC, net-zero policy has made it easier to install specific cooling systems.

Speaking to Carbon Brief, Andrew Sissons, director of sustainable future at Nesta, says the government must now implement its announced £2,500 subsidy for air-to-air heat pumps “as quickly as possible”, to further ensure that the technology can be rolled out efficiently. He adds:

“[The government] should also continue to expand permitted development rights for air-to-air heat pumps, with a particular focus on flats and homes in denser areas. As long as heat pumps meet the MCS [Microgeneration Certification Scheme] noise test, there are few reasons to limit their use via the planning system.”

Some properties, such as large homes, listed buildings or those in conservation areas, may still require planning permission to install an air-to-air heat pump or other AC. Sissons notes that this can add cost and delay to installation.

While it cannot be said that AC has been blocked or banned due to net-zero, neither has it been prioritised.

This may shift as temperatures continue to rise. UK government advisors at the Climate Change Committee (CCC) suggest that 22% of the UK’s housing stock will likely need active cooling, such as AC, to cope with 2C of global warming.

The CCC’s recent adaptation report also calls for all new homes to be built using low-cost, passive cooling measures, alongside more AC.

Active cooling such as AC is more likely to be needed for retrofitting existing homes, the report adds.

Back to top

AC is not the only answer to overheating cities

AC has become increasingly politicised in Europe, as demonstrated by France’s RN party announcing its “grand plan for AC” in all public buildings.

As noted by Dutch MEP Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, this “far-right” embrace of AC is coming from the same people who for years have “delayed emissions reductions”.

In response, left-leaning policymakers in Europe have frequently downplayed the role of AC, prioritising programmes of urban greening and retrofitting older buildings.

Such approaches for dealing with extreme heat have already proved successful. Therefore, many experts argue that these methods, alongside AC, will be essential to prepare for a hotter world.

According to the IPCC’s sixth assessment report, adaptive infrastructure, such as urban forests and green roofs, can reduce energy use because of cooling, with co-benefits for climate, air quality, physical and mental health.

While retrofitting older buildings for heat as well as insulating them from the cold might prove challenging, urban greening and an active shade policy – one that determines how much of every street is exposed to direct sunlight – are simple measures cities can adopt.

Some experts have also warned about the high cost of running AC, expressing concerns that excessive reliance on the technology could increase energy poverty.

In a Carbon Brief guest post published in 2025, researchers at the Basque Centre for Climate Change found that framing AC as the “default solution” can miss the opportunity to design “more inclusive, human-centred responses” to rising temperatures.

William Lewis, a PhD candidate and one of the guest post’s authors, tells Carbon Brief it is not a case of “one or the other”, when considering AC and other options:

“We have this opportunity in European countries to choose a slightly different path [from the US], which isn’t AC in every single home.”

King’s College London’s Pillai says that, by centring the debate on AC, the far-right response to the heatwaves in Europe has “completely neglected the science of how you cool human beings”.

There are many solutions, he adds, that are already widely used across hot developing countries, such as ceiling fans, windows that open and cross-ventilation, as well as strategies to reduce cumulative hours of heat exposure.

Pillai tells Carbon Brief that, while places reaching 42C and higher “definitely need to think about AC very seriously”, places in the “low to mid 30Cs” could rely on these alternatives.

Behavioural change, he adds, is the “least glamorous part” of heat policy, but “pulls most of the weight” of protecting people. These include a wide range of actions and responses – from reducing heat exposure, to wearing lighter clothing and drinking more water and fluids.

There are also workplace protections. Pillai tells Carbon Brief that these could include legislation on mandatory work breaks, cooling and shade requirements at workplaces, as well as health insurance that covers heat stress days that have been lost by heat-exposed workers.

Back to top

The post Eight facts about air conditioning amid an overheated global debate appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Eight facts about air conditioning amid an overheated global debate

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com