Welcome to Carbon Brief’s China Briefing.
China Briefing handpicks and explains the most important climate and energy stories from China over the past fortnight. Subscribe for free here.
Key developments
China to play major role in global energy shift
ELECTRIFICATION: As the world moves into the “age of electricity”, China’s per-capita demand for electricity will grow to overtake that of all advanced economies combined by 2030 under current policy settings, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA)’s World Energy Outlook (WEO) 2024. The report said this is due to the country’s rising electrification, pushed forward by adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) and other low-carbon technologies, as well as economic growth.
LOW-CARBON POWER: China accounted for 60% of worldwide renewable installations in 2023 and its solar power generation alone will, by 2035, exceed the US’ current total electricity demand, WEO said. A separate IEA report released last week found that China will add 60% of new renewables installations globally between 2024 and 2030. This rapid expansion, according to WEO, will help China lead a global decline in carbon emissions after 2030, with China’s emissions falling to 8% below 2023 levels by 2030 and 24% below by 2035, based on current policy settings. (These figures rise to 17% and 45%, respectively, if China meets its announced pledges.) However, to align with the IEA’s scenario for net-zero emissions by 2050, China’s clean power would need to expand 1.5-times faster than current rates and investment – particularly in grids and energy storage – would need to double.
OIL SLOWS, COAL RISING: China, the world’s largest importer of oil, is currently spurring a “major slowdown” in oil demand growth, largely due to its rapid adoption of EVs, said the report. However, the IEA also said that China will overtake the US as the world’s largest oil consuming country by 2030 and remain the largest oil importer until 2050. Similarly, China is also the largest coal user. It consumed around 55% of the coal used to generate electricity globally and added 73% of the world’s new coal-fired power capacity in 2023, WEO said. (Bloomberg reported that China is also still developing new coal-fired power overseas.) Nevertheless, WEO added that China’s coal consumption for power is likely to peak “in the next few years”.
High-level environmental meeting held
ANNUAL MEETING: The China Council for International Cooperation on Environment and Development (CCICED), a high-level environmental advisory body to the Chinese government, held its annual general meeting on 10-12 October, Earth Negotiations Bulletin reported. About 400 people, including global experts, such as WWF director general Kirsten Schuijt, and high-profile Chinese officials attended the meeting, said China Environment News. Following discussions supervised by the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, CCICED revised a series of draft recommendations, which included: combining “ambitious goals with pragmatic actions” in China’s “nationally determined contribution” under the Paris Agreement and establishing an absolute emissions reduction goal for 2035; setting a target of 2,400 gigawatts (GW) of solar and wind capacity by 2030 and 6,000GW by 2040; and accelerating the expansion of the national carbon market and shifting to auctions for carbon allowances, which are currently given for free.
HEAVY HITTERS: Several influential political figures spoke at the meeting, including executive vice-premier Ding Xuexiang, who reiterated China’s willingness to “work with all parties” on building “a clean and beautiful world” and said it will follow the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” in “global environmental challenges”, according to the Communist party-affiliated newspaper People’s Daily. Environment minister Huang Runqiu told delegates that, to advance climate goals, China will focus on six key areas: better “prevention” of emissions; more “precise” emissions control; building “norms” and standards in climate policy; “market guidance”; scientific and technological “empowerment”; and “openness and win-win cooperation”, state news agency Xinhua said. Chinese climate envoy Liu Zhenmin said that “many of the concerns of developing countries at COP28 have not been adequately addressed”, adding that “developed countries…[need to take] the lead in reducing emissions”, according to news outlet China News. Liu’s predecessor, Xie Zhenhua, said in a speech that, “compared with mitigation, in developing countries, adaptation…needs to be solved more than anything else”, said the Paper, a Shanghai-based newspaper.
Diversifying critical mineral supply chains
GROWING FRUSTRATION: The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) confirmed that it is “courting new investors” in order to “diversify ownership” in its mining industry, currently dominated by China, Bloomberg reported. It quotes mines minister Kizito Pakabomba saying the country “is looking to make strategic choices about who runs Congo’s mines”. The outlet added that the DRC has “grown increasingly frustrated by its lack of influence over its mining industry, particularly in cobalt”, a mineral central to the production of some types of EV batteries. The Wall Street Journal said the US is encouraging companies to purchase cobalt producer Chemaf in DRC, after blocking its sale to the Chinese state-backed Norin Mining.
MINERALS ALLIANCE: Meanwhile, the US and India have agreed to “cooperate on strengthening supply chains in India and US for lithium, cobalt and other critical minerals”, the Indian Express reported, adding that the agreement “still fall[s] short of a full critical minerals trade deal” allowing India to access US tax credits for EVs. The newspaper also noted that India’s commerce minister Piyush Goyal aimed to “include other countries in the partnership, especially those who are already mineral rich like countries in Africa and South America”. In response to the agreement, an editorial in the state-run newspaper China Daily said the US, “understandably, does not want to put all its eggs in one basket in the face of rising tensions with China” and described a similar minerals deal with Vietnam as “lip service”, adding that “the US helps none but itself”.
HARSH RHETORIC: Meanwhile, the US Department of State’s under secretary for economic growth, energy and the environment Jose Fernandez criticised China for producing too much lithium for global consumption and alleged it was triggering a “predatory” price drop in an “intentional response” to the US’ Inflation Reduction Act, in comments covered by Reuters.
Spotlight
China’s birth policy ‘could raise emissions 20% by 2060’
A study published in Nature Climate Change finds that China’s current population policies – allowing families to have three children – could increase its future carbon emissions.
However, lead author Prof Zhifu Mi, who researches climate change economics at University College London’s (UCL) Bartlett School of Sustainable Construction, tells Carbon Brief that this finding is not to imply that China should reverse its demographic policies.
In an interview, Mi says that, in response to the findings, China could consider a “synergistic approach” to both “fertility policies” and “climate action strategies”.
Carbon Brief: What impact does China’s current population size and demographic makeup have on its carbon emissions?
Zhifu Mi: Population size and demographic composition significantly influence a country’s carbon emissions. Population is one of the primary drivers of greenhouse gas emissions. China has long been the most populous nation, contributing to its status as the largest carbon emitter all over the world. [In 2023, India overtook China as the world’s most populous nation.]
Age structure also plays a role in emissions. The per-capita carbon footprint of younger people (under 30) in China is approximately 1.8 times that of older people (60 and above). This pattern contrasts with developed countries, where older individuals often have higher carbon footprints.
CB: To avoid demographic pressures, China is encouraging families to have three children and its workforce to delay retirement. You found that relaxing limits on family size would make it harder to meet China’s carbon neutrality goal. Could you explain these findings?
ZM: Both relaxing fertility policies and delaying retirement would increase carbon emissions via boosting the labour force. The impact of relaxing fertility policies [and allowing families to have more children] is notably greater than delaying retirement. Shifting from a two-child to a three-child policy would result in a roughly 20% increase in China’s total carbon emissions by 2060.
CB: How are the emissions profiles of China’s young people different to its elderly?
ZM: Younger individuals in China have higher per-capita carbon footprints due to age-related income differences. Their higher per-capita carbon footprints are related to clothing, goods and transport, while older Chinese have higher per-capita carbon footprints related to healthcare.
CB: Some previous research, suggesting that having fewer children is one of the best ways for individuals to cut their carbon footprints, has been criticised for ignoring the impact of climate action, which could reduce the per-capita emissions of the next generation. What do you think about the wider debate on population growth and climate change?
ZM: I disagree with the idea that having fewer children is one of the best ways to cut carbon footprints. Beyond climate change mitigation, we have many other Sustainable Development Goals to consider. While reducing population growth can lower carbon footprints to some extent, population also drives socio-economic development.
Our research indicates that relaxing fertility policies would increase China’s household carbon footprint. We present this objective phenomenon with the hope that this impact of fertility policy will be integrated into climate action strategies.
CB: The paper states that your results should not be read to imply that China must reverse its three-child and retirement-delay policies, but that the policies should be synergised with emissions reductions targets. In your view, what steps could the Chinese government take to do so?
ZM: Yes, our result is not to imply that such policies should be avoided to reduce environmental pressure. We recommend a synergistic approach, considering both population policies and climate goals.
First, climate policies should be tailored to the specific demographic structures of different regions in China – promoting greener consumption and sustainable lifestyles among younger people is crucial. Second, addressing income and consumption disparities across age groups can help mitigate the carbon impacts of fertility and retirement policies. Third, when setting climate targets for each province, population size and demographic composition should be key considerations.
CB: Your paper talks about the need to explore what would happen if China misses its 2060 target, which, as China’s NDC notes, is a challenging goal to meet. What do you see as the key hurdles in this effort?
ZM: Achieving carbon neutrality is a significant challenge for China, particularly because the country has only 30 years to reduce its net carbon emissions to zero after peaking. In contrast, developed countries have had much longer timelines. For instance, the EU…[has allowed] for about 70 years to reduce emissions [from its peak to net-zero]. The US, with a peak in 2005, has 45 years to reach net-zero. China’s more compressed timeline, coupled with the higher volume of emissions to be reduced, makes the challenge more daunting.
Furthermore, China’s energy mix, which is dominated by coal and lacks sufficient oil and gas resources, poses another significant hurdle…Finally, China’s regional economic development is uneven. Eastern regions have witnessed rapid economic growth and industrialisation, while central and western regions lag behind. This imbalance…further complicates China’s path to carbon neutrality.
Responses have been edited for length and clarity.
Watch, read, listen
SUNNY DISPOSITIONS: State broadcaster CCTV’s flagship interview programme Duihua (Dialogue, 对话) aired a discussion of the state of the solar industry with major Chinese solar manufacturers, including Tongwei, LONGi and JingkoSolar.
FIVE-YEAR PLAN: The California-China Climate Institute, a research institute housed at UC Berkeley, issued recommendations for ways Chinese policymakers can take climate goals into account as they prepare for the 15th “five-year plan” (2026-2030).
NDC WATCH: China must avoid setting “conservative near-term climate goals”, an opinion article in Foreign Policy by Lauri Myllyvirta, senior fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute, and Byford Tsang, senior fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, argued.
GREEN FINANCE: Yuan Yuan, a climate and energy campaigner at Greenpeace East Asia, wrote in the Shuang Tan newsletter how the asset management industry can improve climate-related risk management and disclosure standards.
51%
The percentage of Chinese citizens who believe that the US and China have “common objectives” on environment and climate change issues, according to a public opinion poll carried out by Tsinghua University on China’s outlook on international security. Respondents also ranked climate change as the 8th most concerning risk from a list of 18 global security challenges.
New science
Can combined wind and solar power meet the increased electricity load on heatwave days in China after the carbon emission peak? A case study in southern Hebei
Journal of Cleaner Production
A new study revealed that wind and solar power generation could meet the increase in electricity consumption in China’s Hebei province on heatwave days from 2039, in part because heatwaves would raise wind and solar power generation as well as power demand. Using data from the south of Hebei province, which boasts the highest combined wind and solar capacity in China, researchers developed load and wind power models and calibrated “a boosting ensemble learning model to simulate solar generation”. Results showed Hebei could “harness” wind and solar energy to address demand but energy storage capacity would be needed to ensure full coverage.
Comparative analysis of embodied carbon in modular and conventional construction methods in Hong Kong
Scientific Reports
Using modular integrated construction, where parts of new buildings are prefabricated elsewhere and brought to be installed on-site, rather than conventional construction methods, reduced embodied carbon in a Covid-19 isolation facility in Hong Kong by 21%, according to a new study. The study used an embodied carbon assessment of the isolation facility. It found that the reduction in embodied carbon was primarily due to “shortened construction timelines, decreased waste generation and optimised material usage”.
Energy transition in China: Is there a role for climate policy uncertainty?
Journal of Environmental Management
New research found that climate policy uncertainty in China “significantly hinders the progress” of China’s energy transition, particularly by “reducing the level of green finance development and hindering the optimisation of [the] energy structure”. The study used data from 277 Chinese cities to assess this dynamic, discovering that in regions with “weak environmental regulations, high fiscal decentralisation and low administrative levels”, uncertainty has a higher impact on energy transitions. It also stated that climate policy uncertainty further limited the “high-quality development” of China’s economy and levels of “green innovation”.
China Briefing is compiled by Wanyuan Song and Anika Patel. It is edited by Wanyuan Song and Dr Simon Evans. Please send tips and feedback to china@carbonbrief.org
The post China Briefing 17 October 2024: China’s electrification to disrupt oil; High-level environment meeting; Aligning China’s population and climate policies appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Permitting reform: A major key to cutting climate pollution
By Dana Nuccitelli, CCL Research Coordinator
Permitting reform has emerged as the biggest and most important clean energy and climate policy area in the 119th Congress (2025-2026).
To make sure every CCL volunteer understands the opportunities and challenges ahead, CCL Vice President of Government Affairs Jennifer Tyler and I recently provided two trainings about the basics of permitting reform and understanding the permitting reform landscape.
These first introductory trainings set the stage for the rest of an ongoing series, which will delve into the details of several key permitting reform topics that CCL is engaging on. Read on for a recap of the first two trainings and a preview of coming attractions.
Permitting reform basics
Before diving into the permitting reform deep end, we need to first understand the fundamentals of the topic: what is “permitting”? What problems are we trying to solve with permitting reform? Why is it a key climate solution?
In short, a permit is a legal authorization issued by a government agency (federal and/or state and/or local) that allows a specific activity or project to proceed under certain defined conditions. The permitting process ensures that public health, safety, and the environment are protected during the construction and operation of the project.
But the permitting process can take a long time, and in some cases it’s taking so long that it’s unduly slowing down the clean energy transition. “Permitting reform” seeks to make the process more efficient while still ensuring that public health, safety, and the environment are protected.
There are a lot of factors involved in the permitting reform process, including environmental laws, limitations on lawsuits, and measures to expedite the building of electrical transmission lines that are key for expanding the capacity of America’s aging electrical grid in order to allow us to connect more clean energy and meet our energy affordability and security and climate needs.
But if we can succeed in passing a good, comprehensive permitting reform package through Congress, it could unlock enough climate pollution reductions to offset what we lost from this year’s rollback of the Inflation Reduction Act’s clean energy investments. Permitting reform is the big climate policy in the current session of Congress.
Understanding the permitting reform landscape
In the second training of this series, we sought to understand the players and the politics in the permitting reform space, learn about the challenges involved, and explore CCL’s framework and approach for weighing in on this policy topic.
Permitting reform has split some traditional alliances along two differing theories about how to best address climate change. Some groups with a theory of change relying on using permitting and lawsuits to slow and stop fossil fuel infrastructure are least likely to be supportive of a permitting reform effort. Groups like CCL that recognize the importance of quickly building lots of clean, affordable energy infrastructure are more supportive of permitting reform measures.
The subject has created some strange bedfellows, because clean energy and fossil fuel companies and organizations all want efficient permitting for their projects, and hence all tend to support permitting reform. For CCL, the key question is whether a comprehensive permitting reform package will be a net benefit to clean energy or the climate — and that’s what we’re working toward.
The two major political parties also have different priorities when it comes to permitting reform. Republicans tend to view it through a lens of reducing government red tape, ensuring that laws and regulations are only used for their intended purpose, and achieving energy affordability and security. Democrats prioritize building clean energy faster to slow climate change, addressing energy affordability, and protecting legacy environmental laws and community engagement.
As we discussed in the training, there are a number of key concepts that will require compromise from both sides of the aisle in order to reach a durable bipartisan permitting reform agreement. We’ll delve into the details of these in these upcoming trainings:
The Challenge of Energy Affordability and Security
First, with support from CCL’s Electrification Action Team, on February 5 I’ll examine what’s behind rising electricity rates and energy insecurity in the U.S. and how we can solve these problems. Electrification is a key climate solution in the transition to clean energy sources. But electricity rates are rising fast and face surging demand from artificial intelligence data centers. Permitting reform can play a key role in addressing these challenges.
Transmission Reform and Key Messages
Insufficient electrical transmission capacity is acting as a bottleneck slowing down the deployment of new clean energy sources in the U.S. Reforming cumbersome transmission permitting processes could unlock billions of tons of avoided climate pollution while improving America’s energy security and affordability. In this training on March 5, Jenn and I will dive into the details of the key clean energy and climate solution that is transmission reform, and the key messages to use when lobbying our members of Congress.
Clean energy projects often encounter long, complex permitting steps that slow construction and raise costs. Practical permitting reforms can help ensure that good projects move forward faster while upholding environmental and community protections. In this training on March 19, Jenn and I will examine permitting reforms to build energy infrastructure faster, some associated tensions and compromises that they may involve, and key messages for congressional offices.
Presidents from both political parties have taken steps to interfere with the permitting of certain types of energy infrastructure that they oppose. These executive actions create uncertainty that inhibits the development of new energy sources in the United States. For this reason, ensuring fair permitting certainty is a key aspect of permitting reform that enjoys bipartisan support. In this training on April 2, Jenn and I will discuss how Congress can ensure certainty in a permitting reform package, and key messages for congressional offices.
Community Engagement and Key Messages
It’s important for energy project developers to engage local communities in order to address any local concerns and adverse impacts that may arise from new infrastructure projects. But it’s also important to strike a careful balance such that community input can be heard and addressed in a timely manner without excessively slowing new clean energy project timelines. In this training on May 7, Jenn and I will examine how community engagement may be addressed in the permitting reform process, and key messages for congressional offices.
We look forward to nerding out with you in these upcoming advanced and important permitting reform trainings! 
Want to take action now? Use our online action tool to call Congress and encourage them to work together on comprehensive permitting reform.
The post Permitting reform: A major key to cutting climate pollution appeared first on Citizens' Climate Lobby.
Greenhouse Gases
DeBriefed 30 January 2026: Fire and ice; US formally exits Paris; Climate image faux pas
Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.
This week
Fire and ice
OZ HEAT: The ongoing heatwave in Australia reached record-high temperatures of almost 50C earlier this week, while authorities “urged caution as three forest fires burned out of control”, reported the Associated Press. Bloomberg said the Australian Open tennis tournament “rescheduled matches and activated extreme-heat protocols”. The Guardian reported that “the climate crisis has increased the frequency and severity of extreme weather events, including heatwaves and bushfires”.
WINTER STORM: Meanwhile, a severe winter storm swept across the south and east of the US and parts of Canada, causing “mass power outages and the cancellation of thousands of flights”, reported the Financial Times. More than 870,000 people across the country were without power and at least seven people died, according to BBC News.
COLD QUESTIONED: As the storm approached, climate-sceptic US president Donald Trump took to social media to ask facetiously: “Whatever happened to global warming???”, according to the Associated Press. There is currently significant debate among scientists about whether human-caused climate change is driving record cold extremes, as Carbon Brief has previously explained.
Around the world
- US EXIT: The US has formally left the Paris Agreement for the second time, one year after Trump announced the intention to exit, according to the Guardian. The New York Times reported that the US is “the only country in the world to abandon the international commitment to slow global warming”.
- WEAK PROPOSAL: Trump officials have delayed the repeal of the “endangerment finding” – a legal opinion that underpins federal climate rules in the US – due to “concerns the proposal is too weak to withstand a court challenge”, according to the Washington Post.
- DISCRIMINATION: A court in the Hague has ruled that the Dutch government “discriminated against people in one of its most vulnerable territories” by not helping them to adapt to climate change, reported the Guardian. The court ordered the Dutch government to set binding targets within 18 months to cut greenhouse gas emissions in line with the Paris Agreement, according to the Associated Press.
- WIND PACT: 10 European countries have agreed a “landmark pact” to “accelerate the rollout of offshore windfarms in the 2030s and build a power grid in the North Sea”, according to the Guardian.
- TRADE DEAL: India and the EU have agreed on the “mother of all trade deals”, which will save up to €4bn in import duty, reported the Hindustan Times. Reuters quoted EU officials saying that the landmark trade deal “will not trigger any changes” to the bloc’s carbon border adjustment mechanism.
- ‘TWO-TIER SYSTEM’: COP30 president André Corrêa do Lago believes that global cooperation should move to a “two-speed system, where new coalitions lead fast, practical action alongside the slower, consensus-based decision-making of the UN process”, according to a letter published on Tuesday, reported Climate Home News.
$2.3tn
The amount invested in “green tech” globally in 2025, marking a new record high, according to Bloomberg.
Latest climate research
- Including carbon emissions from permafrost thaw and fires reduces the remaining carbon budget for limiting warming to 1.5C by 25% | Communications Earth & Environment
- The global population exposed to extreme heat conditions is projected to nearly double if temperatures reach 2C | Nature Sustainability
- Polar bears in Svalbard – the fastest-warming region on Earth – are in better condition than they were a generation ago, as melting sea ice makes seal pups easier to reach | Scientific Reports
(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)
Captured
Sales of electric vehicles (EVs) overtook standard petrol cars in the EU for the first time in December 2025, according to new figures released by the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA) and covered by Carbon Brief. Registrations of “pure” battery EVs reached 217,898 – up 51% year-on-year from December 2024. Meanwhile, sales of standard petrol cars in the bloc fell 19% year-on-year, from 267,834 in December 2024 to 216,492 in December 2025, according to the analysis.
Spotlight
Looking at climate visuals
Carbon Brief’s Ayesha Tandon recently chaired a panel discussion at the launch of a new book focused on the impact of images used by the media to depict climate change.
When asked to describe an image that represents climate change, many people think of polar bears on melting ice or devastating droughts.
But do these common images – often repeated in the media – risk making climate change feel like a far-away problem from people in the global north? And could they perpetuate harmful stereotypes?
These are some of the questions addressed in a new book by Prof Saffron O’Neill, who researches the visual communication of climate change at the University of Exeter.
“The Visual Life of Climate Change” examines the impact of common images used to depict climate change – and how the use of different visuals might help to effect change.
At a launch event for her book in London, a panel of experts – moderated by Carbon Brief’s Ayesha Tandon – discussed some of the takeaways from the book and the “dos and don’ts” of climate imagery.
Power of an image
“This book is about what kind of work images are doing in the world, who has the power and whose voices are being marginalised,” O’Neill told the gathering of journalists and scientists assembled at the Frontline Club in central London for the launch event.
O’Neill opened by presenting a series of climate imagery case studies from her book. This included several examples of images that could be viewed as “disempowering”.
For example, to visualise climate change in small island nations, such as Tuvalu or Fiji, O’Neill said that photographers often “fly in” to capture images of “small children being vulnerable”. She lamented that this narrative “misses the stories about countries like Tuvalu that are really international leaders in climate policy”.
Similarly, images of power-plant smoke stacks, often used in online climate media articles, almost always omit the people that live alongside them, “breathing their pollution”, she said.
During the panel discussion that followed, panellist Dr James Painter – a research associate at the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism and senior teaching associate at the University of Oxford’s Environmental Change Institute – highlighted his work on heatwave imagery in the media.
Painter said that “the UK was egregious for its ‘fun in the sun’ imagery” during dangerous heatwaves.
He highlighted a series of images in the Daily Mail in July 2019 depicting people enjoying themselves on beaches or in fountains during an intense heatwave – even as the text of the piece spoke to the negative health impacts of the heatwave.
In contrast, he said his analysis of Indian media revealed “not one single image of ‘fun in the sun’”.
Meanwhile, climate journalist Katherine Dunn asked: “Are we still using and abusing the polar bear?”. O’Neill suggested that polar bear images “are distant in time and space to many people”, but can still be “super engaging” to others – for example, younger audiences.
Panellist Dr Rebecca Swift – senior vice president of creative at Getty images – identified AI-generated images as “the biggest threat that we, in this space, are all having to fight against now”. She expressed concern that we may need to “prove” that images are “actually real”.
However, she argued that AI will not “win” because, “in the end, authentic images, real stories and real people are what we react to”.
When asked if we expect too much from images, O’Neill argued “we can never pin down a social change to one image, but what we can say is that images both shape and reflect the societies that we live in”. She added:
“I don’t think we can ask photos to do the work that we need to do as a society, but they certainly both shape and show us where the future may lie.”
Watch, read, listen
UNSTOPPABLE WILDFIRES: “Funding cuts, conspiracy theories and ‘powder keg’ pine plantations” are making Patagonia’s wildfires “almost impossible to stop”, said the Guardian.
AUDIO SURVEY: Sverige Radio has published “the world’s, probably, longest audio survey” – a six-hour podcast featuring more than 200 people sharing their questions around climate change.
UNDERSTAND CBAM: European thinktank Bruegel released a podcast “all about” the EU’s carbon adjustment border mechanism, which came into force on 1 January.
Coming up
- 1 February: Costa Rican general election
- 3 February: UN Environment Programme Adaptation Fund Climate Innovation Accelerator report launch, Online
- 2-8 February: Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) 12th plenary, Manchester, UK
Pick of the jobs
- Climate Central, climate data scientist | Salary: $85,000-$92,000. Location: Remote (US)
- UN office to the African Union, environmental affairs officer | Salary: Unknown. Location: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
- Google Deepmind, research scientist in biosphere models | Salary: Unknown. Location: Zurich, Switzerland
DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
The post DeBriefed 30 January 2026: Fire and ice; US formally exits Paris; Climate image faux pas appeared first on Carbon Brief.
DeBriefed 30 January 2026: Fire and ice; US formally exits Paris; Climate image faux pas
Electric heat pumps are set to play a key role in the UK’s climate strategy, as well as cutting the nation’s reliance on imported fossil fuels.
Heat pumps took centre-stage in the UK government’s recent “warm homes plan”, which said that they could also help cut household energy bills by “hundreds of pounds” a year.
Similarly, innovation agency Nesta estimates that typical households could cut their annual energy bills nearly £300 a year, by switching from a gas boiler to a heat pump.
Yet there has been widespread media coverage in the Times, Sunday Times, Daily Express, Daily Telegraph and elsewhere of a report claiming that heat pumps are “more expensive” to run.
The report is from the Green Britain Foundation set up by Dale Vince, owner of energy firm Ecotricity, who campaigns against heat pumps and invests in “green gas” as an alternative.
One expert tells Carbon Brief that Vince’s report is based on “flimsy data”, while another says that it “combines a series of worst-case assumptions to present an unduly pessimistic picture”.
This factcheck explains how heat pumps can cut bills, what the latest data shows about potential savings and how this information was left out of the report from Vince’s foundation.
How heat pumps can cut bills
Heat pumps use electricity to move heat – most commonly from outside air – to the inside of a building, in a process that is similar to the way that a fridge keeps its contents cold.
This means that they are highly efficient, adding three or four units of heat to the house for each unit of electricity used. In contrast, a gas boiler will always supply less than one unit of heat from each unit of gas that it burns, because some of the energy is lost during combustion.
This means that heat pumps can keep buildings warm while using three, four or even five times less energy than a gas boiler. This cuts fossil-fuel imports, reducing demand for gas by at least two-fifths, even in the unlikely scenario that all of the electricity they need is gas-fired.
Since UK electricity supplies are now the cleanest they have ever been, heat pumps also cut the carbon emissions associated with staying warm by around 85%, relative to a gas boiler.
Heat pumps are, therefore, the “central” technology for cutting carbon emissions from buildings.
While heat pumps cost more to install than gas boilers, the UK government’s recent “warm homes plan” says that they can help cut energy bills by “hundreds of pounds” per year.
Similarly, Nesta published analysis showing that a typical home could cut its annual energy bill by £280, if it replaces a gas boiler with a heat pump, as shown in the figure below.
Nesta and the government plan say that significantly larger savings are possible if heat pumps are combined with other clean-energy technologies, such as solar and batteries.
Both the government and Nesta’s estimates of bill savings from switching to a heat pump rely on relatively conservative assumptions.
Specifically, the government assumes that a heat pump will deliver 2.8 units of heat for each unit of electricity, on average. This is known as the “seasonal coefficient of performance” (SCoP).
This figure is taken from the government-backed “electrification of heat” trial, which ran during 2020-2022 and showed that heat pumps are suitable for all building types in the UK.
(The Green Britain Foundation report and Vince’s quotes in related coverage repeat a number of heat pump myths, such as the idea that they do not perform well in older properties and require high levels of insulation.)
Nesta assumes a slightly higher SCoP of 3.0, says Madeleine Gabriel, the organisation’s director of sustainable future. (See below for more on what the latest data says about SCoP in recent installations.)
Both the government and Nesta assume that a home with a heat pump would disconnect from the gas grid, meaning that it would no longer need to pay the daily “standing charge” for gas. This currently amounts to a saving of around £130 per year.
Finally, they both consider the impact of a home with a heat pump using a “smart tariff”, where the price of electricity varies according to the time of day.
Such tariffs are now widely available from a variety of energy suppliers and many have been designed specifically for homes that have a heat pump.
Such tariffs significantly reduce the average price for a unit of electricity. Government survey data suggests that around half of heat-pump owners already use such tariffs.
This is important because on the standard rates under the price cap set by energy regulator Ofgem, each unit of electricity costs more than four times as much as a unit of gas.
The ratio between electricity and gas prices is a key determinant of the size and potential for running-cost savings with a heat pump. Countries with a lower electricity-to-gas price ratio consistently see much higher rates of heat-pump adoption.
(Decisions taken by the UK government in its 2025 budget mean that the electricity-to-gas ratio will fall from April, but current forecasts suggest it will remain above four-to-one.)
In contrast, Vince’s report assumes that gas boilers are 90% efficient, whereas data from real homes suggests 85% is more typical. It also assumes that homes with heat pumps remain on the gas grid, paying the standing charge, as well as using only a standard electricity tariff.
Prof Jan Rosenow, energy programme leader at the University of Oxford’s Environmental Change Institute, tells Carbon Brief that Vince’s report uses “worst-case assumptions”. He says:
“This report cherry-picks assumptions to reach a predetermined conclusion. Most notably, it assumes a gas boiler efficiency of 90%, which is significantly higher than real-world performance…Taken together, the analysis combines a series of worst-case assumptions to present an unduly pessimistic picture.”
Similarly, Gabriel tells Carbon Brief that Vince’s report is based on “flimsy data”. She explains:
“Dale Vince has drawn some very strong conclusions about heat pumps from quite flimsy data. Like Dale, we’d also like to see electricity prices come down relative to gas, but we estimate that, from April, even a moderately efficient heat pump on a standard tariff will be cheaper to run than a gas boiler. Paired with a time-of-use tariff, a heat pump could save £280 versus a boiler and adding solar panels and a battery could triple those savings.”
What the latest data shows about bill savings
The efficiency of heat-pump installations is another key factor in the potential bill savings they can deliver and, here, both the government and Vince’s report take a conservative approach.
They rely on the “electrification of heat” trial data to use an efficiency (SCoP) of 2.8 for heat pumps. However, Rosenow says that recent evidence shows that “substantially higher efficiencies are routinely available”, as shown in the figure below.
Detailed, real-time data on hundreds of heat pump systems around the UK is available via the website Heat Pump Monitor, where the average efficiency – a SCoP of 3.9 – is much higher.
Homes with such efficient heat-pump installations would see even larger bill savings than suggested by the government and Nesta estimates.
Academic research suggests that there are simple and easy-to-implement reasons why these systems achieve much higher efficiency levels than in the electrification of heat trial.
Specifically, it shows that many of the systems in the trial have poor software settings, which means they do not operate as efficiently as their heat pump hardware is capable of doing.
The research suggests that heat pump installations in the UK have been getting more and more efficient over time, as engineers become increasingly familiar with the technology.
It indicates that recently installed heat pumps are 64% more efficient than those in early trials.
Notably, the Green Britain Foundation report only refers to the trial data from the electrification of heat study carried out in 2020-22 and the even earlier “renewable heat premium package” (RHPP). This makes a huge difference to the estimated running costs of a heat pump.
Carbon Brief analysis suggests that a typical household could cut its annual energy bills by nearly £200 with a heat pump – even on a standard electricity tariff – if the system has a SCoP of 3.9.
The savings would be even larger on a smart heat-pump tariff.
In contrast, based on the oldest efficiency figures mentioned in the Green Britain Foundation report, a heat pump could increase annual household bills by as much as £200 on a standard tariff.
To support its conclusions, the report also includes the results of a survey of 1,001 heat pump owners, which, among other things, is at odds with government survey data. The report says “66% of respondents report that their homes are more expensive to heat than the previous system”.
There are several reasons to treat these findings with caution. The survey was carried out in July 2025 and some 45% of the heat pumps involved were installed between 2021-23.
This is a period during which energy prices surged as a result of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the resulting global energy crisis. Energy bills remain elevated as a result of high gas prices.
The wording of the survey question asks if homes are “more or less expensive to heat than with your previous system” – but makes no mention of these price rises.
The question does not ask homeowners if their bills are higher today, with a heat pump, than they would have been with the household’s previous heating system.
If respondents interpreted the question as asking whether their bills have gone up or down since their heat pump was installed, then their answers will be confounded by the rise in prices overall.
There are a number of other seemingly contradictory aspects of the survey that raise questions about its findings and the strong conclusions in the media coverage of the report.
For example, while only 15% of respondents say it is cheaper to heat their home with a heat pump, 49% say that one of the top three advantages of the system is saving money on energy bills.
In addition, 57% of respondents say they still have a boiler, even though 67% say they received government subsidies for their heat-pump installation. It is a requirement of the government’s boiler upgrade scheme (BUS) grants that homeowners completely remove their boiler.
The government’s own survey of BUS recipients finds that only 13% of respondents say their bills have gone up, whereas 37% say their bills have gone down, another 13% say they have stayed the same and 8% thought that it was too early to say.
The post Factcheck: What it really costs to heat a home in the UK with a heat pump appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Factcheck: What it really costs to heat a home in the UK with a heat pump
Permitting reform: A major key to cutting climate pollution
How Is U.S. Insanity Affecting Tourism?
Clean Energy Investment Hits Record $2.3T in 2025 Says BloombergNEF: What Leads the Surge?
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Greenhouse Gases6 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change6 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
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
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
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
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits