Connect with us

Published

on

Investing in flood defences, air conditioning and other measures to protect the UK from climate change will provide “long-term savings” for the country, according to the Climate Change Committee (CCC).

The government’s climate advisors have proposed a set of climate-adaptation actions that would require at least an extra £11bn per year in spending, largely from the private sector.

Most of this investment would go towards keeping buildings cool and protecting them from floods, as well as building reservoirs and supporting water-efficiency measures.

The committee says this is a “manageable level of investment” that will shave billions of pounds off climate change-driven damages that the UK will experience in the coming years.

Crucially, the CCC stresses that this approach would be “cheaper than facing the damages”.

This analysis comes from the CCC’s new “well-adapted UK” report, which sets out more than 100 actions that the committee says could help the UK prepare for global warming up to 2C above pre-industrial levels by 2050.

The CCC highlights 20 overarching objectives and a set of measurable targets that it says should be prioritised in the coming years, such as curbing deaths related to extreme heat.

This first-of-its-kind “solutions-focused” report will feed into the UK government’s upcoming fourth climate-change risk assessment, due in 2027, and inform its approach to climate adaptation.

Here, Carbon Brief provides an overview of the key messages in the 554-page report, including the actions highlighted by the CCC and the policy levers required to implement them.

What is the ‘well-adapted UK’ report?

The CCC’s new report on how to create a “well-adapted UK” sits alongside a legal process designed to ensure the country is prepared for the impacts of climate change.

It warns that the UK has not yet done enough to adapt to climate change and sets out priorities – as well as potential solutions – for the challenges ahead.

The CCC’s work stems from the Climate Change Act 2008, under which the UK government must publish a Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA) every five years. This must set out the risks and opportunities the nation is facing due to climate change.

A key pillar of the act is the creation of the CCC, an independent body that provides advice on the climate-related risks facing the UK and how it should adapt.

The CCC has previously produced three technical reports to advise the government on adaptation. Today sees the publication of the fourth set of advice, officially known as the CCRA4-IA technical report. The “well-adapted UK” report sits alongside this.

(The CCC also makes more frequent assessments of adaptation strategies produced by England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland individually.)

This is the first time the CCC has produced “well-adapted UK”, which it describes as a “solution-focused report” providing suggested government actions to address adaptation needs.

Speaking during a press briefing ahead of the report launch, Baroness Brown, chair of the CCC’s adaptation committee, said:

“It’s a first for us, the first time we’ve produced a report of this sort.It forms part of our independent assessment for the fourth climate-change risk assessment and it contains our advice to government.

“It’s now nearly 20 years since the Climate Change Act was passed and, despite making very strong progress on reducing emissions since 2008, I think we all agree that we have done nothing like enough to address the increasing risk from the impacts of climate change to the UK today.”

The CCC report offers evidence to support action by individual UK governments, as well as other organisations focused on adaptation.

It highlights three priority areas as the UK prepares for 2C of warming by 2050: providing cooling to protect from heat; increasing flood preparedness; and improving water management.

The report says that deploying adaptation at scale around these priorities will help avoid loss of life, as well as disruption to people and the economy.

It also sets out climate risks, actions and enablers across 14 key systems, breaking the analysis down into sectors to allow for clear recommendations on what needs to be done and accountability for delivering progress.

However, the report notes that “climate risks do not simply sit in single systems. Many of the most dangerous risks will cascade across them.”

The CCC states that “adaptation cannot wait”, adding that the duty of the state to keep people safe and secure is being compromised by climate change. As such, it says adaptation needs the same level of focus and commitment as geopolitical and other threats.

The report says:

“Damage is already happening, which can be avoided. Taking action today is cheaper than taking action tomorrow. The main challenge is leadership, getting adaptation underway at sufficient scale and speed.”

Finally, the CCC states that adaptation cannot replace efforts to limit warming, but is instead an “essential complement” to cutting greenhouse gas emissions. It describes adaptation action as “both necessary and achievable, but also urgent”.

Back to top

What are the climate risks facing the UK?

The UK is already facing increased threats of heatwaves, extreme rainfall and sea level rise due to human-driven burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use, says the report.

Since 2000, the UK has experienced all 10 of its hottest years on record and temperatures passed 40C for the first time in 2022. There is a 50% likelihood of reaching those temperatures again in the next 12 years, says the CCC.

Warmer air can hold more moisture than colder air, with the result that these warmer temperatures have been accompanied by heavier and more intense rainfall in all seasons of the year across the UK.

Additionally, the UK has experienced about 200 millimetres of sea level rise since 1901, with this occurring at an accelerating rate over the last three decades, notes the CCC. The largest increases in sea levels have occurred on the country’s southern coast.

The level of risk facing the country in the future will be determined largely by the level of global emissions, states the report.

Under current emissions pathways, the world will reach around 2C of warming above pre-industrial temperatures by 2050, climbing to nearly 3C by the end of the century.

Lower warming levels are still possible, if countries strengthen their current climate policies and accelerate global emissions reductions. At the same time, scenarios involving even higher levels of warming “should be considered in long-term planning”, says the report.

The table below summarises potential changes to the UK’s climate hazards at 2C of global warming in 2050 and at 4C of global warming in 2100.

In addition to direct impacts on the UK, says the report, the country “cannot be isolated” from global climate risks, such as destructive extreme-weather events.

The report notes that risk is based on three components: hazard; exposure; and vulnerability.

Hazard refers to the physical event that can cause damage. Exposure refers to the presence of people or assets in the area that may be affected by a hazard. Vulnerability is how susceptible something or someone is to experiencing damage if it is exposed to a hazard, accounting for the ability to take adaptation measures.

Current vulnerability and exposure are both highly variable across the country, with marginalised groups likely to be disproportionately impacted by climate change. How these will change in the future is highly uncertain, it says.

Back to top

How much will it cost to prepare the UK for climate change?

The CCC estimates that delivering its package of adaptation actions will require additional investment of at least £11bn per year, shared between public and private sectors.

(The report notes that, given limits in available information, this is “likely to be an underestimate, but it gives a sense of the scale of investment needed”.)

Roughly a third of this investment will likely be needed for air conditioning and passive cooling measures, according to the committee. Another third will be required for flood defences and water conservation.

Overall, the CCC says around 36% of the expected investment is in areas “that have tended to be funded by the public sector”, while 41% will likely fall to the private sector. The remaining costs are “undetermined”.

The committee stresses that “acting now is cheaper than acting later” and that investing in adaptation is “cheaper than facing the damages” caused by climate change.

Climate-related damages are already costing the UK economy and could grow to around 1-5% of GDP by 2050 – roughly £60-260bn per year – under scenarios of around 2C global warming, according to the CCC.

(The CCC has previously suggested that cutting emissions to net-zero would require investments of £20-40bn per year, yielding savings of a similar magnitude.)

In this context, the £11bn a year “is a manageable level of investment for the UK economy” that will deliver “long-term savings for both public and private actors”, states the report.

CCC analysis of a new adaptation package covering heat and health, urban heat and water scarcity suggests that these measures alone could save up to £12bn a year in climate-damage costs by the 2050s. This can be seen in the chart below.

Potential for a package of additional adaptation measures
Potential for a package of additional adaptation measures (light blue) to reduce costs from climate-change impacts, £bn, compared to existing adaptation measures (dark blue). Source: CCC analysis.

The CCC stresses that many adaptation actions are “low-cost or low-regret”, highlighting numerous examples that show very favourable benefit-cost ratios. For example, flood resilience measures tend to produce benefits five-times greater than their costs.

In addition, 53 of the 120 adaptation actions for which costs were assessed provided additional “co-benefits”, such as the energy and water bill savings that can result from water-efficiency improvements.

While the CCC does not provide a comprehensive estimate of the financial impact of such co-benefits, it says they “strengthen the case for action”.

The report also emphasises that it makes financial sense to target adaptation measures at people or assets that are particularly vulnerable to and at-risk from climate impacts.

Back to top

What measures does the CCC recommend?

The CCC’s report sets out a range of climate risks and required adaptation actions across 14 “key systems”, including health, land and the economy as a whole.

As well as proposing more than 100 “actions”, the committee lays out the kind of policies that could be implemented to achieve them. For example, actions in the building sector might require changes to planning policy.

The report also sets out key “enablers” for adaptation in each of these key systems. Common enablers are adequate financial resources, better monitoring processes and improved public awareness of adaptation issues.

The CCC sets out 20 overarching objectives and 39 proposed targets to guide the UK’s adaptation progress out to 2050, which “set out a clear and measurable ambition for a well-adapted UK”. These objectives and targets can be seen in the table below.

The committee says its goals are “clearly measurable and time-bound” and will rely on actions being implemented – often cutting across different systems. For example, curbing deaths linked to extreme heat will rely on the construction of cooler buildings.

For each of the 14 key systems identified, the CCC says it has applied “10 principles for effective adaptation” in order to “inform meaningful recommendations to national government departments”.

Among other things, these principles include preparing for 2C of warming by 2050 and “considering” 4C of warming by 2100.

The following headings break down the key threats facing each of the key systems identified by the CCC – and the actions needed to prepare them for climate change.

Back to top

Health

Climate change poses a direct threat to population health, with extreme heat linked to everything from increased threat of heart attacks to the spread of climate-sensitive infectious diseases.

At the same time, heatwaves and flooding can disrupt the normal functioning of the UK’s health and social-care system, which can also harm people’s health.

The CCC identifies the following “priority adaptation actions” to protect people from climate change, with a particular focus on minimising excess heat-related mortality and morbidity:

  • Behavioural changes – supported by information services – to avoid health risks during hot weather;
  • Public cooling spaces to protect vulnerable people during heat events;
  • Visits by healthcare or community workers to high-risk people;
  • Mental health treatment for people exposed to flooding;
  • Surveillance and monitoring of climate hazards and climate-sensitive diseases;
  • Early warning systems, including the expansion of heat alerts beyond England;
  • Expanding natural areas that can provide shade and reduce the urban heat island effect;
  • Maintaining “safe” water bodies that reduce breeding of endemic mosquitoes and harmful algal blooms.

The CCC also identifies priority actions to protect health and social-care facilities from extreme weather:

  • Cooling measures in healthcare facilities, including retrofitting buildings with “passive cooling” measures and installing air conditioning;
  • Flood defences and other protective measures, such as waterproofed electricals, at hospitals and care homes;
  • Training for health professionals that focuses on climate-related health risks; 
  • Business continuity planning to manage staff absences during extreme-weather events;
  • Occupational support to protect healthcare staff during extreme weather;
  • Emergency scenario planning for climate-related emergencies.

Many of the required actions would fall to devolved governments and rely on public funding.

The CCC says the UK government could ensure facilities are built to cope with climate extremes by embedding adaptation in statutory health, building and environmental standards. It adds that there is also a need for education programmes to encourage behavioural change.

Crucially, the committee also highlights the need for sustained government funding for adaptation-specific measures. In total, the CCC says the known investment required to deliver adaptation in the health system could be around £0.7-1.7bn per year.

Back to top

Built environment and communities

Climate change presents numerous risks to the UK’s settlements, buildings and communities, according to the CCC.

The report notes that already, more than half of UK homes are at risk of overheating, 6.3m properties are located in flood-risk areas and extreme weather is causing millions of pounds of damage to properties every year.

Without additional adaptation measures by 2050, it says that the risk of overheating is projected to be 4.2 times higher and that 27% more homes are projected to be at risk of flooding and coastal erosion in England. In addition, the risk of subsidence in Great Britain will increase, with 11% of properties affected by the 2070s, as well as other impacts.

As such, the CCC has set out a series of recommended actions to ensure settlements, buildings and communities are fit-for-purpose and durable places to live and work:

  • Building out catchment-scale flood defences, including a mix of engineering “hard” defences and natural defences;
  • Expanding urban green infrastructure, for example, street trees, parks and waterways, to provide natural cooling and shade;
  • Introducing more “sustainable drainage systems”, such as green roofs, permeable paving, rain gardens and others;
  • Helping communities prepare for extreme-weather events;
  • Build out nature-based solutions to manage changes from sea level rise and coastal erosion;
  • Introducing cooling measures in buildings, including both active cooling – such as air conditioning – and passive cooling measures;
  • Utilising government schemes, such as Flood Re, to help ensure all households can access insurance and that it is affordable.

The CCC highlights engagement with communities, ensuring that they are well informed about the future climate risks they face from extreme-weather events, as a key enabler of the above actions.

Holland Park, an affluent area of West London.
Holland Park, an affluent area of West London. Credit: BBA Travel / Alamy Stock Photo

It notes that a number of policies are already in place to address flooding and overheating, as well as funding for large-scale flood-defence projects. However, it says more can be brought in to support the adaptation of the existing and planned building stock. 

Back to top

Public services

The CCC’s assessment of public services covers the facilities and operation of services outside of health and social care, such as education, justice and emergency services.

It highlights that hazards such as heatwaves and flooding can cause closure and disruption to the operation of services, as well as impact things such as children’s ability to concentrate. Even in the current climate, it says an estimated 4.3% of cumulative learning time is lost in England due to high temperatures.

Emergency workers are increasingly facing challenges created by climate change. For example, wildfires increase demand for fire and rescue, police and environmental-incident response services.

The CCC calls for the creation of new targets to help protect people from the impacts of increased temperatures and flood risk, including: internal temperatures in learning environments should be kept between 16-25C by 2050; and internal temperatures at prisons and justice facilities should be kept between 16-26C.

By 2030, all emergency services and incident responders should be equipped to meet all weather events, adds the committee.

The CCC sets out suggested actions the government could take to ensure that services operate during extreme weather at levels at least as good as today:

  • Introducing outdoor shading, such as trees and canopies, at sites such as playgrounds and outside school gates;
  • Rolling out passive cooling strategies;
  • Introducing active cooling, such as air conditioning, where necessary to reduce indoor temperatures;
  • Rolling out surface-water flood alleviation measures;
  • Ensuring key assets are adapted, such as backup generators and response vehicles, so that climate change does not impact the delivery of public services;
  • Rostering and timetabling should take into account climate-related travel and health issues, bolstered by flexible capacity within services and staff training;
  • Introducing surveillance and early warning systems.

The CCC adds that retrofitting buildings to allow them to adapt to climate change will require both up-front funding and long-term revenue budgets, as will expansions of personnel.

It says policy should be used to ensure that building regulations and design standards for public buildings are suitable for future climate conditions. Additionally, the government should look to provide public funding, accessible and reliable climate information and help to improve joint working between different departments, delivery bodies and responders.

Back to top

Cultural heritage

The CCC considers four aspects of cultural heritage in its report: cultural and archaeological sites and landscapes; buildings that are listed or otherwise significant; fixed assets, such as statues, monuments and shipwrecks; and moveable assets, such as art and historic documents.

Without adaptation, flooding, storms and coastal erosion may reduce access to these sites and assets, or even destroy them entirely. However, due to their varied nature, any adaptation plans need to be highly context-specific, it says.

Antony Gormley statue submerged in the Water of Leith at Bells Weir.
Antony Gormley statue submerged in the Water of Leith at Bells Weir. Credit: Craig Brown / Alamy Stock Photo.

The report notes that many of the CCC’s priority adaptation actions are broadly applicable across the four classes of cultural-heritage assets, such as:

  • Increasing the frequency of inspections and repairs for built assets;
  • Creating or strengthening flood barriers and coastal defences;
  • Improving drainage around cultural-heritage sites;
  • Adjusting opening times and access to help protect visitors and staff, such as temporary closures during extreme weather or installing raised walkways;
  • Incorporating technology and digital solutions, such as early-warning systems, digitising collections and creating virtual tours;
  • Managing loss, such as by relocating assets and transforming the use of historic buildings.

Adapting the UK’s cultural-heritage assets will require an unknown amount of funding, along with training to increase adaptation-planning capabilities, says the report. These plans must be developed for each context, it says, incorporating local risks, costs and the “potential acceptable future states” of these assets.

The report calls for heritage organisations to “plan for future climate conditions and share these plans for others to learn from”. It also recommends that such considerations should be required for projects receiving public funds in the future.

Back to top

Water and wastewater

The report groups together the UK’s water supply – both public and private – and wastewater infrastructure.

It notes that these systems are “not fit for the current, let alone future, climate”, with risks of both drought and floods expected to increase across the UK under future warming.

Droughts are the “most significant climate hazard” facing the water system, while heavy rainfall and flooding can damage both water and wastewater infrastructure and overwhelm the capacity of wastewater-transport systems.

The CCC proposes several priority adaptation actions for the water subsystem:

  • Installing water-efficient products, such as low-flow fixtures on taps and toilets;
  • Reusing non-potable water in specific instances, such as using rainwater to cool data centres;
  • Encouraging behavioural changes, including through smart metering and water-efficiency labelling;
  • Improving water-use efficiency in private use;
  • Repairing leaks quickly – particularly the largest and most damaging ones;
  • Installing protections against flooding and erosion;
  • Increasing the use of reservoirs to store excess winter rainfall for summer usage;
  • Improving pollution-management systems to protect existing water sources;
  • Increasing water-treatment capacity and efficiency.

The committee also proposes actions to address adaptation in the wastewater subsystem:

  • Separating the systems that carry rainwater from those that carry wastewater;
  • Reducing the area of impermeable surfaces to decrease runoff;
  • Encouraging behavioural changes to avoid blockages and flooding;
  • Increasing the volume that the wastewater system can treat at a given time;
  • Improving and decentralising water-treatment processes.

To adapt the water system to future climate change, the committee suggests creating minimum water-efficiency standards for appliances, as well as for new water users, such as data centres.

It also calls for increased planning and regulation between the water and wastewater sectors, as well as across other sectors that contribute heavily to water usage or wastewater generation.

Thames Water personnel fixing a burst water main near Windsor Castle.
Thames Water personnel fixing a burst water main near Windsor Castle. Credit: Maureen McLean / Alamy Stock Photo

Back to top

Energy

The CCC warns that climate change is already impacting the energy sector. This includes electricity generation, storage and transport, as well as fuel production, storage and transport of gas, oil, bioenergy and sustainable aviation fuels.

It says that electricity networks are vulnerable to damage from flooding, high winds and increased heat, while heat and drought can reduce efficiency and capacity across the electricity grid and at power plants.

For example, the CCC says that in England, 22% of the electricity infrastructure is currently at risk of flooding, but this is expected to increase to 26% by 2040 due to climate change.

Flooding and water scarcity are the areas of most concern for the fuel-supply system.

The CCC adds that there are interdependencies between fuel and electricity systems.

The committee identifies the following adaptation actions to reduce the climate risk facing the energy system and to allow the current level of resilience to be maintained:

  • Siting energy assets to reduce their exposure to climate hazards;
  • Building redundancy into the energy system design to avoid single points of failure;
  • Reinforcing existing energy assets and designing new ones with appropriate; protections; 
  • Ensuring that regular inspections of energy assets are undertaken and preventative maintenance is taken where possible;
  • Managing vegetation around electricity and gas networks; 
  • Preparing ways to anticipate, respond to and recover from extreme events, such as early warning systems;
  • Provide alternative sources of backup power.

The CCC identifies resources and funding as key enablers for undertaking these actions. It recognises the significant build-out of new equipment that is planned in the next five to 10 years in the energy sector, stating that it is “easier and more cost-effective to build resilience into infrastructure projects at the design stage rather than retrofitting later”.

Other enablers include clear plans, roles and responsibilities being set early and the use of technology and innovation.

The CCC notes that governance of the energy system is “complex”, with some elements centralised and others devolved, as well as splits across the public and private sectors. However, it says policy levers can be used to drive and monitor adaptation across segments, such as regulation, strategic planning and innovation provision.

The committee calls for continued UK government focus on timely and appropriate targets for investments, clarity on the future of the gas grid, wider mandatory adaptation reporting and other measures.

Back to top

Transport

The committee’s transport-system assessment includes roads, rail and public transportation systems, as well as maritime and aviation infrastructure and operations.

The report notes that the interconnected nature of the UK’s transport system “offers some built-in redundancy”, but also increases the risk of cascading climate impacts.

The biggest climate hazard facing the UK’s transport system is flooding. However, it is also at risk from subsidence, erosion, high winds and extreme heat, according to the report.

Rail track dangling after heavy snow and floods at Stover Canal, Newton Abbot, Devon.
Rail track dangling after heavy snow and floods at Stover Canal, Newton Abbot, Devon. Credit: nidpor / Alamy Stock Photo

The CCC recommends the following measures as priorities for physically adapting the transport sector:

  • Improving drainage systems across roadways, tunnels and urban rail systems;
  • Installing coastal flood defences, such as seawalls and “rock armour”, near infrastructure located in floodplains;
  • Reinforcing embankments, installing retaining structures and strengthening earthworks to protect against erosion;
  • Using materials that are durable at higher temperatures, as well as integrating other temperature-reducing measures, such as shading and airflow;
  • Reinforcing tall structures against high winds.

It also recommends several operational adaptations for the sector:

  • Increasing preventative maintenance, including by clearing drains, dredging waterways, patching tarmac and painting rails;
  • Using technology to optimise schedule, route and speed-limit adjustments;
  • Implementing contingency plans to protect system-critical assets during severe disruptions.

To implement these adaptation measures, the CCC recommends improving the available guidance and reporting for planners and operators. It notes that planning policies and design codes should embed an “appropriate consideration of climate risk”, such as exposure to hazards.

It also calls for improved resilience standards and engagement with the public to determine the level of service expected in the future and the level of investment required to achieve that.

Back to top

Waste

The waste sector is facing climate risks predominantly relating to mine tailings and historic landfill sites, with heavier rainfall increasing the risk of landslides that can threaten communities, according to the CCC.

For example, 368 out of 2,590 coal-mine tips in Wales are currently categorised as posing a potential risk to public safety. Increased rainfall and storms under a 2C of global warming in 2050 will increase the potential for landslides at these sites, as well as the number of sites that require adaptation.

The report says that government action is needed to reduce these risks. It adds that better data and monitoring should be used to prioritise the sites that pose the greatest risk.

The CCC sets out actions to ensure these waste sites are managed safely and do not harm people or the environment around them:

  • Improving drainage at waste sites and stabilising their slopes stabilised; 
  • Installing coastal and flood defences at waste sites where needed;
  • Treating waste to stabilise or remove hazardous materials; 
  • Permanently removing or relocating waste from vulnerable sites.

The biggest enabler for these changes will be resources and funding, according to the CCC.

Local authorities have some regulatory power to manage historic waste sites, which it says they should use to ensure adaptation actions are taken.

Back to top

Digital and telecoms

The digital and telecommunications sector is made up of both public and private networks, as well as infrastructure such as data centres, wired connections and other assets.

Climate change threatens the sector directly, by damaging or otherwise challenging this telecommunications infrastructure, according to the CCC. However, says the report, the “main climate risk” facing the telecoms sector is its “fundamental dependency on the power system”.

The report notes that storms and flooding can damage infrastructure and cause power failures, while high temperatures can overwhelm cooling systems and force systems to overheat.

The CCC calls for several physical adaptation measures to protect digital and telecoms assets:

  • Choosing infrastructure sites to reduce vulnerabilities to flooding and wind;
  • Installing physical protection measures, such as flood defences and underground cables, for existing infrastructure;
  • Completing the changeover to fibre-based digital systems, which are more water-resistant than existing networks;
  • Adopting cooling systems and upgrading existing ones to withstand projected future temperatures;
  • Adopting more water-efficient cooling systems to reduce vulnerability to water shortages.

Resilience can also be achieved through redundancy measures, it says:

  • Installing backup generators, on-site batteries and other redundancies for the power supply;
  • Providing backup batteries to consumers to ensure access to emergency services in case of power outages;
  • Creating redundancy in cooling systems and network connections;
  • Encouraging consumers to store key data in multiple locations to reduce the impact of data-centre outages.

Some of these actions are already underway, notes the report. For example, the changeover to fibre-based systems is expected to be completed by January 2027.

It says resilience will also require regulatory clarity, such as confirming that the UK’s Office of Communications (Ofcom) has a mandate to cover data centres, as well as climate resilience. It notes that this oversight is “expected to be confirmed” by the pending Cyber Security and Resilience Bill.

The CCC also calls for mandatory reporting of climate risks and resilience plans for companies that provide critical telecoms services.

Back to top

Land

Even if adaptation measures are taken, the land sector – including not just the UK’s terrestrial ecosystems, but also land-related commercial industries, such as farming and forestry – will “not all be able to stay the same as today”, says the report.

Changing temperatures and rainfall patterns are some of the most pressing challenges facing the land sector, with the hot-and-dry summer of 2025 causing more than £800m in revenue loss for England’s farmers.

Climate change is also increasing the frequency of threats, such as wildfires, pests and pathogens, as well as the spread of invasive alien species.

Flooded fields with hay bails on farmland on the Somerset Levels.
Flooded fields with hay bails on farmland on the Somerset Levels. Credit: Paul Glendell / Alamy Stock Photo

The CCC identifies several priority actions for adaptation in the land sector, with different types of terrestrial ecosystems requiring different measures:

  • Increasing the diversity and connectivity of habitats for both wild lands and land-based commercial activities;
  • Rewetting peatlands and allowing other ecosystems to naturally regenerate;
  • Managing the spread of invasive species, pests, pathogens and diseases;
  • Preparing for wildfires, as well as reducing their occurrence and spread through managing fuel loads and maintaining fire breaks;
  • Encouraging the use of resilient soil- and water-management practices and improving on-farm biodiversity;
  • Adjusting farm planning in response to the changing climate, such as by shifting to different crops or adjusting the timing of planting and harvesting;
  • Planting shade trees near riverbanks;
  • Creating new coastal habitats;
  • Manually moving vulnerable species to locations where they may be able to thrive under a changed climate.

It adds that achieving resilience in the land sector can also be aided by reducing the non-climate pressures that threaten habitats, such as pollution.

The committee notes that delivering on these actions will require both the support of government agencies and private landowners. It says that doing so will require public funding for adaptation, cultural awareness and acceptance of change, as well as flexible regulation and coherent frameworks on land use.

Back to top

Sea

Similar to the land sector, the CCC’s suggestions for sea-system adaptation measures cut across multiple other sectors, including human health, international trade and food security.

The UK’s seas are already both warming and acidifying in response to human-caused fossil-fuel emissions, with impacts up and down the marine food chain.

By 2050, without adaptation measures, the UK could experience seabird population declines of more than 70%, fisheries employment losses of up to 20% and a rise in disease outbreaks, says the report.

The CCC identifies the following priority adaptation actions focused on both marine habitats and on human activities related to the sea sector:

  • Creating larger, better-connected marine protected areas;
  • Improving international cooperation around marine protection;
  • Diversifying the species targeted by fisheries – moving away from cold-water species, such as cod and haddock, towards warmer-water ones, such as tuna;
  • Increasing the genetic diversity of farmed species to increase resilience to disease;
  • Sustainably managing wild fish populations, even if this means reducing fishing in the short term;
  • Investing in more resilient equipment to withstand stronger storms;
  • Relocating aquaculture away from the migration pathways of wild species;
  • Preventing the spread of invasive species, diseases, pests and pathogens.

Similar to the land system, the committee says that reducing external pressures – including pollution and harmful fishing practices – can support achieving resilience in the sea system.

The report notes several existing policies that can aid in adaptation for the sea system, including the UK Marine Strategy and the 2020 Fisheries Act. However, it notes that “many actions to adapt [the sector] sit within the industry itself”.

Specific government actions that can support adaptation include changing the licensing and quotas for the fishing industry to reduce the pressure of overfishing, it adds.

Back to top

Food security

The report considers the “food security” system to include food and agricultural inputs imported from abroad, separate from the country’s own farming and fisheries.

It notes that in 2023, 40% of the UK’s food was imported.

A number of extreme weather events pose hazards to food production and transport, potentially impacting food security both in the UK and globally. These events can also drive up food prices, while warming trends can lower average crop yields and drive changes in the suitability of growing regions.

While agricultural productivity is projected to continue to increase in the future due to improved technological efficiency, it is “unclear how these trends will interact with climate change and extreme weather shocks”, says the report.

Dry and cracked soil in a field in rural Worcestershire, during dry weather.
Dry and cracked soil in a field in rural Worcestershire, during dry weather. Credit: Alan Harbottle / Alamy Stock Photo

Adapting the UK’s food-security system will require undertaking a number of priority actions, says the CCC:

  • Shifting working hours for agricultural labourers, providing shading and taking other measures to protect workers from heat stress;
  • Investing in capacity-building, skills and technology to improve sustainability and efficiency for local producers;
  • Diversifying the supply chains of both imported foods and inputs to UK agriculture, such as fertilisers, animal feed and fuel;
  • Reducing food waste (edible food that is discarded at the retail level or by consumers);
  • Investing in resilient cold-chain infrastructure for transporting and storing temperature-sensitive food products;
  • Stress-testing the global commodity markets and preparing for potential shocks, such as export bans;
  • Considering centralised stockpiling of critical food supplies.

Many of these actions are “expected to be delivered by market forces and industry”, says the report, although doing so will require engagement with and improved information for these actors. It suggests that requiring food-related businesses to disclose their climate risks could facilitate adaptation decisions.

The report also suggests strengthening international collaboration, such as through food-trade agreements, as well as providing support to vulnerable groups to alleviate potential food-price inflation due to climate shocks.

Back to top

Economy and finance

The CCC divides the economy and finance sector into three subsystems: businesses, which provide goods and services; finance, which provides banking, investment and insurance services; and the macroeconomy, which accounts for the country’s overall economic strength through GDP, employment, inflation and other indicators.

All three of these subsystems are impacted by climate change, says the report.

Climate hazards, such as heatwaves, storms and flooding, can disrupt supply chains and daily operations in the business sector.

Climate-related damages can threaten financial assets and increase insurance costs, which can “reduce capacity to recover from climate events and create risks to financial stability and economic growth”, it says.

Meanwhile, macroeconomic indicators such as GDP and inflation can be “negatively affected by all climate-related impacts across sectors”, adds the report.

For the business subsystem, the CCC recommends the following priority adaptation actions:

  • Identifying and managing climate-related risks to commercial assets, such as by installing flood defences and air-conditioning systems;
  • Protecting workers from climate hazards, such as by adjusting working hours or providing shade and water;
  • Reducing supply-chain exposure to climate hazards by diversifying suppliers, stockpiling resources and making procurement decisions with climate risk in mind;
  • Identifying opportunities for businesses to provide adaptation innovations, goods and services.

For the finance subsystem, the committee outlines the following priorities:

  • Collecting company-level data on climate risks and adaptation;
  • Incorporating climate risks and adaptation costs into financial decisions;
  • Reducing financial risks by accounting for the climate risks posed to financial institutions’ capital assets;
  • Integrating adaptation into insurance products, pooling risk and issuing climate-responsive products, such as resilience bonds, which fund adaptation projects.

The CCC also details several priority actions for the macroeconomy:

  • Creating a fiscal framework for the UK government that incorporates adaptation costs and potential future climate-related spending;
  • Effectively responding to climate-related inflationary pressures;
  • Reducing the climate risks associated with critical supply chains, such as energy, food and pharmaceuticals.

Carrying out these actions will require resources and capacity-building for businesses and financial institutions, as well as clearly defined roles and responsibilities for all involved actors, says the report.

Back to top

National security and international engagement

The final sectoral section in the CCC’s “well-adapted UK” report looks at how international climate change poses risks to national security, foreign policy and development interests.

The committee says a key message is that the UK is interconnected with the rest of the world, meaning that no matter how well-adapted the country is domestically, it will be threatened by international climate risks.

The CCC says that national security ”cannot be ensured without climate resilience”. Moreover, it says that the UK has an obligation to help other countries adapt and build resilience – and that it will benefit from such aid.

This comes just days after the UK announced its intention to cut funding to the UN’s flagship Green Climate Fund, which provides climate financing for developing countries.

The CCC highlights that “climate-change impacts, weak economic development and inequality exacerbate each other”, as well as noting that climate hazards are a growing driver of involuntary migration.

It recommends the following measures to help maintain UK national security and fulfil international commitments in the face of global climate risks:

  • Adapting the defence sector, including training and equipping forces to operate in more extreme weather conditions;
  • Embedding climate considerations within decision-making processes;
  • Providing direct adaptation assistance to support other countries and territories;
  • Mobilising international private adaptation finance;
  • Sharing and exporting the UK’s capabilities internationally, both in climate science and financial services.

Financial resources are one of the most important enablers for these actions, alongside a clear division of roles and responsibilities and effective use of data and monitoring.

The CCC also calls for sustained diplomacy and engagement on climate adaptation.

Back to top

The post CCC: Investing in ‘urgent’ UK adaptation action ‘cheaper than climate damages’ appeared first on Carbon Brief.

CCC: Investing in ‘urgent’ UK adaptation action ‘cheaper than climate damages’

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Extreme heat costing India’s poorest workers 2% of GDP, survey finds

Published

on

Low-income Indian workers, many of them migrants from rural areas hit by climate change, are paying for worsening extreme heat through lost working days and health complications, with the cost equivalent to 2% of national GDP per year, new research shows.

The International Institute of Environment and Development (IIED), a London-based think-tank, worked with local organisations to survey around 540 households of informal workers in three Indian cities: Ajmer, Delhi and Agra. Most had migrated from rural areas to find work in industries such as construction, brick-making, garment manufacturing and food packaging.

The survey found them struggling through long working days with little access to shade, cooling, rest or water, as well as few toilets for women. And even when they go home, many live in makeshift shelters or airless cramped rooms with barely a single fan, bringing almost no respite.

Outdoor workers are losing about 24 days of work a year due to heat, costing them nearly a tenth of their annual earnings, while indoor workers sacrifice roughly 15 days. On top of losing income, they are also bearing the cost of health problems like heat exhaustion, psychological stress and kidney damage brought on by repeated dehydration.

If the survey’s findings are extrapolated to a national level, the IIED researchers estimate that the decline in productivity and effects of kidney disease combined add up to lost wages of $78 billion each year.

    Vishram Meena, 45, from Alwar in Rajasthan, has worked on construction sites in Ajmer for more than a decade, toiling for 10 to 12 hours a day carrying materials and mixing cement in the full sun.

    In May 2024, on one of the hottest days, he collapsed after feeling dizzy and suffering a nosebleed. His wife and colleagues managed to get him to hospital where he was diagnosed with heat stroke. He has since returned to the same building work because the family needs the money.

    “I went back because what else could I do? We are not machines. We are human beings. The heat is killing us slowly,” he was quoted as saying in a report on the survey’s findings.

    “Victorian-era” conditions

    Ritu Bharadwaj, IIED’s director of climate resilience, finance and loss and damage, described some of the stories from workers about their experiences of extreme heat as “genuinely horrifying”.

    Kusum, a tailor at a garment manufacturing and export unit in Kapashera, Delhi, recounted how the machines for ironing finished garments are in the same tiny room where workers are making the clothes, with steam and hot air building up through her shift.

    Fans are too far apart to move the air and nothing has changed in over a decade, she said, adding that “in summer, the unit feels like a furnace”.

    “These are Victorian-era working conditions and they’re completely unacceptable in the 21st century,” said Bharadwaj. She called for stepped-up social protection from the government to pay people for days they are unable work due to heat, as well as micro-insurance schemes with payouts triggered by temperature measurements.   

    This money would help families buy food and pay medical bills when their income dips if they fall ill or cannot work their usual hours due to soaring temperatures.

    Climate change-driven heatwaves hit Delhi’s Red Fort market traders

    The aim of the IIED study, Bharadwaj added, is to get policy-makers’ attention by showing the scale of damage extreme heat is doing to India’s GDP in an economy whose growth relies on service-led industries. “If the workers within them start falling sick, you know it’s the economic growth which is going to get impacted,” she told a webinar to present the research.

    “Whether [policymakers] care about the workers or not, at least they would care about the GDP, and therefore then invest in their care,” she explained.

    Labour code leaves out heat

    However, Bharadwaj noted that a 2026 reform to India’s labour law bringing a range of regulations together in one code does not include heat-related protections for workers and only applies to businesses above a certain size. She urged the government to introduce a temperature threshold above which all workers would be able to stop their activities.

    IIED and its partners have also carried out a similar study in Bangladesh which will be published later this month, showing that extreme heat is costing its workforce the equivalent of nearly 1.4% of GDP.

    Shakirul Islam, chairperson of the Ovibashi Karmi Unnayan Program (OKUP) in Bangladesh, said the government had introduced stricter safety policies for garment-making companies after the Rana Plaza complex collapsed in 2013. But, he said, these rules are rarely followed by manufacturers, especially at the level of smaller subcontractors.

    The workers’ welfare centres that do exist are open mainly during work hours so they are difficult to visit. Some companies also make saline water available for heat stress, which is no good for those with high blood pressure, he noted.

    For Indian women workers, a just transition means surviving climate impacts with dignity

    Archana Shukla Mukherjee, CEO of India’s Change Alliance, which also partnered with IIED on the survey, said it was time to hold both the government and businesses accountable for finding solutions to the intensifying problem of extreme heat’s effects on workers.

    She said that employee state insurance schemes should identify heat stroke as an occupational disease while companies along the whole supply chain should start putting in place heat protection measures, including for informal workers and migrants.

    If the tools and mechanisms available to help workers do not reach the most vulnerable and marginalised people, “then I think we are not doing something right,” she said.

    The post Extreme heat costing India’s poorest workers 2% of GDP, survey finds appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Extreme heat costing India’s poorest workers 2% of GDP, survey finds

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Top maritime court rejects bid to halt UN deep-sea mining inquiry

    Published

    on

    A United Nations investigation into deep-sea mining firms will continue after the world’s top maritime court rejected their bid to suspend the inquiry triggered by a US-backed push to extract critical minerals from the ocean floor.

    In two orders issued on Saturday, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) declined to halt an inquiry launched by the International Seabed Authority (ISA) into whether permit holders, including Tonga Offshore Mining Ltd (TOML) and Nauru Ocean Resources Inc (NORI), have breached their obligations under UN exploration contracts.

    The two companies are subsidiaries of Canadian firm The Metals Company (TMC), which earlier this year sought permits from the United States to commercially mine the deep seabed in an area already covered by its UN exploration licences, bypassing the ISA’s regulatory process.

    The inquiry was opened after TMC’s move raised questions over whether its subsidiaries had complied with their contractual obligations to the ISA, which regulates mining in international waters under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. TOML and NORI sued the ISA last June for allegedly targeting them “in breach of due process” and without “good faith”.

      While allowing the inquiry to proceed, the court ordered the ISA to ensure the companies receive due process. Judges said the regulator must explain the factual and legal basis of its inquiry, clarify the procedures being followed and provide TOML and NORI with a meaningful opportunity to respond.

      The companies seeks to mine an area called the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, which holds vast reserves of critical minerals like nickel, manganese and rare earths but is also home to a little-studied deep ocean ecosystem with thousands of unnamed species.

      In response to the court’s ruling, the ISA welcomed the decision, saying the inquiry “remains in effect” and would continue “with due regard to all applicable legal requirements”.

      Last week, during an annual meeting of its member governments, ISA secretary-general Leticia Carvalho said the resources in the ocean floor are “the common heritage of humankind” and upheld the agency’s role as “more important than ever”.

      TMC also welcomed the court decision in a statement and claimed that judges ruled to “protect the rights of TMC subsidiaries”.

      “Contractors like NORI and TOML, who have together spent hundreds of millions of dollars on the promise of a fair regulatory framework, should be informed of the factual and legal basis of any non-compliance inquiries, understand the procedure being applied, and receive a meaningful opportunity to respond,” said Gerard Barron, CEO of The Metals Company.

      Iridogorgia and bamboo coral pictured around the Johnston Atoll Unit of the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument (Photo: NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research)

      Environmental groups said the ruling allows scrutiny of the companies’ actions to continue.

      Louisa Casson, deep-sea mining campaigner with Greenpeace, said the “entire litigation has been an egregious waste of time and money”, which was part of the industry’s “textbook distraction tactic” meant to delay the consequences of the inquiry.

      “If the inquiry confirms that TMC’s subsidiaries are breaching their contracts, governments must send the strongest possible signal that complicity in unlawful deep sea mining will not be tolerated,” she said.

      While investigation is still ongoing, NORI’s contract is set to expire this week and is up for review. Governments asked the ISA to report back and make “make appropriate recommendations” by the next ISA assembly, its main decision-making body set to take place next week from July 27 to 31.

      The court ordered both the ISA and TMC to submit a report on how they complied with the ruling by August 31, and called on both to “cooperate and refrain from any action that might lead to
      aggravating the dispute”.

      The post Top maritime court rejects bid to halt UN deep-sea mining inquiry appeared first on Climate Home News.

      Top maritime court rejects bid to halt UN deep-sea mining inquiry

      Continue Reading

      Climate Change

      Q&A: What the EU’s carbon market review means for climate action

      Published

      on

      The European Commission has put forward new plans to cut emissions under the EU carbon market more slowly, from 2031 onwards.

      On 17 July, the commission presented its long-awaited proposal for reform of the EU’s Emissions Trading System (ETS).

      It recommended a number of changes, including giving companies free allowances to cover their emissions for longer than previously planned, conditional on climate investment plans.

      The proposal offers a more business-friendly and “savvy” approach, argued EU climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra in a press conference.

      But critics believe it could “weaken” the system and put EU climate targets at risk.

      Alongside the proposal, the commission also announced a new target for electricity to make up 46% of energy consumption by 2040, doubling the current rate of 23%.

      This could cut EU spending on imported fossil fuels by €260bn annually, according to the commission.

      In this Q&A, Carbon Brief outlines the details of the new ETS proposal – which is subject to negotiation with member states – and explores what it could mean for climate action.

      What is the EU Emissions Trading System?

      The EU ETS is a carbon market, which puts a price on the greenhouse gas emissions of companies in power generation, industry, aviation and other sectors.

      It covers everything from electricity generation to steel production, as well as flights within the EU and a handful of other European countries.

      Emissions in these sectors have halved since the ETS launched in 2005, according to the European Commission.

      A European parliament briefing describes the system as a “cornerstone” of EU climate policy, covering around 40% of the bloc’s overall emissions.

      It applies to emissions in all 27 EU countries alongside Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and electricity generation in Northern Ireland. (The UK established its own ETS after Brexit.)

      The ETS operates as a “cap and trade” system, which puts a limit on the amount of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) that can be emitted within the sectors it covers.

      The “cap” on emissions gradually decreases each year until, eventually, they are expected to reach zero.

      The currency of trade within the system is “allowances”. One allowance is equal to one tonne of CO2-equivalent emissions.

      At present, around 57% of these allowances are bought by companies in auctions. The EU generated around €43bn in revenue from these auctions in 2025.

      The remaining 43% of allowances are given to companies for free, to cover some or all of their emissions.

      This is intended to prevent “carbon leakage” – the idea that companies operating in countries with strict climate policies will relocate to countries with looser rules.

      The amount of free allowances varies by sector, depending on factors including the level of competition with overseas firms that do not face a carbon price.

      What did companies and countries want from the ETS review?

      Countries and companies have been divided on how they wanted the ETS to evolve.

      Some pushed for more ambition to help meet European climate goals. Others called for it to be rolled back, amid rising costs for businesses.

      In March, 10 countries including Italy, Hungary and Poland wrote a letter to the commission calling the ETS an “existential risk” for key industrial sectors, reported Euronews.

      Italy had earlier even called for the system to be suspended outright.

      France and other countries favoured introducing a slower descent towards bringing the emissions cap to zero by 2039.

      Some steel and chemical companies also criticised the cost burden of the ETS.

      Other organisations focused on calls for stability and predictability in the system.

      In recent weeks, Spain, the Netherlands and five other countries called on the commission to “resist gutting” the ETS in its review, said E&E News. They said the ETS should be strengthened to “ensure long-term investment predictability and regulatory stability”.

      Weakening the system could “undermine investment signals and leave Europe more exposed to fossil-fuel shocks”, said a March 2026 briefing from climate thinktank E3G.

      Another E3G briefing said the “risk” is that politicians weaken the system as a short-term economic fix, “undermining one of the EU’s main tools for delivering on its industrial transformation ambitions”.

      Dozens of investment organisations called on EU countries to facilitate a “robust and predictable” ETS. They said that “policy stability is the cheapest investment stimulus available to the EU”.

      In its list of priorities for ETS reform, the NGO Carbon Market Watch said that “now is not the time to backslide” on its aims and terms.

      What is in the new proposal from the European Commission?

      The commission’s proposal outlines a number of changes to the ETS, to bring it in line with the EU’s climate goal to cut emissions to 90% below 1990 levels by 2040.

      The review will “bring relief to industry”, the commission says, while also continuing the ETS’ “essential” role in climate action.

      However, others are more sceptical about the impacts it could have on climate action.

      Below, Carbon Brief details the main aspects of the proposal.

      Free allowances extended

      The European Commission proposes to extend free allowances beyond a previously agreed date.

      Free allocations were due to reduce from this year and be fully removed by 2034.

      However, the commission has proposed to extend this to 2038, on the condition that companies receiving free allowances set out how they will invest in decarbonising their EU operations.

      It proposes that from 2031 onwards, 80% of free allowances in the system would be given to companies that have submitted plans for investment in EU decarbonisation.

      The remaining 20% of free allowances would only be allocated to those that can prove they followed through with planned investments and achieved the emissions reductions they had previously outlined.

      This move is a “step in the right direction”, says Dr Kirsten Scholl, the director for EU affairs at thinktank Epico, but it must not “impose excessive administrative burdens”.

      The EU’s carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) was designed to replace the existing system of free allowances in the ETS.

      It is a tax applied to certain imported goods, based on the amount of CO2 emissions released during their production. It began to be phased in at the start of 2026.

      As a result, free allocation is being gradually phased out from 2026-38.

      However, the commission has proposed that 15% of free allocations due to be removed because of CBAM should be reintroduced from 2028, to “reduce the speed at which CBAM is phased-in and mitigate the remaining carbon leakage risk”.

      The commission says that preventing carbon leakage “remains a crucial element” of the ETS.

      Pushing back the phase-out of free allowances and the full implementation of CBAM “risks squandering the EU’s credibility with investors and trading partners alike”, says Francesco Lombardi Stocchetti, a policy advisor on sustainable economy at the Bellona Foundation, an environmental NGO.

      “Europe cannot lead the clean industrial transition just by moving the goalposts,” he adds in a statement.

      Slowing path to reach zero emissions by a decade

      The commission has proposed to cut emissions in the ETS more slowly from 2031 onwards.

      This could mean new allowances are able to enter the scheme into the 2040s, instead of ending in 2039 as previously planned.

      But the planned changes are still “aligned” with the EU’s 2040 climate target and net-zero requirement by 2050, says the commission.

      The overall ETS cap on emissions was reduced by 1.7% each year up to 2020 and then by 2.2% annually since 2021.

      It is then agreed to drop by 4.3% over 2024-27 and 4.4% from 2028 onwards.

      Maintaining similar rates after 2030 would not be “realistic”, says the commission’s proposal.

      Instead, it suggests that the cap should fall by 3.7% per year over 2031-35 and by just 1.7% annually over 2036-40.

      Simon Evans on Bluesku: The cap on EUETS emissions was due to hit zero by 2039

      This will make the path to zero emissions within the ETS “more gradual and aligned with domestic climate ambition level”, claims the commission.

      But WWF says that the proposal would allow an extra 2bn tonnes of CO2e to be emitted. (See: What could the changes mean for greenhouse gas emissions?)

      Aviation

      The commission has proposed plans to incorporate more airline emissions into the ETS.

      The plan outlines that, from 2029, all flights departing from the European Economic Area (EU, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) and landing in other countries within 5,000km of a point in central Europe should be added to the ETS.

      This distance means that the changes would not apply to flights landing in China or the US. (Both the US and China have opposed the expansion of ETS coverage for flights.)

      The commission also proposes including emissions from private jets and other “business flights” in the ETS.

      It notes that aviation currently accounts for 14% of EU transport emissions. This is expected to skyrocket to around 90% by 2050, given it is more difficult to decarbonise than other modes of transport.

      Some aviation emissions have been included in the ETS since 2012. This included emissions from air travel within the EEA and flights departing from Switzerland and the UK.

      The airline industry did not respond favourably to reports of plans to expand beyond this scope.

      On 8 June, the biggest airlines in Europe urged commission president Ursula von der Leyen not to extend the ETS to cover international flights, saying that it would raise ticket prices.

      A study commissioned by Carbon Market Watch found that the ETS encompassing all flights departing from the EEA, not just those within it, would result in a “very small impact on ticket prices and passenger demand”.

      Auction money

      Under the proposed changes, EU countries would need to funnel half of the money they receive from ETS auctions towards decarbonising sectors covered by the system.

      This would amount to more than €100bn in investment for decarbonisation before 2030, says the commission.

      Around three-quarters of the money generated by the ETS has been allocated to EU countries since 2013, the proposal notes.

      Since 2023, countries have been required to spend all of this money on climate and energy-related activities – at least on paper.

      But the proposal says the “transparency and effectiveness” of this mechanism has been “insufficient”.

      Currently, only around 5% of the ETS money “directly supports industrial decarbonisation in sectors such as steel, chemicals and fertilisers”, it adds.

      Going forward, the proposal says that 50% should be put towards actions aiding clean-energy plans, industrial decarbonisation and improved waste management, as some examples.

      A briefing by thinktank Institut Montaigne noted that the money generated within the system for EU countries to help finance the energy transition should be “at the heart” of ETS discussions, amid budget constraints in many EU countries at the moment.

      CO2 removals

      The commission has proposed integrating permanent carbon removals into the ETS to “give additional flexibility” for certain sectors that struggle to decarbonise. This action was previously agreed within the terms of the EU’s 2040 climate target.

      “Permanent” removals refer to direct air capture with carbon storage and similar measures, rather than temporary removals such as planting trees.

      The removals would be integrated into the system by increasing the allowance cap by an amount equivalent to the number of removals purchased.

      This will set up “additional emission space” for hard-to-abate sectors and also support the “scale-up of the carbon removals industry”, outlines the proposal.

      It also proposes that certain companies, such as shipping and aircraft operators, could compensate for their emissions with their own certified carbon removals.

      These emissions would not be permitted to “go beyond zero”, adds the proposal.

      Sven Harmeling, the head of climate at Climate Action Network (CAN) Europe, says that adding carbon removals “would weaken the ETS impact, undermine the carbon price and create new loopholes for polluters instead of accelerating the transition away from fossil fuels”.

      The proposal “fails to ensure that only high-integrity removal technologies would be considered”, he adds in a statement.

      However, the director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Prof Ottmar Edenhofer, describes the move as “an important step”, saying:

      “For the first time, it creates a credible and long-term investment framework for carbon-removal technologies in Europe.”

      International credits

      The commission proposes that firms covered by the ETS could make use of “high-integrity” credits bought on the global carbon market from 2036 onwards.

      This relates to the EU’s 2040 climate target, in which up to 5% of the 90% reduction in GHGs can come from global carbon credits.

      Amélie Laurent, a policy advisor in carbon accounting at the Bellona Foundation, says in a statement that these credits “should be in a strategic last resort reserve, not an excuse to avoid doing our homework”.

      Aurora D’Aprile, the EU policy director at the International Emissions Trading Association, notes in a statement:

      “For international credits, early preparation on governance and procurement and greater certainty around a pilot from 2031, will be essential to establish a credible demand signal.”

      Other sectors extended

      The commission has outlined plans to expand the inclusion of the maritime sector in the ETS.

      Maritime accounts for around 4% of the EU’s total emissions. The new proposals for the sector include adding certain small ships of 400-5,000 tonnes to the system.

      The proposal also outlines plans to incorporate more waste incineration into the ETS on a gradual basis from 2031.

      Since 2024, some waste-burning companies have been required to monitor and report their emissions under the ETS. But they did not have to purchase credits.

      Now, the commission proposes introducing the sector on a gradual basis.

      Under the proposals, companies would require allowances for 25% of their emissions in 2031, 50% in 2032, 75% in 2033 and 100% from 2034 onwards.

      Market stability reserve review

      The market stability reserve was added to the ETS in 2019 to help stabilise the flow of allowances.

      It acts like an overflow container holding extra allowances. If the number of allowances in the market falls below a certain threshold, more are brought out from the reserve to balance things out.

      Equally, if the market is flooded with too many allowances, depressing prices, then some are removed and put into the reserve.

      The commission has proposed a reform of the reserve, including changing the upper and lower limits for when allowances are released or removed.

      It wants to reduce the rate at which allowances are withdrawn from auctions when they exceed a certain threshold from 24% to 12% from 2028.

      This means that the permits would be able to stay in the market for longer.

      As shown in the chart below, the price of carbon in the EU increased tenfold over 2017-2021, exceeding €80 (£68) per tonne of CO2.

      Carbon price in the EU ETS over 2012-26, in € per tonne of CO2. Credit: Carbon Brief, based on data from Energy Instrat and EEX
      Carbon price in the EU ETS over 2012-26, in € per tonne of CO2. Credit: Carbon Brief, based on data from Energy Instrat and EEX

      Nevertheless, the commission proposal says the reserve was “effective in mitigating price shocks” on the ETS caused by the Covid-19 pandemic and the surge in energy prices after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2021.

      UK-EU ties

      The EU and UK have agreed in principle to link their carbon markets, but the commission’s proposal says negotiations are still “under progress”.

      It adds that the commission “foresees” future financial contributions from the UK to the EU’s ETS, if a final agreement is reached.

      Many companies have called for the systems to be linked. In June, dozens of carbon-capture organisations and industry groups signed a letter calling for greater certainty on EU-UK links to ensure cross-border carbon-capture and storage projects are covered, for example.

      Switzerland’s ETS has been linked to the EU since 2020.

      What could the changes mean for greenhouse gas emissions?

      The European Commission says the ETS plays a “crucial role” in meeting its climate targets “cost-effectively”.

      The system contributed to a 41% reduction in EU industrial emissions over 2021-23, a decrease of around 800m tonnes of CO2 per year, according to recent analysis from the London School of Economics.

      As highlighted in the chart below, the EU’s overall GHG emissions have dropped by 40% since 1990.

      Greenhouse gas emissions in the EU over 1990-2025 (solid line) and projections out to 2050 (dotted line). The red dots indicate climate targets for 2020, 2030, 2040 and 2050. Credit: Carbon Brief, based on data from the European Environment Agency
      Greenhouse gas emissions in the EU over 1990-2025 (solid line) and projections out to 2050 (dotted line). The red dots indicate climate targets for 2020, 2030, 2040 and 2050. Credit: Carbon Brief, based on data from the European Environment Agency

      Climate commissioner Hoekstra told a press briefing that the proposal is “fully aligned” with the EU’s target to cut GHGs to 90% below 1990 levels by 2040. He called the plan “completely climate-law proof”.

      He also noted that no other EU policy has contributed to reducing emissions on the scale of the ETS, describing it as a “phenomenal asset”.

      But campaigners and experts are concerned that the proposed changes could slow decarbonisation and put the EU’s climate goals at risk.

      Carbon Market Watch says the plans would “severely weaken” the ETS and “risk undermining the achievement of the EU’s 2040 and 2050 climate targets”.

      The proposals “would represent a major setback for EU climate ambition, weakening incentives to cut emissions, extending reliance on fossil fuels and putting the 2040 climate target at risk”, says a statement from WWF.

      WWF estimates that 2bn extra tonnes of CO2 would be emitted if the proposals were approved in the EU.

      Michael Bloss, a German member of the European parliament (MEP) for the European Greens, says the plans would release around 1.4bn tonnes of extra CO2. He describes the proposal as “climate vandalism”.

      Chiara Martinelli, the director of CAN Europe, says:

      “Every extra tonne of CO2 allowed under the ETS makes Europe’s climate challenge harder and more expensive. Weakening the ETS now is a gift to polluters that have prioritised shareholder payouts instead of investing in cleaner production.”

      How was the proposal received?

      The European Commission’s new ETS proposal has been met with a mixed response.

      Scholl from Epico says the proposal has “important flexibilities that can help address competitiveness challenges and provide greater certainty for industrial investment”. But she adds in a statement:

      “Concerns remain about whether the proposed changes preserve the long-term investment signal of the ETS and sufficiently recognise companies that have already committed to ambitious decarbonisation pathways.”

      Edenhofer from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research adds that the proposals provide “clarity on the contribution that emissions trading is intended to make towards the 2040 climate target”.

      Elisa Giannelli, a programme lead at E3G, says in a statement:

      “Today’s proposal might please some, but it risks increasing both the long-term cost and the time needed to deliver the EU’s growth strategy.”

      Pepe Escrig, a senior researcher, also at E3G, adds that the commission held onto some of the ETS’ “essential foundation”, but “yielded to political pressure to weaken it as a quick fix to broader challenges”.

      This has left the plan “pull[ing] in two directions: strengthening support for industrial investment while weakening parts of the framework meant to drive it”, says Escrig.

      Andrea Spignoli, the policy manager of sustainable markets at Bellona Europa, says the proposal risks “weakening green investments” and putting a larger decarbonisation burden onto other sectors that are not covered by the ETS.

      Greg Van Elsen, a senior industrial policy coordinator at CAN Europe, says in a statement:

      “Free pollution permits were never meant to become a permanent subsidy. Extending them until 2038 rewards delay instead of industrial decarbonisation.”

      Lobby groups also had mixed reactions to different aspects of the proposal.

      The International Air Transport Association says it is “deeply frustrated” with the proposal.

      The organisation’s director general, Willie Walsh, claims the consequences will be “harmful”, “sowing acrimony over extraterritoriality, slowing global decarbonisation and sapping European competitiveness”.

      WindEurope says the proposal risks “slowing decarbonisation and failing to channel billions in ETS revenues to industrial electrification”.

      BusinessEurope’s director general, Markus J Beyrer, says some aspects “raise concerns”. For example, he says the “new conditionalities for free allocations risk increasing bureaucratic complexity and the uncertain role for international carbon credits”.

      What is ‘ETS2’?

      ETS2 is a separate emissions trading system to the main ETS. It is due to take effect in 2028 and is not affected by the current ETS review or resultant proposals.

      It will operate under a similar system as the existing ETS, covering emissions from transport, buildings and smaller industries in other sectors.

      One key difference, however, is that ETS2 will not provide any allowances for free. They will all be auctioned and bought by companies.

      On 15 July, 10 countries, including Italy and Poland, had urged the commission to also reconsider the ETS2 during this review. They were unsuccessful.

      Similar to the original ETS, the commission believes the carbon price under the new ETS2 system will “provide a market incentive for investments in building renovations and low-emissions mobility”.

      However, in June, member-state governments and the European parliament agreed on a number of “safeguards” to support price stability.

      For example, if allowance costs under the ETS2 exceed €45 per tonne of CO2, they agreed that 40m allowances will be put into the system from a reserve to normalise the supply – double the amount previously agreed.

      A European Environment Agency briefing said the ETS2 will “affect fuel prices and mobility costs” and that money will be syphoned into a social climate fund to “support vulnerable households and investments”.

      What happens next?

      EU countries will now negotiate over the terms of the commission’s proposal before it goes to a vote in the European parliament.

      Ireland, which recently took over the six-monthly rotating presidency of the Council of the EU, has stated that it wants the ETS proposals to be signed off by the end of this year.

      A previous document from the council, which represents member-state governments, outlined a target to agree a deal by the first quarter of 2027.

      Clean Energy Wire says that this would be an “unusually ambitious timetable for one of the bloc’s most technically complex pieces of climate legislation”. 

      Politico notes that “months of arguing” is likely to occur.

      The post Q&A: What the EU’s carbon market review means for climate action appeared first on Carbon Brief.

      Q&A: What the EU’s carbon market review means for climate action

      Continue Reading

      Trending

      Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com