Clean-energy growth helped China’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions fall by 1% year-on-year in the first half of 2025, extending a declining trend that started in March 2024.
The CO2 output of the nation’s power sector – its dominant source of emissions – fell by 3% in the first half of the year, as growth in solar power alone matched the rise in electricity demand.
The new analysis for Carbon Brief shows that record solar capacity additions are putting China’s CO2 emissions on track to fall across 2025 as a whole.
Other key findings include:
- The growth in clean power generation, some 270 terawatt hours (TWh) excluding hydro, significantly outpaced demand growth of 170TWh in the first half of the year.
- Solar capacity additions set new records due to a rush before a June policy change, with 212 gigawatts (GW) added in the first half of the year.
- This rush means solar is likely to set an annual record for growth in 2025, becoming China’s single-largest source of clean power generation in the process.
- Coal-power capacity could surge by as much as 80-100GW this year, potentially setting a new annual record, even as coal-fired electricity generation declines.
- The use of coal to make synthetic fuels and and chemicals is growing rapidly, climbing 20% in the first half of the year and helping add 3% to China’s CO2 since 2020.
- The coal-chemical industry is planning further expansion, which could add another 2% to China’s CO2 by 2029, making the 2030 deadline for peaking harder to meet.
Even if its emissions fall in 2025 as expected, however, China is bound to miss multiple important climate targets this year.
This includes targets to reduce its carbon intensity – the emissions per unit of GDP – to strictly control coal consumption growth and new coal-power capacity, as well as to increase the share of cleaner electric-arc steelmaking in total steel output.
If policymakers want to make up for these shortfalls, then there will be additional pressure on China’s next “nationally determined contribution” (NDC, its international climate pledge for 2035) and its 15th five-year plan for 2026-30, both due to be finalised in the coming months.
The falling trend in CO2 emissions – and the clean-energy growth that is driving it – could give policymakers greater confidence that more ambitious targets are achievable.
Falling emissions from power, cement and steel
The reduction in emissions in the first half of 2025 was predominantly driven by the power sector, aided by the building materials, steel and heating industries.
Coal use in the power industry fell by 3.4% compared with the same period a year earlier, while gas use increased by 6%, resulting in a 3.2% drop in emissions for the sector overall.
The reduction in CO2 emissions from coal use in the power sector is shown at the bottom of the figure below, along with the small rise due to higher gas-fired electricity generation.
Other changes in CO2 emissions in the first half of 2025, compared with the same period in 2024, are broken down by source and sector in the rest of the figure.
Emissions from the building materials sector fell by 3% and from the metals industry by 1%, with cement falling 4% and steel output 3%. The reason for these reductions is the ongoing contraction in the construction sector, with real estate investment falling 11% and the floor area of new construction starts by 20%. Traditional targets of government infrastructure investment, such as transportation, also showed relatively slow growth.
CO2 reductions resulting from the drop in steel output were limited by a fall in the share of electric arc furnace (EAF) steelmaking, a much less emissions- and energy-intensive process than the coal-based production of primary steel.
The share of electric-arc output in total production fell from 10.2% in 2024 to 9.8% in the first half of 2025, despite a government target of 15% for this year.
Excess coal-based capacity and a lack of incentives for shifting production mean that electric arc steelmakers, rather than coal-based steel mills, tend to absorb reductions in output, as their operating costs are higher and costs of shutting down and starting up production lines are lower.
Shifting to EAF steel is one of the largest emission reduction opportunities in China over the next decade, according to an analysis by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air.
Elsewhere, consumption of oil products increased by 1%. However, this growth did not come from transport fuel demand. The production of petrol, diesel and jet fuel all continued to fall, with electric vehicles eating into road-fuel demand. Instead, growth was driven by demand for naphtha from petrochemicals producers, including newly commissioned plants.
Gas use outside the power sector – mainly heating – dropped by 1%, after a fall in the first quarter due to mild winter temperatures and a smaller increase in the second quarter.
Solar boom covers power demand growth
The first half of 2025 saw a new record for the growth of clean power generation excluding hydro, made up of solar, wind, nuclear and biomass.
Clean power generation from solar, wind and nuclear power grew by 270 terawatt hours (TWh), substantially exceeding the 170TWh (3.7%) increase in electricity consumption. Hydropower generation fell by 3% (16TWh), moderating the fall in fossil fuel-fired power generation.
The rise in power generation from solar panels, on its own, covered all of the growth in electricity demand, increasing by 170TWh – equivalent to the national power output of Mexico or Turkey over the same period. Wind power output grew by 80TWh and nuclear by 20TWh.
As a result, the share of low-carbon sources reached 40% of the nation’s electricity generation overall in the first half of the year, up from 36% in the same period of 2024.
The figure below shows how clean-energy sources excluding hydro (columns) have started matching the recent increases in China’s electricity demand (solid line), as well as the average amount of growth in recent years (dashed line).
Strikingly, the record growth of solar and continued expansion of wind mean that both sources of electricity generation overtook hydropower for the first time in the first half of 2025, as shown in the figure below. Despite steady growth, nuclear power is a relatively distant fourth, at less than half of the power generation from each of the other three major non-fossil technologies.
The growth in solar power generation was driven by record capacity growth. China added 212GW of new solar capacity in the first half of the year, double the amount installed in the first half of 2024, which itself had been a new record.
For comparison, the world’s second-largest nation for solar capacity – the US – had only installed 178GW, in total, by the end of 2024, while third-ranked India had 98GW.
Some 93GW of new solar capacity was added to China’s grid in May alone, as the rush to install before a change in pricing policy culminated. This rate of installations translates to approximately 100 solar panels installed every second of the month.
The acceleration was due to a change in the policy on tariffs paid to new wind and solar generators, which started in June. Previously, new plants were guaranteed to receive the benchmark price for coal-fired power output in each province, for each unit of electricity they generate. Under the new policy, new generators have to secure contracts directly with electricity buyers, causing uncertainty and likely putting downward pressure on revenue.
The resulting surge in new capacity means that solar is poised to overtake wind this year – and hydro this year or next – to become the largest source of clean power generation in China.
This is despite solar capacity additions slowing down in June and projections diverging widely on how much growth to expect for the remainder of 2025 and into 2026, under the new policy.
The consensus among forecasters has been one of a sharp slowdown in installations.
After the new pricing policy was announced, the China Electricity Council (CEC) and China Photovoltaic Industry Association (CPIA) projected 210GW and 215-235GW for 2025 as a whole, respectively, implying plummeting additions in the second half of the year. In contrast, the State Grid Energy Research Institute expects 380GW to be added to the grid this year.
After data for May installations became available, the CEC upgraded its forecast for the whole year to 310GW and the CPIA to 270-300GW, implying that 60-100GW would be added in the second half of the year. This would still be a sharp deceleration compared with the second half of 2024, when 173GW was added.
For wind, the State Grid researchers expect 140GW and CEC 110GW, while 51GW was added in the first half of the year. Both numbers indicate larger capacity additions in the second half of 2025 and an increase for the full year compared with 2024.
The State Grid should have detailed knowledge of projects seeking to connect to the electricity grid, so its projections carry extra weight compared with others. If its expectations for wind and solar growth are realised, this would result in around 850TWh of annual clean power generation being added to the grid in 2025, as shown in the figure below.
This new clean power capacity would be more than enough to meet the entire electricity demand of Brazil (760TWh), or Germany and the UK combined (817TWh).
With the State Grid also projecting demand to grow by 400-640TWh (4.0-6.5%), clean-energy growth should push down CO2 from China’s power sector this year – and well into next year.
China’s top economic planner, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), is also taking steps to spur demand for contracts with solar and wind producers.
A new policy – published in July – requires for the first time that steel, cement and polysilicon factories, as well as some new data centres, meet a certain percentage of their demand using renewable electricity.
Previously, such requirements were only applied to provinces, power distribution companies and the aluminum industry. Their mandated renewable energy shares have also now increased.
These changes boost demand for contracts with renewable electricity suppliers, just as new solar and wind plants are having to secure contracts directly with buyers, under their new pricing policy.
The increase in demand for renewable power resulting from these measures broadly matches the low end of the growth projected in solar and wind this year. The renewable quotas therefore offer a backstop of support for the continued growth of clean power, which will be required to meet China’s wider climate and energy targets.
The increase in solar power generation from rising installations could be even larger, but is being limited by issues around grid management and capacity.
The share of potential solar power output that was not utilised rose to 5.7% in the first half of 2025, from 3.2% a year earlier. While technical issues such as uncompleted grid connections could play a role amid the boom, this also implies a significant increase in curtailment.
The average utilisation rate of solar panels fell by 12% in the first quarter of this year, compared with the 2020–2023 average, according to China Electricity Council data accessed through Wind Information. This is a much larger reduction than indicated by the reported curtailment rates. The flipside of this dip in utilisation is that improvements to grid operation and infrastructure will unlock even more generation from existing solar capacity.
Coal power capacity is expected to surge this year, even as demand for power generation from coal contracts. The State Grid predicts 127GW of thermal power added. Some of this will be gas, but based on non-coal thermal power additions expected by the CEC, around 90-100GW is coal, while the CEC projects 80GW of coal power added.
Data from Global Energy Monitor shows 93-109GW of coal-power projects under construction that could be completed this year, assuming a 2.5 to 3-year lead time from issuance of permits to grid connection. The largest amount of coal-fired capacity China has ever connected to the grid in one year is 63GW in 2008, so 2025 seems likely to set a new record by a large margin.
A former senior official at one of China’s largest power firms stated in an interview in June 2025 that companies are building coal power capacity due to central government pressure.
There is little enthusiasm to invest and the target to expand coal-power capacity to 1,360GW in this five-year plan period, covering 2021-2025, is unlikely to be met. Operating coal-power capacity was 1,210GW at the end of June, up from 1,080GW at the end of 2020.
The influx of coal-fired capacity will result in falling utilisation and profitability.
However, oversupply of coal power could also weaken demand for contracts with solar and wind producers, undermining clean-energy growth. This makes measures that offer a backstop of demand for clean power, such as the sector quotas, all the more significant.
Coal chemicals shooting up
The only major sector that saw growth in emissions in the first half of the year was the chemicals sector. Coal use in the sector, both as a fuel and a feedstock, increased by a dramatic 20% year-on-year, on top of a 10% increase in 2024.
Oil use in the chemicals sector increased as well, as reflected in a 9% increase in total consumption of naptha – a key petrochemicals feedstock – estimated from OPEC data.
The growth is driven by the coal-to-chemicals industry, which turns coal into synthetic liquid and gaseous fuels, as well as petrochemical products. This is a sector that China has developed aggressively, to reduce reliance on imported oil and gas, as well as to promote the exploitation of coal resources in the country’s far west – particularly Xinjiang – where coal and coal power exports to the rest of China are limited by transportation capacity and costs.
The sector consumed approximately 390m tonnes of coal in 2024, resulting in an estimated 690m tonnes CO2 emissions (MtCO2), making it responsible for 6% of China’s fossil CO2 emissions and 9% of the country’s coal use in 2024.
Coal use and emissions increased 10% from 2023 while total coal conversion capacity increased only 5%, implying that the utilisation of existing capacity increased as well.
The coal-to-chemicals industry used 155m tonnes of standard coal in 2020 and CO2 emissions were estimated at 320MtCO2. The coal-to-chemicals industry therefore added around 3% to China’s total CO2 emissions from 2020 to 2024, making it one of the sectors responsible for the recent acceleration in the country’s CO2 emissions growth and its shortfall against targets to control increases in CO2 emissions and coal use.
Output from the sector reportedly replaced 100m tonnes of oil equivalent (Mtoe) of oil and gas in 2024, which implies 250-280MtCO2 emissions avoided from oil and gas use, depending on how the avoided demand breaks down between oil and gas.
The net effect of the industry on CO2 emissions was therefore an increase of around 410-440MtCO2, or 4% of China’s total CO2, highlighting that coal-based chemical production is much more carbon-intensive than its already carbon-intensive oil- and gas-based equivalent.
The sector’s growth in coal use and emissions reflects drastically improved profitability in most segments in recent years. Its profitability depends heavily on the oil price, so the sharp increase in oil prices from the 2015-2020 level in 2021-24 supported output growth, whereas the recent fall in oil prices could temper it.
The chemical industry association still expects the sector to expand capacity for another decade, until 2035, even under China’s CO2 peaking target.
Analysis by Tianfeng Securities touts the years 2025-2030 as the “peak period” for investment in coal to chemicals, claiming that potential annual investment over the next five years could reach three times the 2021-23 level and that half of this potential investment is in Xinjiang province.
Sinolink Securities projects that an average of at least 37m tonnes of coal conversion capacity will be added in the coal-to-chemicals industry each year from 2025 to 2029, with coal-to-oil-and-gas and coal-to-methanol dominating these capacity additions.
This would mean a 40% increase in the industry’s capacity from 2024 to 2029, with the potential to add over 250MtCO2 per year of emissions, increasing total CO2 emissions by over 2%.
The figure below illustrates this potential increase, which would continue recent trends.
If this further expansion takes place – and assuming new chemicals plants are used at the same rate as the existing fleet is being used today – then it would complicate China’s carbon peaking target and make the CO2 intensity target for 2030 even more challenging to meet.
However, this is not the first time that the industry has been predicted to boom. In 2014, the China Coal Association issued a prediction that the coal-to-chemicals industry would be using 750Mt of coal per year by 2020, converting to about 540Mt of “standard” coal.
In reality, less than a third of this demand was realised – in large part due to low oil prices – and the sector was still only using half of this amount by the end of 2024.
New targets on the horizon
Given the major increase in solar capacity in the first half, as well as expected additions of wind and nuclear throughout the year, China is on track for a fall in emissions in 2025.
This would continue a declining trend that began in early 2024 and leaves open the possibility that China’s emissions could have peaked already, years ahead of its “before 2030” target.
The recent slide in China’s total CO2 emissions is shown in the figure below, with the shallow decline illustrating the potential that this trend could be reversed.
Even if China’s emissions fall by a few percent this year, however, this is unlikely to be sufficient to meet the carbon intensity target for 2025 in the current five-year plan. Still, it would make the country’s 2030 carbon intensity commitment under the Paris Agreement easier to meet.
A continuing fall in emissions, extending the fall that began in early 2024, could also affect target-setting for the next five-year plan – which is being prepared for release in early 2026 – by showing that China could peak and reduce its emissions well ahead of the 2030 deadline.
Yet, despite rapid progress in 2024 and 2025, China is bound to miss multiple emissions-related targets in the 2021-2025 period, due to rapid CO2 rises during and after the Covid pandemic.
These targets include improvements in carbon intensity, “strict” controls of the growth in coal consumption and new coal-fired power plants, as well as the share of cleaner electric arc steelmaking in total steel output.
If China’s policymakers want to make up the shortfall against these 2025 targets and get on track for their 2030 goals, then they would need to set out higher ambitions in the 15th five-year plan, covering 2026-2030. For example, this could include reducing the carbon intensity of China’s economy by more than 20% over the next five years.
China’s new pledge (NDC) under the Paris Agreement, with targets for 2035, is due to be published in the next few months and will provide important indications of their intentions.
The new pricing policy for wind and solar has also increased the importance of target-setting, by making “contracts for difference” available for the amount of capacity needed to meet the central government’s clean-energy targets. An ambitious clean-energy target for 2035 would be a significant new backstop for clean-energy growth, with both climate and economic relevance.
Another major question is how the government will react to the influx of coal-fired capacity, even as power generation from coal recedes. It could either move to close down older coal plants – or to limit clean-energy additions.
With respect to coal power plants, the key point remains, however, that as long as clean power generation keeps growing faster than electricity demand, then increases in coal and gas fired capacity will result in falling utilisation, rather than increased CO2 emissions.
About the data
Data for the analysis was compiled from the National Bureau of Statistics of China, National Energy Administration of China, China Electricity Council and China Customs official data releases, and from WIND Information, an industry data provider.
Wind and solar output, and thermal power breakdown by fuel, was calculated by multiplying power generating capacity at the end of each month by monthly utilisation, using data reported by China Electricity Council through Wind Financial Terminal.
Total generation from thermal power and generation from hydropower and nuclear power was taken from National Bureau of Statistics monthly releases.
Monthly utilisation data was not available for biomass, so the annual average of 52% for 2023 was applied. Power sector coal consumption was estimated based on power generation from coal and the average heat rate of coal-fired power plants during each month, to avoid the issue with official coal consumption numbers affecting recent data.
CO2 emissions estimates are based on National Bureau of Statistics default calorific values of fuels and emissions factors from China’s latest national greenhouse gas emissions inventory, for the year 2021. Cement CO2 emissions factor is based on annual estimates up to 2024.
For oil consumption, apparent consumption is calculated from refinery throughput, with net exports of oil products subtracted.
The post Analysis: Record solar growth keeps China’s CO2 falling in first half of 2025 appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Analysis: Record solar growth keeps China’s CO2 falling in first half of 2025
Climate Change
Maryland Passes Energy Bill That Delivers Short-Term Relief, Locks Ratepayers into Long-Term Nuclear Subsidy
Advocates say Maryland lawmakers passed consequential energy proposals without adequate analysis or public debate during the 2026 session.
Maryland lawmakers’ new solution for rising utility bills reduces a surcharge funding an effective energy-efficiency program, offers rebates by raiding the state’s clean energy fund and includes subsidies for nuclear power that advocates say may prove costly over time.
Climate Change
To avoid COP mistakes, Santa Marta conference must be shielded from fossil fuel influence
Rachel Rose Jackson is a climate researcher and international policy expert whose work involves monitoring polluter interference at the UNFCCC and advancing pathways to protect against it.
Next week, dozens of governments will gather in the Colombian city of Santa Marta for a conference on transitioning away from fossil fuels.
The conference is a first of its kind, in name and in practice. It’s a welcome change to see a platform for global climate action actually acknowledge the primary cause of the climate crisis – fossil fuels. This sends a clear message about what needs to be done to avoid tumbling off the climate cliff edge we are precariously balancing on.
The agenda set for governments to hash out goes further than any other multilateral space has managed to date. Over the week, participants will discuss how to overcome the economic dependence on fossil fuels, transform supply and demand, and advance international cooperation to transition away from fossil fuels.
Alongside the conference, academics, civil society, movements and others are convening to put forward their visions of a just and forever fossil fuel phase out. The conference can help shape pathways and tools governments can use to achieve a fossil-fuel-free future, particularly if the dialogue begins with an honest assessment of “fair shares.”
-
Santa Marta: fossil fuel transition in an unstable world
Transitioning away from fossil fuels in an unstable world: how can Santa Marta deliver? -
Major oil producers among 46 nations joining fossil fuel phase-out summit
Canada, Australia, Brazil and Norway are set to attend the Santa Marta summit, but the world’s biggest fossil fuel producers are missing from the list -
Iran war could boost fossil fuel phase-out push, says Colombian minister
Colombia’s environment minister Irene Vélez Torres said she hopes that a new fossil fuel phase out summit in Santa Marta can cement a coalition of countries
This means assessing who is most responsible for emissions and exploring truer means of international collaboration that can unlock the technology, resources and finances necessary for a just transition.
Fossil fuel-driven violence is spiraling in places like Palestine, Iran, and Venezuela. Climate disasters are causing billions and billions of dollars in damage annually with no climate reparations in sight. All of this remains recklessly unaddressed on account of corporate-funded fascism.
We know the world’s addiction to fossil fuels must end. Is it surprising that a global governmental convening chooses now to try to tackle fossil fuels? It shouldn’t be, but it is.
COP failures
By contrast, meetings of governments signed up to the longest-standing multilateral forum for climate action—the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) – took nearly three decades before it officially responded to the power built by movements and acknowledged the need to address fossil fuel use at COP28 in 2023.
Even then, this recognition came riddled with loopholes. It may seem illogical that a forum established by governments in 1992 to coordinate a response to climate change should take decades to acknowledge the root of the problem. Yet there are clear reasons why arenas like the UNFCCC have consistently failed to curb fossil fuels decade after decade.
What would the outcome be when a fossil fuel executive literally oversaw COP28 and when Coca-Cola was one of the sponsors for COP27?
How can strong action take hold when, year after year, the UNFCCC’s COPs are inundated with thousands of fossil fuel lobbyists?
And how can justice be achieved when there are zero safeguards in place to protect against the conflicts of interest these polluters have?
Colombia pledges to exit investment protection system after fossil fuel lawsuits
Justly transitioning off fossil fuels cannot be charted when the very actors that have knowingly caused the climate crisis are at the helm—the same actors that consistently spend billions to spread denial and delay.
Unless platforms like the UNFCCC take concerted action to protect climate policymaking from the profit-at-all-costs agenda of polluters, the world will not deliver the climate action people and the planet deserve.
The impacts of climate action failure are now endured on a daily basis in some way by each of us – and especially by frontline communities, Indigenous Peoples, youth, women, and communities in the Global South. We must be closing gaps and unlocking pathways for advancing the strongest, fairest and fastest action possible.
Learn from mistakes
Yet, as we chase a fossil-fuel-free horizon, it’s essential that we learn from the mistakes of the past. We do not have the luxury or time to repeat them. History shows us we must protect against the polluting interests that want the world addicted to fossil fuels for as long as humanly possible.
We must also reject their schemes that undermine a just transition—dangerous distractions like carbon markets and Carbon Capture Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) that are highly risky and spur vast harm, all while allowing for polluters to continue polluting.
Fossil Free Zones can be on-ramps to the clean energy transition
We get to a fossil-fuel-free future by following the leadership of the movements, communities and independent experts who hold the knowledge and lived experience to guide us there.
We succeed by protecting against those who have a track record of prioritising greed over the sacredness of life.
And we arrive at a world liberated from fossil fuels by doing all of these things from day one, before the toxicity of the fossil fuel industry’s poison takes hold.
If this gathering in Santa Marta can do this, then it can help set a new precedent for what people-centered and planet-saving climate action looks like. When everything hangs in the balance, there can be no if’s, and’s, or but’s. There’s only here and now, what history shows us must be done, and what we know is lost if we do not.
The post To avoid COP mistakes, Santa Marta conference must be shielded from fossil fuel influence appeared first on Climate Home News.
To avoid COP mistakes, Santa Marta conference must be shielded from fossil fuel influence
The UK government has announced a series of measures to “double down on clean power” in response to the energy crisis sparked by the Iran war.
The conflict has caused a spike in fossil-fuel prices – and the high cost of gas is already causing electricity prices to increase, particularly in countries such as the UK.
In response, alongside plans to speed the expansion of renewables and electric vehicles, the UK government says it will “move…to break [the] link between gas and electricity prices”.
Ahead of the announcement, there had been speculation that this could mean a radical change to the way the UK electricity market operates, such as moving gas plants into a strategic reserve.
However, the government is taking a more measured approach with two steps that will weaken – but not completely sever – the link between gas and electricity prices.
- From 1 July 2026, the government will increase the “electricity generator levy”, a windfall tax on older renewable energy and nuclear plants, using part of the revenue to limit energy bills.
- The government will encourage older renewable projects to sign fixed-price contracts, which it says will “help protect families and businesses from higher bills when gas prices spike”.
There has been a cautious response to the plans, with one researcher telling Carbon Brief that it is a “big step in the right direction in policy terms”, but that the impact might be “relatively modest”.
Another says that, while the headlines around the government plans “suggest a decisive shift” in terms of “breaking the link” between gas and power, “the reality is more incremental”.
- Why are electricity prices linked to gas?
- What is the government proposing?
- What is not being proposed?
- What will the impact be?
Why are electricity prices linked to gas?
The price of electricity is usually set by the price of gas-fired power plants in the UK, Italy and many other European markets.
This is due to the “marginal pricing” system used in most electricity markets globally.
(For more details of what “marginal pricing” means and how it works, see the recent Carbon Brief explainer on why gas usually sets the price of electricity and what the alternatives are.)
As a result, whenever there is a spike in the cost of gas, electricity prices go up too.
This has been illustrated twice in recent years: during the global energy crisis after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022; and since the US and Israel attacked Iran in February 2026.
Notably, however, the expansion of clean energy is already weakening the link between gas and electricity, a trend that will strengthen as more renewables and nuclear plants are built.
The figure below shows that recent UK wholesale electricity prices have been lower than those in Italy, as a result of the expansion of renewable sources.
The contrast with prices in Spain is even larger, where thinktank Ember says “strong solar and wind growth [has] reduced the influence of expensive coal and gas power”.
The share of hours where gas sets the price of power on the island of Great Britain (namely, England, Scotland and Wales) has fallen from more than 90% in 2021 to around 60% today, according to the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ). (Northern Ireland is part of the separate grid on the island of Ireland.)
This is largely because an increasing share of generation is coming from renewables with “contracts for difference” (CfDs), which offer a fixed price for each unit of electricity.
CfD projects are paid this fixed price for the electricity they generate, regardless of the wholesale price of power. As such, they dilute the impact of gas on consumer bills.
The rise of CfD projects means that the weeks since the Iran war broke out have coincided with the first-ever extended periods without gas-fired power stations in the wholesale market.
This shows how, in the longer term, the shift to clean energy backed by fixed-price CfDs will almost completely sever the link between gas and electricity prices.
The National Energy System Operator (NESO) estimated that the government’s target for clean power by 2030 could see the share of hours with prices set by gas falling to just 15%.
What is the government proposing?
For now, however, about one-third of UK electricity generation comes from renewable projects with an older type of contract under the “renewables obligation” scheme (RO).
It is these projects that the new government proposals are targeting.
The government hopes to move some of these projects onto fixed-price contracts, which would no longer be tied to gas prices, further weakening the link between gas and electricity prices overall.
When RO projects generate electricity, they earn the wholesale price, which is usually set by gas power. In addition, they are paid a fixed subsidy via “renewable obligation certificates” (ROCs).
This means that the cost of a significant proportion of renewable electricity is linked to gas prices. Moreover, it means that, when gas prices are high, these projects earn windfall profits.
In recognition of this, the Conservative government introduced the “electricity generator levy” (EGL) in 2022. Under the EGL, certain generators pay a 45% tax on earnings above a benchmark price, which rises with inflation and currently sits at £82 per megawatt hour (MWh).
The tax applies to renewables obligation projects and to old nuclear plants.
The current government will now increase the rate of the windfall tax to 55% from 1 July 2026, as well as extending the levy beyond its previously planned end date in 2028.
It says it will use some of the additional revenue to “support businesses and households with the impacts of the conflict in the Middle East on the cost of living”. Chancellor Rachel Reeves said:
“This ensures that a larger proportion of any exceptional revenues from high gas prices are passed back to government, providing a vital revenue stream so that money is available for government to support businesses and families with the impacts of the conflict in the Middle East.”
The increase in the windfall tax may also help to achieve the government’s second aim, which is to persuade older renewable projects to accept new fixed-price contracts.
Reeves made this aim explicit in her comments to MPs, saying the higher levy “will encourage older, low-carbon electricity generators, which supply about a third of our power, to move from market pricing to fixed-price contracts for difference”.
(This is an adaptation of a proposal for “pot zero” fixed-price contracts, made by the UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC) in 2022, see below for more details.)
As with traditional CfDs, the new fixed-price contracts would not be tied to the price of gas power. Instead of earning money on the wholesale electricity market, these generators would take a fixed-price “wholesale CfD”. In addition, they would be exempted from the windfall tax and would continue to receive their fixed subsidy via ROCs.
The government says this will be voluntary. It will offer further details “in due course” and will then consult on the plans “later this year”, with a view to running an auction for such contracts next year.
It adds: “Government will only offer contracts to electricity generators where it represents clear value for money for consumers.”
(It is currently unclear if the proposals for new fixed-price contracts would also apply to older nuclear plants. Last month, the government said it intended to “enable existing nuclear generating stations to become eligible for CfD support for lifetime-extension activities”.)
What is not being proposed?
Contrary to speculation ahead of today’s announcement, the government is not taking forward any of the more radical ideas for breaking the link between gas and electricity prices.
Many of these ideas had already been considered in detail – and rejected – during the government’s “review of electricity market arrangements” (REMA) process.
This includes the idea of creating two separate markets, one “green power pool” for renewables and another for conventional sources of electricity.
It also includes the idea of operating the market under “pay as bid” pricing. This has been promoted as a way to ensure that each power plant is only paid the amount that it bid to supply electricity, rather than the higher price of the “marginal” unit, which is usually gas.
However, “pay as bid” would have been expected to change bidding behaviour rather than cutting bills, with generators guessing what the marginal unit would have been and bidding at that level.
Finally, the government has also not taken forward the idea of putting gas-fired power stations in a strategic reserve that sits outside the electricity market.
Last year, this had been proposed jointly by consultancy Stonehaven and NGO Greenpeace. In March, they shared updated figures with Carbon Brief showing that – according to their analysis – this could have cut bills by a total of around £6bn per year, or about £80 per household.
However, some analysts argued that it would have distorted the electricity market, removing incentives to build batteries and for consumers to use power more flexibly.
What will the impact be?
The government’s plan for voluntary fixed-price contracts has received a cautious response.
UKERC had put forward a similar proposal in 2022, under which older nuclear and renewable projects would have received a fixed-price “pot zero” CfD.
(This name refers to the fact that CfDs are given to new onshore wind and solar under “pot one”, with technologies such as offshore wind bidding into a separate “pot two”.)
In April 2026, UKERC published updated analysis suggesting that its “pot zero” reforms could have saved consumers as much as £10bn a year – roughly £120 per household.
Callum McIver, research fellow at the University of Strathclyde and a member of the UKERC, tells Carbon Brief that the government proposals are a “big step in the right direction in policy terms”.
However, he says the “bill impact potential is lower” than UKERC’s “pot zero” idea, because it would leave renewables obligation projects still earning their top-up subsidy via ROCs.
As such, McIver tells Carbon Brief that, in his view, the near-term impact “could be relatively modest”. Still, he says that the idea could “insulate electricity prices” from gas:
“The measures are very welcome and, with good take-up, they have the potential to insulate electricity prices further from the impact of continued or future gas price shocks, which should be regarded as a win in its own right.”
In a statement, UKERC said the government plan “stops short of the full pot-zero proposal, since it will leave the RO subsidy in place”. It adds:
“This makes the potential savings smaller, but it will break the link with gas prices. The devil will be in the detail, but provided the majority of generators join the scheme, most of the UK’s power generation fleet will have a price that is not related to the global price of gas.”
Marc Hedin, head of research for Western Europe and Africa at consultancy Aurora Energy Research, tells Carbon Brief that, while the headlines “suggest a decisive shift” in terms of “breaking the link” between gas and power, “the reality is more incremental”. He adds:
“In principle, moving a larger share of generation onto fixed prices would reduce consumers’ exposure to gas‑driven price spikes and aligns well with the direction already taken for new build [generators receiving a CfD].”
However, he cautioned that “poorly calibrated [fixed] prices would transfer value to generators at consumers’ expense, while overly aggressive pricing could result in low participation”.
In an emailed statement, Sam Hollister, head of UK market strategy for consultancy LCP, says that the principle of the government’s approach is to “bring stability to the wholesale market and avoid some of the disruption that a more radical break might have caused”.
However, he adds that the reforms will not “fundamentally reduce residential energy bills today”.
Johnny Gowdy, a director of thinktank Regen, writes in a response to the plans that while both the increased windfall tax and the fixed-price contracts “have merit and could save consumers money”, there were also “pitfalls and risks” that the government will need to consider.
These include that a higher windfall tax could “spook investors”. He writes:
“A challenge for policymakers is that, while the EGL carries an investment risk downside, unless there is a very significant increase in wholesale prices, the tax revenue made by the current EGL could be quite modest.”
Gowdy says that the proposed fixed-price contracts for older renewables “is not a new idea, but its time may have come”. He writes:
“It would offer a practical way to hedge consumers and generators against volatile wholesale prices. The key challenge, however, is to come up with a strike price that is fair for consumers and does not lock future consumers into higher prices, given that we expect wholesale prices to fall over the coming decade.”
Gowdy adds that it might be possible to use the scheme as a way to support “repowering”, where old windfarms replace ageing equipment with new turbines.
On LinkedIn, Adam Bell, partner at Stonehaven and former head of government energy policy, welcomes the principle of the government’s approach, saying: “The right response to yet another fossil fuel crisis is to make our economy less dependent on fossil fuels.”
However, he adds on Bluesky that the proposals were “unlikely to reduce consumer bills”. He says this is because they offered a weak incentive for generators to accept fixed-price contracts.
The post Q&A: How the UK government aims to ‘break link between gas and electricity prices’ appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Q&A: How the UK government aims to ‘break link between gas and electricity prices’
FIFA World Cup and the 3.7 Million-Tonne Problem: Can Football’s Biggest Event Reduce Its Climate Impact?
Europe’s Green Shift Hits Overdrive: Robotaxis Launch, EV Sales Surge, Emissions Fall
How I Cut My Grocery Bill to $300 a Month
-
Climate Change8 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases8 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Renewable Energy6 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits