The UK’s new Labour government must urgently reinstate the net-zero plans shelved by its predecessor in order to “limit the damage” caused by Conservative policy rollbacks, according to official advisors at the Climate Change Committee (CCC).
In its latest annual progress report, the CCC issues some frank words about the “confusing and inconsistent” behaviour of the previous government.
The Conservatives only brought in “credible” policies to cover one-third of the emissions cuts required to hit the UK’s 2030 climate target, the committee finds.
Despite being “insufficient”, the CCC notes that this is a slight improvement on last year. Since then, a requirement for carmakers to sell electric models and a deal to help decarbonise heavy industry both boosted the credibility of the UK’s climate strategy, it says.
Nevertheless, the committee criticises former prime minister Rishi Sunak’s decision to roll back key net-zero policies, notably delaying bans on the sale of new gas boilers and non-electric cars. It says that, contrary to his claims, there was “no evidence” the delays would save people money.
The committee points to a general need to scale up emissions cuts across the economy. It says almost none of the UK government efforts to scale up low-carbon technologies or invest in nature-based solutions are on track.
With this in mind, the progress report lays out a selection of “priority” actions that the new Labour government should take to “make up lost ground” so the UK can achieve its climate goals.
- New government
- Policy gap
- Road transport
- Buildings
- Industry
- Fossil fuels and hydrogen
- Electricity
- Agriculture and land use
- Aviation and shipping
- CO2 removal
- Waste and F-gases
- Adaptation
New government
A lot has changed in UK climate politics since the CCC’s last annual progress report was published in June 2023.
Earlier this month, Labour won a landslide election victory ending 14 years of Conservative rule. The party triumphed with a manifesto full of climate-related policies, including a pledge to decarbonise the nation’s electricity supplies by 2030.
Under the Conservatives, the CCC had issued a series of progress reports in which it warned, again and again, that the UK was not on track to meet its future climate goals.
Rather than heeding these warnings, the government led by Sunak announced a rollback of net-zero policies last September, citing “unacceptable costs” for British people. This included delaying the phaseout of both gas boilers and petrol and diesel cars.
The CCC’s latest report acknowledges some positive progress made under Sunak’s leadership. However, it is also quite critical of the outgoing Conservative government, which it says “undermined” the government’s own climate efforts with “confusing and inconsistent messaging and actions”. The report states:
“[The previous government] claimed to be acting in the long-term interests of the country, but there was no evidence backing the claim that dialling back ambition would reduce costs to citizens.”
The new report was prepared before the election, but it says the new government must “act fast to hit the country’s commitments”. It highlights the reinstatement of the weakened net-zero policies as a priority, noting that “damage can be limited”, if the government does so “quickly”.
Interim CCC chair Prof Piers Forster told journalists in a briefing that the new Labour government, which has hired former CCC chief executive Chris Stark to lead its clean power by 2030 “Mission Control”, has already made some progress. He said:
“They’ve done some quite good things in their first 10 days…They have concentrated their announcements on decarbonising energy.”
However, to achieve the UK’s broader climate goals, he added that the new government would “have to go much wider than energy”, with efforts to cut emissions “right across the economy”.
In the coming months, the Labour government must produce a new net-zero strategy, following a second successful legal challenge, which concluded that the existing UK plan was not credible.
It is also obliged to produce a new international climate pledge (nationally determined contribution, NDC) under the Paris Agreement, laying out the UK’s ambition for cutting emissions out to 2035.
The government will also have to legislate in 2025 for the seventh carbon budget, covering 2038-2042, following advice from the CCC due early next year. The CCC describes the seventh carbon budget period as a “stepping stone” on the path to net-zero by 2050.
(See Carbon Brief’s “Interactive: Labour government’s in-tray for climate change, energy and nature”.)
Policy gap
UK greenhouse gas emissions have been falling steadily for years, largely driven by the phaseout of coal and the growth of renewable power. Last year was no exception, the CCC says – confirming Carbon Brief analysis published in March.
The nation’s emissions dropped by 5.4% from 415m tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e) in 2022 to 393MtCO2e in 2023, excluding emissions from international aviation and shipping.
This marked an increase in the rate of emissions cuts, resulting predominantly from a fall in gas demand that “may in part reflect continuing high gas prices”, as well as a return to normal levels of imports of clean electricity from overseas.
The UK also comfortably achieved its third carbon budget, which ran for the period 2018 to 2022, the CCC confirms. It notes that, rather than due to deliberate climate policy, this can partly be attributed to the UK’s “lower-than-expected GDP”, which, in turn, is linked to the economic impact of Brexit and the Covid-19 pandemic.
However, for years the CCC has been warning of a looming gap between the government’s net-zero policies and its future emissions targets.
Only one third of the emissions reductions required to achieve the UK’s 2030 NDC goal under the Paris Agreement of cutting emissions 68% by 2030 are covered by plans the CCC deems “credible”.
There is an even larger credibility gap on the sixth carbon budget for 2033-2037, with only a quarter of the cuts needed covered by “credible” policies.
The chart below shows the distance between these credible policies (dark blue) and the “delivery pathway” that the government has set out for achieving its net-zero target (red).
Policies with “some” (light blue) or “significant” risk (purple) close part of the gap to getting on track, but around one fifth of the emissions cuts needed are either covered by plans that are “completely insufficient” or have no plans in place at all.
The CCC notes a “slight improvement” in credible policies, which only covered a quarter of the 2030 emissions cuts last year. This is due primarily to the introduction of the zero-emission vehicle mandate and a deal for the electrification of heavy industry.
This is illustrated in the figure below, which shows the change in expected emissions in 2030 based only on “credible” policies. The dots on the left show what the CCC expected in its 2023 progress report, while those on the right show its latest estimates.
While the committee now expects emissions from road transport and industry to be slightly lower, the outlook for some sectors – notably buildings – has worsened following the Conservatives’ rollback of net-zero policies.
One of the ways in which the committee monitors government progress towards net-zero is with 28 “key indicators”. Of the 22 that have a fixed benchmark or target, only five are currently on track, including a reduction in distances driven by cars and a drop in battery prices.
None of the CCC’s 12 indicators for the uptake of low-carbon technologies and nature-based solutions are classed as “on track”, except for the expansion of public electric vehicle charging stations.
The CCC also set out 27 specific “priority recommendations” in last year’s progress report for the previous government to implement.
It says only two of these recommendations have seen “good progress” over the past year and 12 have seen no progress at all. Nine of the priorities where no progress was seen were the responsibility of the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ), which oversees most of the policies in question.
Progress was also “too slow” in the devolved administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the CCC notes, with limited headway on their priority recommendations.
While there are “almost” enough credible policies in place to achieve the upcoming fourth carbon budget, between 2023 and 2027, the CCC warns that this should not lead to complacency.
Both the fourth and fifth budgets are relatively unambitious because they were set before the UK had a net-zero target, when the goal was an 80% cut in emissions by 2050. Both must be overachieved in order to remain on a “sensible path” to net-zero, it says.
The emissions drop in 2023 of 22.3MtCO2e was much higher than the average annual emissions cut seen in the seven years prior to this, which was 13.8 MtCO2e each year. The CCC notes that “a similar pace of reduction will need to be maintained throughout the rest of the decade” in order to meet future climate targets.
However, while emissions cuts to date have been dominated by the electricity system, other sectors will need to start contributing in the coming years.
As the chart below shows, three quarters of the emissions cuts over the next three carbon budgets are expected to come from transport, buildings and other sectors.
The CCC sets out various “priority actions” across the report in order to “make up lost ground” and get the UK back on track for its climate targets.
These include sector-specific targets, described in the sections below. They also include broader goals, such as making planning policy consistent with net-zero, publishing a just transition plan for workers and improving public engagement on low-carbon choices.
Road transport
Despite an increase in the miles driven on UK roads last year, emissions from cars and other road transport fell by 0.9%, according to the progress report.
The CCC says this marks the “first time that the uptake of electric vehicles has had a meaningful impact on the direction of emissions trends”. At least one million UK cars – 2.8% of the total fleet – are now electric.
In addition, the CCC notes that the number of miles being driven in cars remains roughly 6% below pre-Covid levels, indicating a persistent shift in travel patterns following the pandemic. (This is not the case for vans, which are being driven 11% more miles than before.)
Yet transport remains the largest source of emissions in the UK economy. The CCC stresses that emissions from cars, vans and trucks will have to drop four times faster than the 2023 rate each year this decade, in order to meet the country’s climate targets.
The report recommends various policies to achieve this. It welcomes the zero-emission vehicle mandate – which sets targets for car manufacturers to sell a certain share of electric models – as one of the few recent successes of the previous government.
However, it says that electric cars’ market share did not grow in 2023, after years of having exceeded the CCC’s expectations. It also notes that electric van sales have been stalling.
With this in mind, the CCC’s “priorities” for the Labour government includes a reinstatement of the 2030 phaseout date for petrol and diesel cars, after Sunak’s government delayed this to 2035. (Labour pledged to do so in its election manifesto.)
It also says ministers should remove planning barriers for electric vehicle chargers and develop new policies to promote electric van uptake.
The report welcomes the rapid drop in electric-vehicle battery prices, which have fallen far ahead of the CCC’s expectations, as the chart below shows. Their continued decline will play a “key role” in making these vehicles “more cost-effective”, it says.
Finally, the CCC recommends that the UK and devolved governments should publish various plans to guide local authorities in setting out local transport strategies, promote charging infrastructure and reduce the use of cars.
Buildings
In 2023, emissions from buildings fell by 7.2% due to reduced demand for gas. This continued a trend seen in 2022, which was driven in part by mild winter months and high fuel prices leading to behavioural change, such as people using their heating less.
However between 2015 and 2022, the average reduction in emissions in the buildings sector was below the pace needed for the rest of the decade to reach 2030 targets, the CCC says.
The reductions over the last two years were also not driven by sustained programmes to scale up low-carbon technologies, such as heat pumps, which the CCC says will be needed for “deeper decarbonisation of the economy”.
As such, progress must now be sped up, enabled by programmes of support to roll-out key technologies over the next seven years, the CCC says.
In 2023, the number of heat pumps installed only increased by 4% compared to the previous year, up from 58,000 to 60,000.
This indicator is “significantly off track” from the rate the CCC says is required. Installation rates in residential buildings will need to increase tenfold from 2023 levels by 2028 to meet the government’s 600,000 a year target.
However, the committee says there have been some “promising signs” in the first few months of 2024.
Applications under the Boiler Upgrade Scheme – which provides financial support for switching from a gas boiler to a heat pump – rose 62% in the first four months of the year compared to the same period in 2023. This follows a decision by the Conservative government to increase the grants available under the scheme from £5,000 to £7,500.
Meanwhile, measures to improve the energy efficiency of buildings are “moving in the wrong direction”. Rates of home insulation fell in 2023, having already been “significantly off track” in 2022, the CCC states.
Overall, the CCC’s assessment of policies to decarbonise buildings for the 2030 NDC has worsened over the last year. It points to the Conservative government’s decision to delay the phaseout of fossil-fuelled boilers, abandon plans to enforce energy efficiency improvements in rental properties and push back the introduction of the “clean heat market mechanism”.
The committee recommends reversing recent policy rollbacks as a priority. It also says the government should introduce a comprehensive programme to decarbonise public sector buildings, remove planning barriers for heat pumps and make electricity cheaper to support the electrification of home heating. (See: Electricity.)
Broadly, one of the priorities set out by the CCC is rolling out heat pumps faster, supported by strong and credible signals that policies such as the Boiler Upgrade Scheme will continue to be fully funded.
Additionally, the committee says the government should “narrow the scope” of the strategic decision on hydrogen for heat, ahead of its current deadline in 2026. The government has been set to make a decision on what the role of hydrogen will be within the heating system in Britain, however, multiple pilot schemes have now closed bringing the role of the technology into question. Ahead of this decision, the CCC suggests “prohibiting connections to the gas grid for new buildings from 2025”.
Industry
Emissions from industry fell by 8.1% in 2023. These reductions were largely the result of site closures in the chemicals sector, with high gas prices potentially a contributing factor, the CCC says. There was also a reduction in emissions in the iron and steel sector.
As with buildings, the sector’s annual emissions reductions over the previous seven years were not at a sufficient pace to achieve the UK’s 2030 climate target, the report says.
Moreover, last year’s fall was not the result of sustained decarbonisation action. The CCC says emissions cuts will need to speed up, supported not by factory closures but by the rollout of low-carbon technologies.
Between 2008 and 2022, direct industrial and fuel supply emissions fell from 140.8MtCO2e to 87.1MtCO2e, as shown in the chart below. This was “considerably faster” than the CCC expected in its 2008 advice.
This was mostly due to a fall in emissions-intensive industries’ outputs, in particular for steel and chemicals. The overall demand for steel saw a “big drop” from 2008 to 2009, and the sector has shrunk due to a lack of competitiveness internationally.
Additionally the EU emissions trading scheme (ETS) contributed significantly to abatement by encouraging further emissions reductions, the CCC notes.
The share of industrial energy use that comes from electricity has stayed relatively consistent, at 26%, since 2020. However, the CCC expects this to increase, as various industries electrify their processes to reduce emissions. As an indicator therefore, industrial electrification is off track, the report adds.
Risks to the decarbonisation of industry include British Steel’s plan to replace its blast furnace in Scunthorpe with two electric arc furnaces (EAF), which is dependent on as-yet unapproved government support.
The CCC notes that the previous government’s £500m deal with Tata Steel to shift production at its Port Talbot site to EAFs has lowered the risk of industry missing its decarbonisation targets.
However, this transition will mean up to 2,800 job losses. The CCC notes that it has “long been clear that the site would need to adapt to remain competitive, for economic reasons largely unrelated to decarbonisation, yet successive governments have failed to develop a long-term economic strategy to develop alternative high-quality employment in the area”.
It further advises that the government should be more proactive and ambitious when it comes to engaging with communities affected by the transition to net-zero. Not doing so risks long-term harm to communities, which could undermine support for net-zero.
The CCC says there has been progress with tightening the cap under the UK’s emissions trading system (UK ETS), which includes industry. However, it notes that the cap is still far looser than in the “central” trajectory in the government’s net-zero strategy. This means that other parts of the economy will need to cut emissions more quickly in order to keep the UK on track overall.
The new UK ETS cap is expected to lead to higher production costs, the CCC notes. While some industries will be protected if the government introduces a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) in 2027 as planned, this “could lead to offshoring in the absence of further supporting policy to develop alternative low-carbon options”, the report notes..
It says priorities for the new Labour government to tackle industry emissions therefore include strengthening the UK ETS to ensure that its price is sufficient to drive decarbonisation and implementing a CBAM effectively to protect against offshoring.
It also says the government should act to make electricity cheaper, develop policies to address barriers to industrial electrification and implement resource efficiency plans.
Fossil fuels and hydrogen
The CCC also weighs in on the question of whether the UK should continue to exploit its domestic fossil fuel resources, including those in the North Sea.
Specifically, it says that UK policy should be aligned with the COP28 deal on “transitioning away” from fossil fuels, as well as the guiding principle for international climate action of “common but differentiated responsibilities”. It says:
“As a developed country with a binding commitment to transition to net-zero, the UK should reassess whether further exploration for new sources of fossil fuels is aligned to the UNFCCC principle of common but differentiated responsibility and the global stocktake.”
The outgoing Conservative government had argued that domestic fossil fuels bolstered energy security, attempting to make this into a “wedge issue” with the now-ruling Labour Party, which ran on a pledge to end new licensing for North Sea oil and gas extraction.
To drive this point home, the Conservatives had introduced an offshore petroleum licensing bill that would have required the North Sea Transition Authority to run annual licensing rounds for new exploration. (The Conservatives failed to pass the bill before the election.)
In contrast, the CCC report notes that one of the key reasons why UK energy bills have remained so high during and after the global energy crisis is due to the country’s dependence on fossil fuels. This dependence will be reduced in the shift to net-zero, it notes.
The shift to domestic renewables will also bolster energy security, the CCC says:
“British-based renewable energy is the cheapest and fastest way to reduce vulnerability to volatile global fossil fuel markets. The faster we get off fossil fuels, the more secure we become.”
One “welcome” point of progress has been that in February 2024, the UK formally withdrew from the controversial Energy Charter Treaty, which provides protection to companies investing in fossil fuel developments, the CCC notes.
Beyond fossil fuels, the UK government has continued to target a strategic role for hydrogen. It published a hydrogen production delivery roadmap, a transport and storage networks pathway, and a business model for the first hydrogen allocation round in December 2023.
As a priority, the government should also publish a “strategic spatial energy plan” and identify low-regret infrastructure investments, including for hydrogen infrastructure that can proceed now, the committee says.
Electricity
Emissions from the electricity system fell by 22.2% in 2023. This large drop reflects falling gas generation as part of the longer-term rise of renewables, combined with a return to the UK’s normal status as a net electricity importer.
Electricity generation is the only sector to have sustained emissions cuts in line with the 2030 target over multiple years, the CCC notes.
With electrification of the economy a key enabler for wider emissions cuts, one of the CCC’s priority actions for the remainder of 2024 is for the government to make electricity cheaper, by removing policy costs from electricity bills.
This would support industrial electrification, the uptake of electric cars and ensure lower running costs of heat pumps compared to fossil fuel boilers, it says.
Electricity decarbonisation to date has been aided by massive cost reductions for technologies including wind and solar power, the CCC says. It adds that lower costs lay the groundwork for continued rapid uptake of low-carbon technologies.
Indeed, it says that renewable energy will need to be built even faster than it has been to date. Annual installation of offshore wind will need to more than treble, onshore wind more than double and solar increase five-fold between 2023 and 2035.
For example, the UK had 15 gigawatts (GW) of offshore wind at the end of 2023 and will need to add more than 5GW every year to reach 50GW by 2030. This is more than three times the rate added over the past three years.
The technology hit a stalling point in 2023, when no offshore wind was contracted in the contracts for difference (CfD) scheme due to failure to respond to supply chain cost increases.
The CCC says it has “some confidence” that contracts coming through under the CfD scheme will lead to capacity increases, “but these are not enough and significant additional capacity beyond this will be required”.
The CCC “welcomes” updates to the next CfD auction, including the 66% increase in the maximum price for offshore wind and an increase in the notional “budget” that includes £800m for the technology
Onshore wind capacity in 2023 was 15GW, however only 0.5GW of new capacity was installed last year. This was considerably below the peak of 1.8GW in 2017.
Total solar capacity was 16GW in 2023. For the UK to achieve the previous government’s ambition of hitting 70GW of capacity by 2035, more than 4GW would need to be installed each year, the CCC notes – more than five times the average amount added over the past three years.
Within its first week, the new Labour government has moved to make the development of renewables easier, including removing the de facto ban on onshore wind in England and approving three major solar farms.
Other key areas of development have been “positive steps” made by the previous government around whole-system strategic planning of the future energy system, the report says.
The CCC calls for rapid decisions to be made following the second consultation on the “review of electricity market arrangements”, which was published in March,.
The government should publish a strategy for the full decarbonisation of electricity by 2035 at the latest, the CCC recommends. (The report was prepared prior to the election. The new Labour government is targeting clean power by 2030.)
This strategy should cover the strategic and policy requirements, milestones and timeline for delivery, as well as contingencies addressing key risks, the CCC suggests.
Additionally, the government should ensure electricity network capacity is growing to meet requirements. This should include fully implementing the “connections action plan” and “transmission acceleration action plan” at pace.
Agriculture and land use
Agriculture and land use are the source of some major gaps in the previous government’s net-zero plans, the CCC states.
Emissions from agriculture have remained virtually unchanged for nearly two decades. Planting trees and restoring peatland could absorb some of the emissions from high-emitting sectors, but efforts to expand these activities have faltered.
The UK has committed to cut its methane emissions 30% from 2020 levels by 2030. In order to do this, the pace of reductions compared to recent years would need to double over this decade.
Cattle and sheep produce around half of the UK’s methane emissions. Given the slow rate of change over recent years, the rate of methane cuts from agriculture would need to increase roughly eightfold in order to meet the UK’s methane target by 2030.
The CCC notes that livestock numbers fell between 2017 and 2020, but since then the trend has remained flat. It notes that there has been a small amount of progress in the promotion of methane-suppressing feed products for livestock.
The committee also points out that the Welsh government has paused its plans to reduce emissions from farming “following substantial resistance”. It warns that any delay to its sustainable farming scheme “could have significant impacts”.
The report says both the UK government and devolved governments should prioritise funding and support to ensure the UK-wide tree planting target of 30,000 hectares per year by the 2024-25 period is met.
It also says there should be a “delivery mechanism” for peatland restoration, which is supposed to reach 32,000 hectares per year by 2026, but is not on track to do so. (The CCC notes that even this target is “significantly less ambitious” than its own recommendation.)
The final priority highlighted for the sector by the CCC is the publication of the long-awaited land-use framework. This plan has been repeatedly delayed, and could help to align the sector with other issues such as using land to build energy infrastructure or adapt to climate change.
Aviation and shipping
Aviation was the only sector that saw a substantial leap in emissions in 2023. They rose by 15.5% as demand “continued to rebound from the pandemic”, and the CCC says there is “a risk” that demand for flights may rise higher than pre-Covid levels next year.
The government’s pathway to net-zero allows for some growth in both aviation and shipping emissions out to 2030. (While domestic journeys are included, international aviation and shipping are not part of the 2030 NDC target. However, they will feature in the UK’s carbon budgets from the sixth period onwards.)
The CCC says more detail of policies for curbing aviation emissions was provided last year – specifically the sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) mandate. However, it says “delivery concerns” mean this sector continues to “attract some risks”.
It notes that the SAF targets the previous government set were “ambitious”, but cautions that the volume of SAFs available to meet this target is “highly uncertain”.
The CCC has frequently highlighted the need to manage demand for flights as well as implementing technological solutions to decarbonise travel. As recent Carbon Brief analysis demonstrates, any emissions cuts from the SAF mandate in the coming years will be entirely wiped out by the expected rise in demand for flights.
In the new report, the committee says a priority for the Labour government should be pausing any new airport expansions until there is a UK-wide “capacity management framework” in place.
This would assess aviation emissions and ensure there is no overall expansion “unless the carbon intensity of aviation is outperforming the government’s emissions reduction pathway”.
Shipping, which accounts for one of the smallest shares of annual emissions, is not highlighted as a priority area for the new government.
CO2 removal
The CCC says the previous Conservative government’s plans to develop technologies that remove CO2 from the atmosphere are “behind schedule”.
This makes the ambition to remove at least 5MtCO2 per year by 2030 – which is required to meet the UK’s NDC target under current plans – “increasingly challenging”, according to the committee.
Moreover, despite the publication of some business models for the sector, all of the government’s plans carry “significant risk”, the CCC warns. This is notable, as the removals sector is expected to contribute 11% of emissions cuts by the end of the sixth carbon budget in 2037.
The key priority the report highlights for the new Labour government is finalising business models for engineered CO2 removals and “opening these to the market to enable projects to get underway”.
A related piece of advice highlighted by the CCC is that the government should publish guidance for businesses on how to use carbon offsets. It says firms should only use them to claim “net-zero” once nearly all their emissions are cut, and “the remaining emissions are neutralised by high-quality permanent removals”.
Waste and F-gases
The CCC says there has been “very little progress” in cutting waste emissions. It highlights insufficient progress in capturing methane from landfills, recycling and composting.
Waste is largely a devolved issue and the CCC makes recommendations to the governments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland accordingly.
The key priority that the report highlights for the new Labour government for this sector is the need to address rising emissions from waste-to-energy facilities, which have “substantially increased”. It calls for a “moratorium” on new plants until there is a government review of capacity needs and how these facilities align with climate plans.
Fluorinated gases (F-gases), which make up a tiny fraction of UK emission, are subject to steadily declining quotas for importers and producers of the devices that emit them. They are not targeted as a priority in the new report.
Adaptation
The previous Conservative government published its third National Adaptation Plan (NAP3) in 2023, covering the period out to 2028. This is the nation’s statutory plan to ensure the UK is prepared for a warmer world.
It has faced intense criticism from the CCC, and campaigners have taken the government to court, citing the plan’s failure to adequately protect people from climate change.
In its new report, the CCC says NAP3 “lacks the pace and ambition to address growing climate risks which we are already experiencing”. It says the plan needs “clear objectives and targets”, and this should include stronger links with the next spending review.
The report also says the government should reorganise so that adaptation “becomes a fundamental aspect and is embedded in other national policy objectives” across departments. This includes prioritising it in other national priorities, including nature restoration, infrastructure development, economic growth and health.
The post CCC: Labour must ‘make up lost ground’ to hit UK climate goals appeared first on Carbon Brief.
CCC: Labour must ‘make up lost ground’ to hit UK climate goals
UK chancellor Rachel Reeves has unveiled the first spending review under the current Labour government, announcing funding for nuclear power, energy efficiency and carbon capture and storage (CCS).
A spending review establishes each ministry’s spending limits and priorities for the rest of the parliamentary term.
The Department of Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) received one of the largest jumps in capital spending, despite energy secretary Ed Miliband reportedly being one of the last to agree to a spending settlement.
Before the final details had been announced, the Times was describing Miliband as one of the “biggest winners” from the process.
High-profile funding announcements in the Treasury’s spending review include £14.2bn for the Sizewell C new nuclear power plant in Suffolk, the first state-backed nuclear power station for decades.
Elsewhere, two new CCS clusters – Acorn and Viking – were allocated funding and railways across the nation were given a boost.
Below, Carbon Brief runs through the key announcements.
- Departmental spending
- Energy efficiency
- Energy infrastructure investment
- Transport
- Other announcements
Departmental spending
Spending reviews are an opportunity for governments to stake out their priorities by setting the budgets for departments over the rest of this parliament.
Reeves’ spending review has been viewed by experts and media commentators as an opportunity to boost Labour’s flagging popularity and pursue some of its key manifesto commitments, including net-zero.
It covers plans for departmental “resource” spending – including day-to-day running costs – out to 2028-29 and “capital” spending out to 2029-30.
The latter includes injections of funding for infrastructure and public services, such as major clean-energy and transport projects.
In her speech launching the review, Reeves did not specifically mention the terms net-zero or climate change, but stressed the importance of achieving energy security via domestic, low-carbon power. “Clean energy” also featured prominently in the review document itself.
Overall, total departmental budgets are set to grow by 2.3% in real terms across the spending review period.
The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) is expected to see a 16% increase in overall departmental spending, reaching £12.6bn in 2028-29.
(This does not include the boost in funding for Sizewell C nuclear plant, which will see a 15.6% increase thanks to a £14.2bn investment over the next five years. See: New nuclear.)
The chart below – taken from the spending review document – shows that while the absolute increase in spending on areas such as health, defence and education is higher, DESNZ is among the most highly prioritised in relative terms.
The review document emphasises that this increase in public money is necessary to mobilise private investment and “secure the UK’s electricity system with homegrown, clean power by 2030”.
Other departments that are also relevant for climate action have not seen the same overall increases in budget.
The Department for Transport (DfT) is set to see its overall departmental spending drop by 0.4%. However, the review notes that capital spending will increase, including more money for local low-carbon transport options and major rail projects.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) budget is also expected to fall overall, but support for “nature-friendly farming” is set to more than double over the review period.
Energy efficiency
Leading up to the spending review, there had been speculation that the government might cut plans to invest £13.2bn on upgrading the nation’s homes under its “warm homes plan”, which had been a manifesto commitment ahead of last year’s election.
Such a move could have cost households more than £1.4bn a year in avoidable energy bills, according to analysis from thinktank the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU).
However, the spending review confirmed the pledged £13.2bn in funding for the scheme, covering spending between 2025-26 and 2029-30.
The government says this will help to cut bills by up to £600 per household through energy efficiency measures, heat pumps, solar panels and batteries. It will also help support tens of thousands of jobs across the country, the spending review adds.
According to innovation agency Nesta, the warm homes funding is roughly double the previous government’s commitment, amounting to a £6.6bn increase in government spending on home upgrades over the current parliament, compared with the previous one.
It will see around one-fifth of the nation’s housing stock upgraded by 2029, although to a varying degree.
Responding to the announcement, trade association Energy UK’s chief executive Dhara Vyas said in a statement:
“It’s also very important that millions of customers will see a direct benefit from today’s announcements. By reaffirming the funding to improve the energy efficiency of millions of homes and supporting the switch to cleaner heating alternatives, customers can expect warmer and more comfortable homes, cleaner air and cheaper bills – showing how the energy transition can improve their daily lives.”
Funding for the warm homes plan in the spending review follows £3.4bn in investment announced for the scheme at the autumn budget in 2024. At the time, Labour had said that this was just the “first step” in investment for decarbonisation and household energy efficiency within the scheme.
Further details for the warm homes plan will be confirmed in October, the spending review says.
Beyond energy efficiency, Reeves announced what she called the “biggest boost to investment in social and affordable housing in a generation”, confirming £39bn in funding for a 10-year affordable homes programme.
This will nearly double government spending on affordable housing, according to reporting earlier this week.
Miliband recently announced changes to the “future homes standard” that will mean almost all new homes will have to be built with rooftop solar as a default, high levels of energy efficiency and low-carbon heating, such as heat pumps.
As such, new properties built under the affordable homes programme will largely have to include energy efficiency measures and low-carbon energy technologies.
Energy infrastructure investment
GB Energy
The spending review also confirms that it will allocate £8.3bn in funding for Great British Energy (GB Energy) and the linked GB Energy – Nuclear, another manifesto commitment.
It says this has been achieved by allocating £9.6bn in “additional financial transactions, such as loans and equity investments, to support growth”.
(It explains that “financial transactions” are designed to “allow government to invest alongside the private sector, through equity investments, loans and guarantees”. The document also says that GB Energy will be designated as a “public financial institution”.)
In addition to this top-line confirmation for GB Energy, the spending review also gives it an extra £300m in support for offshore wind supply chains.
This forms part of the “government’s investment in resilient and clean energy security, boosting domestic jobs, mobilising additional private investment and securing manufacturing facilities for critical clean energy supply chains such as floating offshore platforms”, it notes.
The spending review confirms up to £80m for port investment to support floating offshore wind deployment in Port Talbot in Wales, subject to final due diligence.
GB Energy funding follows on from Labour’s manifesto, promising investment into technologies such as floating offshore wind, as well as partnering with local authorities and the private sector to support the deployment of mature technologies.
New nuclear
Ahead of the spending review, the chancellor announced a £14.2bn investment in the planned Sizewell C new nuclear power plant in Suffolk.
The plant is being jointly developed by the UK government with French state-owned utility firm EDF Energy, which is already building the Hinkley C plant in Somerset.
Each new plant will have a capacity of 3.2 gigawatts (GW), enough to power six million homes. During its construction, Sizewell C will provide 10,000 jobs, including 1,500 apprenticeships, according to the government.
In a statement earlier this week, energy secretary Ed Miliband said new nuclear was needed for energy security, lower bills and to help cut emissions. He said:
“We need new nuclear to deliver a golden age of clean-energy abundance, because that is the only way to protect family finances, take back control of our energy, and tackle the climate crisis.
“This is the government’s clean energy mission in action- investing in lower bills and good jobs for energy security.”
Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme following the investment announcement, Miliband stated that China would not be able to invest in the new nuclear plant in Suffolk. He further clarified that, while the majority of the investment would come from the UK government, there will also be private investment announced at a later date.
Sizewell C will be one of the first new nuclear power stations in the UK in decades, with no new nuclear power plants having opened since 1995 and all but one of the existing fleet expected to retire by the early 2030s.
The under-construction plant at Hinkley Point C is also being developed by EDF and is expected to serve as a “blueprint” for Sizewell C.
The Hinkley C plant is being funded via a “contract for difference” (CfD), under which EDF is responsible for the upfront investment costs, but will receive £92.50 per megawatt hour (MWh, 2012 prices) for each unit of electricity generated. (This will drop to £89.50/MWh in 2012 prices as a result of the Sizewell C project going ahead.)
EDF has reportedly accepted that Hinkley C will cost more than £40bn to complete, but has “rejected claims” that the Sizewell C scheme would cost a similar amount.
Sizewell C is due to be funded under the “regulated asset base” (RAB) model and so will not receive a CfD, but the details of this deal are not yet available. The final investment decision on the project is due later this summer, according to reports.
Additionally, the government announced Rolls-Royce has been selected to build small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) following a “rigorous” two-year competition.
Rolls-Royce will partner with Great British Energy – Nuclear as part of the government’s industrial strategy, which will see £2.5bn invested over the spending review period.
The firm is expected to build three SMRs, with the first connecting to the grid “in the mid-2030s”, according to Rolls-Royce.
The spending review also included over £2.5bn for nuclear fusion. This will include support for the design and build of a prototype energy plant in Nottinghamshire.
The document notes that the government is providing a “pathway for privately led advanced nuclear technologies”, although details are not elaborated.
Great British Energy – Nuclear will shortly publish a new framework with the National Wealth Fund for exploring further investment opportunities for viable nuclear projects.
The spending review includes £13.9bn for the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, to keep “former nuclear sites and facilities safe and secure as it decommissions sites and manages nuclear waste”.
Carbon capture and storage
The UK has already pledged “up to” £21.7bn of funding over 25 years to support five carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects, involving “clusters” of connected facilities.
Most of this funding will come from levies on consumers, but the government has also been gradually announcing chunks of public investment to get these initiatives off the ground.
The spending review allocates another £9.4bn of capital spending by 2029. This will partly go towards “maximis[ing] deployment to fill the [CO2] storage capacity” of the first two funded clusters.
At the same time, the government also confirmed its support for the next two clusters – Acorn in north-east Scotland and Viking in the Humber in the spending review. These projects are set to be up and running in the 2030s.
The review states that the government is providing the “development funding to advance [the] delivery” of these clusters, with a final investment decision expected “later this parliament, subject to project readiness and affordability”.
Pathways set out by government advisors at the Climate Change Committee (CCC) suggest CCS is required to meet the UK’s net-zero targets.
However, the government has faced intense scrutiny over its investments in CCS. A report by the influential Public Accounts Committee earlier this year said investing public funds in this relatively undeveloped technology was a “high risk” approach.
Transport
The spending review includes a number of commitments for regional transport projects that could help cut UK emissions, including rail upgrades, bus lanes and cycleways.
Overall, the Department for Transport (DfT) settlement will reach total funding of £31.5bn in 2028-29, a slight increase from current levels. This includes support for the HS2 high-speed rail project.
HS2, which had its second phase out to Manchester cancelled under the Conservatives in 2023, will see its funding drop over the spending period.
Meanwhile, capital spending on transport projects around the country is set to experience a 4% real-terms growth rate each year out to 2029-30.
Regional transport projects receiving funding include the TransPennine Route Upgrade between York and Manchester, with £3.5bn, as well as £2.5bn for East-West Rail between Oxford and Cambridge and £300m for rail investment in Wales.
(For comparison, despite the declining funds, HS2 will receive £25.3bn over the period.)
Other relevant investments in the spending review include a commitment to “more than double” city region transport spending per year by 2029-30, by providing a total of £15.6bn for elected mayors across England. The review says this could go towards local transport priorities, including “zero-emission buses, trams and local rail”.
Additionally, there is another £2.3bn allocated for investment in local transport grants to support “bus lanes, cycleways and congestion improvement measures” for areas outside the larger regions with mayors.
The review includes a relatively small sum – £2.6bn – of capital investment that is set aside to “decarbonise transport” as “part of the government’s clean energy mission”.
This is made up of £1.4bn to “support continued uptake” of electric vehicles, in particular vans and heavy goods vehicles (HGVs), as well as £400m for charging infrastructure and £616m for walking and cycling infrastructure.
Some of these funds will also support the production of “sustainable” aviation fuel (SAF) in the UK by extending the government’s advanced fuels fund.
The spending review also includes funding for transport projects that may not help to decarbonise the nation’s transport. Notably, there is £24bn of funding by 2030 to “maintain and improve motorways and local roads across the country”.
Also, while the project is not mentioned in the spending review document itself, Reeves’s speech mentioned “backing Doncaster airport” alongside “investment to connect our cities and our towns”. (The airport is currently closed, but there has been a local political effort to reopen it.)
Other announcements
R&D funding
The government is increasing research and development (R&D) funding to £22.6bn per year by 2029-2030.
This will include funding for the UK’s science base, the spending review says, such as the non-departmental public body UK Research and Innovation and research initiative Horizon Europe.
Part of this funding will go to the government’s new R&D missions accelerator programme. Some £500m of public funds are intended to leverage a further £1.5bn of private investment in innovation that supports the government’s “missions”.
(One of the five key “missions” announced by the Labour government in its manifesto is to “make Britain a clean-energy superpower”.)
Additionally, R&D funding will include up to £750m for a new supercomputer at Edinburgh University, the largest in the UK. This will be used to support a broad range of fields, including climate and weather predictions and research into fusion power.
In a statement, secretary of state for Scotland Ian Murray welcomed the funding for the supercomputer, adding:
“This will see Scotland playing a leading role in creating breakthroughs that have a global benefit – such as new medicines, health advances and climate change solutions.”
Ahead of the publication of the delayed UK industrial strategy, the spending review lists relevant R&D commitments.
It says over £3bn in R&D and capital funding over the next four years will go to advanced manufacturing across the UK, “anchoring the supply chain of zero emission vehicles, batteries and ultra-low and zero-carbon emissions aircraft[s]”.
Clean-energy industries will also receive “significant additional funding”, it adds.
Flood defences and farming funds
As part of the spending review, the government announced investment in climate adaptation and the natural environment to “increase the UK’s resilience to the effects of climate change and protect the ecosystems that underpin the economy and food security”.
This includes £2.7bn in sustainable farming and nature recovery funding until 2028-29, as well as £4.2bn to build and maintain flood defences from 2026-27 to 2028-29.
According to the spending review, farmers will benefit from £2.3bn through the farming and countryside programme and up to £400m from additional nature schemes
There will be increasing support for “nature-friendly farming” through environmental land management schemes, which will grow from £800m in 2023-24 to £2bn by 2028-29. This will be sustained by “rapidly winding down” other subsidy payments.
The spending review states that this will make a “significant contribution” to the Environment Act targets, including improvements to water and air quality and creating spaces for wildlife to support biodiversity.
Funding for both flood defences and farm schemes follows the government stating that it was facing “significant funding pressures” of almost £600m in 2024-25 in the autumn budget.
Foreign aid and climate finance
The government announced in February that it would further cut aid spending to 0.3% of gross national income (GNI) by 2027 in order to fund higher defence spending.
This came just three months after the UK, alongside other developed countries, had committed to raising at least $300bn a year for climate action in developing countries at the COP29 climate summit.
Developed countries have traditionally used their aid budgets to meet such “climate finance” goals.
But observers have noted that scaling up climate finance to meet this new target will be difficult, as nations cut back their overseas spending and the world faces overlapping humanitarian crises.
When announcing the cut earlier this year, prime minister Keir Starmer said that the UK would retain its focus on “tackling climate change” in its aid spending. The government also acknowledged that the decision to cut aid would require “many hard choices”.
The government has a pledge to spend £11.6bn over five years on climate finance in developing countries, which ends in 2025-26. Beyond that, it is expected to announce a new pledge to feed into the $300bn goal.
The spending review does not provide details of precisely what this goal will be, or whether it will be more ambitious as other aid programmes undergo swingeing cuts.
It states that the funding plan “prioritises UK multilateral investment across issues where the international system needs to deliver at scale and to reform”, including the “climate and nature crisis”.
It also says the three departments that provide nearly all UK climate finance – the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, DESNZ and Defra – will “maintain progress” on the nation’s international climate goals.
However, the amounts of aid channelled via all three of these departments will be lower in the coming years than they are now, according to the government’s figures.
Response to climate-risks report
In a separate document published alongside the spending review, the government also set out its response to the latest “fiscal risks and sustainability” (FRS) report, published by the Office for Budget in September 2024.
Within this, the government reiterates its intention to “accelerate to net-zero”, including via its target for clean power by 2030.
The response adds that, alongside this, the government recognises that it “must also take action to build resilience and ensure the UK is well-prepared for the changing climate”.
It says that FRS identified flooding and extreme heat as areas that need particular attention, before setting out its spending commitments in these areas.
The response also confirms two important dates for UK climate-policy watchers.
First, the response says the government will, in October 2025, publish its “carbon budget delivery plan”. This will set out the plans and policies the government will put in place in order to meet the first six carbon budgets, covering the years out to 2037.
Second, it says that the government will legislate for the seventh UK “carbon budget” by June 2026. This is a legally binding limit on emissions covering five years from 2038 to 2042. The CCC has recommended an 87% reduction below 1990 levels.
The post UK spending review 2025: Key climate and energy announcements appeared first on Carbon Brief.
UK spending review 2025: Key climate and energy announcements
Ninety-five countries across continents have called for the adoption of an “ambitious” UN pact to tackle plastic pollution that includes targets to reduce plastic production – a growing source of planet-heating emissions.
The show of unity comes two months before governments are due to restart formal negotiations on a treaty in Geneva, Switzerland, after they dramatically failed to reach agreement at what was supposed to be the last round of talks late last year.
In Busan, South Korea, a handful of oil and gas-producing states – vocally led by Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran – blocked a push to include caps on the production of new plastic, arguing the pact should be limited to addressing consumption and recycling.
“This declaration sends a clear and strong message: we will not give up,” Agnes Pannier-Runacher, France’s minister of ecological transition, said on Tuesday at the launch of the declaration on the sidelines of the UN Ocean Conference in Nice, France.
“We cannot lie to them [our citizens] and to ourselves by saying that waste management and recycling will be enough to solve the problem. It’s a lie,” she added.
Lifeline for fossil fuel industry
Signatories to the declaration include European countries, Australia, Canada, Colombia and Mexico, as well as many African and Pacific island nations. No major plastic producers – such as China, the US, Saudi Arabia, India and South Korea – have endorsed the call.
Nearly all plastics are derived from oil and gas and, as the world gradually starts to wean itself off fossil fuels for energy, countries and companies that profit from carbon-based fuels view an expected ramp-up in plastic production as a lifeline for their industry.
The $712-billion plastics industry is set to at least double by 2050, which would see plastic production account for nearly a third of the remaining global carbon budget for staying below 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming.
In the Nice declaration, countries are calling for the adoption of a “global target” to reduce the production and consumption of the building block of plastic items to “sustainable levels”. The goal would be regularly adjusted to raise ambition and countries would be required to report on their production, imports and exports of primary plastic polymers, it added.
Failure of Busan talks exposes fossil fuel barrier to UN plastics pact
“A treaty that does not reduce plastic production will be empty paper,” said Lena Estrada, Colombia’s minister of environment, who called the declaration “an act of courage”.
The statement also calls for a binding obligation to phase out “the most problematic plastic products and chemicals” used in the manufacturing process and for “new and additional finance” that would support the implementation of the treaty.
Estrada called on opposing countries to act in good faith. “It’s not too late to stand with us,” she added.
Ambitious treaty or no treaty?
Alicia Barcena, Mexico’s minister for the environment and natural resources, said the Geneva talks in August will “mark a turning point” in the hard-fought negotiations that began over three years ago.
But she acknowledged that a treaty might not be concluded there as deep divisions remain. “We’re going to go to Geneva with the intention of getting as much as we can,” Barcena told journalists in Nice. “That doesn’t mean that the treaty might be finalised there. It depends if we want a mediocre or… an ambitious one.”
If the negotiations prove unsuccessful once again, governments could weigh up other options. Dennis Clare, a legal advisor for the Pacific Island state of Micronesia at the talks, told Climate Home that if the so-called ‘high-ambition’ group of countries cannot get an agreement through the current UN process, they can “bypass the blockers and do a deal elsewhere”.
While longstanding fault lines persist, it is unclear what position the United States will take in the next round of talks.
With Joe Biden at the helm, it offered lukewarm support for production caps. The new administration has not yet indicated its plans for the negotiations or whether it will even show up. But President Donald Trump strongly supports the fossil fuel industry and has already taken token measures to undo Biden’s efforts to cut plastic use, such as ending efforts to replace plastic straws with paper ones.
Speaking at Tuesday’s press conference, a French official said they had held informal discussions with the US. “Clearly there are some changes but we don’t know exactly what will happen,” she added.
The post Over half of countries push for plastic production cuts in new UN pact appeared first on Climate Home News.
Over half of countries push for plastic production cuts in new UN pact
Climate Change
Ocean current ‘collapse’ could trigger ‘profound cooling’ in northern Europe – even with global warming
A “collapse” of key Atlantic ocean currents would cause winter temperatures to plunge across northern Europe, overriding the warming driven by human activity.
That is according to new research, published in Geophysical Research Letters, which looks at the combined impact of the shutdown of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) and global warming on temperatures in northern Europe.
Scientists have warned that human-caused climate change is likely causing AMOC to weaken and that continued warming could push it towards a “tipping point”.
The study suggests that, in an intermediate emissions scenario, greenhouse gas-driven warming would not be able to outweigh the cooling impact of an AMOC collapse.
In this modelled world, one-in-10 winters in London could see cold extremes approaching -20C.
Winter extremes in Oslo in Norway, meanwhile, could plummet to around -48C.
The cold temperatures are projected to be driven by the loss of heat transfer from the tropics via ocean currents, as well as the spread of sea ice to northern Europe in the winter months.
The research does not look at when AMOC might tip – instead, it focuses on scenarios in the far future when this has already happened, so as to explore what impact it would have.
Lead author Dr René van Westen, a researcher in oceanography at Utrecht University, says Europe might stand alone as the one region set to get “cooler in a warmer world”. He tells Carbon Brief:
“If the AMOC collapses, we need to prepare for substantially cooler winters. Winter extremes will be very substantial for some regions. Temperatures could go down to -50C in Scandinavia. At -40C and lower in Scandinavia – everything breaks down over there.”
The research is being published alongside an interactive map, featured below, which highlights how a collapsed AMOC under different warming scenarios could impact temperature averages, extremes and sea ice across Europe.
‘Will warming or cooling win?’
AMOC is a system of ocean currents which plays a crucial role in keeping Europe warm. It transports warm water northwards from the tropics to Europe and cold, deep waters back southwards.
The potential collapse of these ocean currents – caused by the influx of freshwater from melting ice as well as rising air temperatures – is seen by some scientists as a “tipping point” that, once triggered, would be irreversible on human timescales.
However, there is significant scientific debate around whether human-caused climate change is causing the AMOC to slow down – and whether and when it might “tip”.
(The “tipping” of AMOC is often referred to as a “collapse”, “breakdown” or “shutdown”.)
Some scientists have argued that ocean currents have been slowing down since the mid-20th century, whereas others say there has been no weakening since the 1960s.
On the risks of an approaching tipping point, some researchers have estimated a collapse could occur this century, but others have questioned the robustness of the early warning signals being interpreted as evidence of a forthcoming shutdown.
(Regular direct measurements of AMOC’s strength started in 2004. To estimate the ocean currents’ health prior to this, scientists turn to a number of methods, including looking at palaeoclimate records, running climate model “hindcasts” and analysing historical patterns in sea surface temperature.)
A paper published last year by van Westen and colleagues, which ranked second in Carbon Brief’s round-up of the most talked-about climate papers of 2024, found that the present-day AMOC is on a trajectory towards tipping.
That paper set out some of the climate impacts of such an event, including a 10-30C drop in average monthly winter temperatures in northern Europe within a century and a “drastic change” in rainfall patterns in the Amazon.
The scientist’s latest offering provides a more detailed look at how an AMOC tipping event might impact Europe, using simulations produced by the Community Earth System Model (CESM).
The research models the impact of an AMOC collapse in combination with the impacts of human-caused climate change, instead of looking at the collapse of the ocean currents in isolation.
Van Westen says the research was designed to answer the question of how warming from greenhouse gas emissions could offset cooling from an AMOC shutdown. He tells Carbon Brief:
“[A question we wanted to address was] what would happen in a scenario where we have climate change and an AMOC collapse. Will it get cooler over Europe, or will it get warmer? Will regional warming win or will the cooling win?”
Simulating AMOC ‘collapse’
To answer this question, the scientists run a raft of climate simulations, exploring different combinations of global temperature rise and AMOC collapse.
Specifically, the scientists explore the collapse of AMOC under three scenarios:
- An “intermediate” climate scenario (RCP4.5), which is in line with current global climate policies.
- A very high-emissions scenario (RCP8.5) where warming hits 4C above the pre-industrial average by 2100.
- A “pre-industrial” scenario, without any human-caused global warming.
Across all three scenarios, the researchers run multiple simulations 500 years into the future, stabilising global temperature rise at 2C and above 4C from 2100 onwards. The researchers explore scenarios where AMOC is stable and when it has tipped.
The paper does not discuss the level of warming at which AMOC might tip – instead, it focuses on a point in the future after it has occurred, when the ocean currents and the climate have “equilibrated to a new background state”.
To simulate an AMOC collapse in the climate model under the two warming pathways, the researchers apply high levels of freshwater forcing to the north Atlantic.
Van Westen acknowledges the level of freshwater forcing applied to the model to create an AMOC shutdown is “unrealistic”, but says the adjustment is necessary to override a “bias” in climate models. He explains:
“[Climate models] have an overly stable AMOC. So, we need to add this kind of freshwater flux to get the AMOC in a more unstable regime which corresponds to actual observations.”
The paper focuses largely on impacts under the intermediate scenario with AMOC collapse. Under this combination, AMOC shutdown causes some global cooling, resulting in a world that is around 2C warmer than pre-industrial levels.
Prof Stefan Rahmstorf, a professor of physics of the oceans at Potsdam University who was not involved in the research, tells Carbon Brief the new study is “highly welcome”. He explains that “not many” studies have investigated the combined impact of global warming with AMOC collapse since a paper he co-authored in 1999, and adds:
“[The new study] uses a sophisticated climate model with good regional resolution – far better than what was possible 26 years ago. The model confirms the long-standing concern that an AMOC collapse would have massive impacts on European climate, in this case focusing on temperature extremes.”
Dr Alejandra Sanchez-Franks, senior research scientist in the marine physics and ocean climate group at National Oceanography Centre, who was also not involved in the research, says the study’s conclusions should not be used to explain how the European climate will respond in the near-term to changes in the strength of AMOC. She tells Carbon Brief:
“The study uses an idealised experiment with unrealistic freshwater changes to force an AMOC collapse. Very importantly, the author’s conclusions refer to the European climate 200 years after an AMOC change and do not describe what will happen to European temperatures and sea ice in the years and decades following an AMOC collapse.
“Therefore, the study does not serve to tell us how an AMOC tipping point or collapse will affect us immediately.”
‘Out of the freezer and into the frying pan’
The most “striking” finding of the paper, according to van Westen, is that an AMOC collapse in a world that is 2C warmer will result in a Europe that is cooler than it is today.
The research notes that – under this scenario – north-west Europe is set to face “profound cooling”, characterised by more intense winter extremes.
Summer temperatures, on the other hand, would be expected to remain just slightly cooler than they would in a pre-industral climate – meaning that Europeans would experience dramatic swings in temperatures throughout the year.
Increased winter storms and greater day-to-day temperature fluctuations are also expected in this scenario. This is due to a greater temperature contrast between northern Europe and southern Europe, which would be less impacted by a weakened AMOC.
The research notes that cooling from the reduced heat transfer from ocean currents would be amplified by “extensive” sea ice expansion to the coasts of north-west Europe. (Sea ice reflects incoming solar sunlight, resulting in less heat uptake and cooler temperatures overall.)
The map below shows the extent of sea ice in February under the scenario where AMOC collapses and the world is 2C warmer. It shows how Arctic sea ice – when at its yearly maximum – would cover the coasts of Scandinavia and much of the island of Great Britain.
Prof Tim Lenton, chair of climate change and Earth system science at the University of Exeter, who was not involved in the study, tells Carbon Brief it is “hard to over-stress how different” the climate simulated by the model is from present-day conditions. He says:
“The extreme winters would be like living in an ice age. But at the same time summer temperature extremes are barely impacted – they are slightly cooler than they would be due to global warming, but still with hotter extremes than the preindustrial climate.
“This means the seasonality of the climate is radically increased. In extreme years it would be like coming out of the freezer into a frying pan of summer heatwaves.”
The research also looks at the impacts of a shutdown of AMOC in a world that is 4C warmer.
It suggests that, under this scenario, cooling related to the shutdown of ocean currents would not outweigh global warming. Northern Europe would not experience extensive sea-ice expansion or the strong cooling projected under the 2C scenario.
Instead, temperatures would be expected to increase throughout the year and particularly in the summer months. However, northern Europe would be expected to see warming below the global average.
Frigid cities
While the paper itself uses the Dutch town of De Bilt as a case study, the researchers have published projections for a range of European cities under the scenarios explored in the study.
For example, the data shows that, under AMOC collapse in a 2C-warmer world, London could experience an average winter temperature of 1.9C, roughly 17.6 freezing days each year and one-in-10-year cold extremes of -19.3C.
In the Norwegian capital of Oslo, average winter temperatures are projected to plunge to -16.5C, with maximum daily temperatures not surpassing 0C for almost half the year, or 169 days. The research suggests the Norwegian city could experience cold extremes of -47.9C.
The map below shows projected cold extremes under 2C of warming and AMOC collapse in cities in Belgium, France, Ireland, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the UK. It shows how temperatures could drop to -29.7 in Edinburgh, -19.3C in London and -18C in Paris.
Van Westen says the findings are “highly relevant for society and policymakers” because they “shift the narrative” about the direction of Europe’s future climate. He explains:
“Parts of the Netherlands and parts of the UK will experience spectacular cold extremes down to -20C or even lower. Our societal structure and our infrastructure is not built for these cold extremes.”
The paper is being published alongside an interactive map, shown below, that shows ice cover, temperature averages and extremes across Europe under five of the scenarios explored in the study. These are: a pre-industrial world with a stable AMOC, a pre-industrial world with a collapsed AMOC, a 2C world with a stable AMOC, a 2C world with a collapsed AMOC and a 4C world with a collapsed AMOC.
Future research
Scientists not involved in the study said the work would need to be followed up with further exploration of the interplay between global warming and potential AMOC collapse.
Dr Bablu Sinha, leader of climate and uncertainty, marine systems modelling at the National Oceanography Centre, told Carbon Brief:
“Given that observational data is limited, theoretical climate modelling approaches need to be taken to properly investigate this topic. Van Westen and Baatsen motivate the need for more detailed investigation into the combined impacts of global warming and AMOC decline on European extreme temperatures.”
Dr Yechul Chin, researcher at Seoul National University’s climate system lab, tells Carbon Brief:
“Although [this research] demonstrates the potential for more extreme weather under combined global warming and AMOC collapse scenarios, significant uncertainties remain that must be resolved before we can quantify risks or devise robust mitigation strategies.
“Projections about AMOC have a large spread and it means that alternative AMOC trajectories and different levels of warming could substantially widen the range of possible outcomes.”
His comments are echoed by Rahmstorf from Potsdam University, who points out that the “exact outcome” for Europe hinges on the development of “two opposing trends” – global warming due to greenhouse gases and regional cooling due to AMOC weakening. He says:
“The balance between those two will depend on the speed and extent of these trends and will, therefore, depend on the emission and AMOC weakening scenarios.
“Therefore, the more scenarios will be explored with different models in future, we will see a range of different outcomes for Europe as well as other parts of the world. A large uncertainty in this respect will remain.”
The post Ocean current ‘collapse’ could trigger ‘profound cooling’ in northern Europe – even with global warming appeared first on Carbon Brief.
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change1 year ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Carbon Footprint1 year agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Why airlines are perfect targets for anti-greenwashing legal action
-
Climate Change Videos1 year ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Some firms unaware of England’s new single-use plastic ban