Plans to “draw down” CO2 from the atmosphere – known as carbon dioxide removal (CDR) – “fall short” of the quantities needed to limit global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, new research warns.
Keeping global temperatures below the limit set in the 2015 Paris Agreement requires rapid cuts in greenhouse emissions.
However, scenarios consistent with the Paris limit also assume heavy reliance on CDR, particularly in the second half of the 21st century.
The study, published in Nature Climate Change, quantifies the “CDR gap” – the difference between the amount of CDR included in national climate plans and what would be needed to limit warming to 1.5C.
CDR currently removes about 3bn tonnes of CO2 from the air every year, of which almost 100% comes from land-based methods, such as afforestation and reforestation, the study says.
The authors estimate that if countries implement their national targets, CDR will increase by up to 1.9bn tonnes of CO2 per year by 2050.
However, assessing a range of scenarios for limiting warming to 1.5C, the authors find a “CDR gap” in 2050 of 0.4bn-5.5bn tonnes of CDR per year.
One scientist, who was not involved in the study, tells Carbon Brief that framing the lack of additional plans for CDR as a “gap” is an “interesting idea”. However, he says it may not reflect a “definitive need for action” because the future role of CDR is debated.
Some scientists argue that reliance on CDR should be avoided, because land-based CDR can cause significant ecological and societal risks. Others worry that the promise of being able to use CDR in the future might dilute incentives to cut fossil-fuel use today.
The lead author of the study tells Carbon Brief that he recognises these concerns and made an effort to discuss them in the paper.
However, he says that calculating the CDR gap is important for assessing nations’ progress – and will provide a way of knowing whether countries are under- or over-committing to CDR in the future.
CO2 removal
CO2 removal (CDR) refers to methods that draw down CO2 from the air and store it indefinitely on land, in the ocean, in geological formations or in products.
The study authors note that the term CDR “includes human enhancement of natural removal processes, but excludes natural uptake not caused directly by human activities”. The latter includes the huge amounts of CO2 absorbed by the land and oceans each year.
The paper groups CDR into two categories:
- Conventional CDR on land: This includes afforestation, in which trees are planted when previously there were none, and reforestation, which means restoring areas where the trees have been cut down or degraded.
- Novel CDR: This includes all CDR methods that are not based on forestry and land-use change, such as biochar, direct air capture and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS).
Using data collected over 2011-20, the authors estimate that total human emissions of all greenhouse gases have reached 60bn tonnes per year. Of this, CDR efforts currently remove around 3bn every year, they find. The study calculates global emissions in CO2 equivalent (CO2e).
The plot below shows current global greenhouse gas emissions and removals. The bar on the left shows emissions of CO2 (blue) and non-CO2 (pink) gases, as well as land emissions (brown). CO2 removal is shown in yellow.
The bars on the right show that 99.9% of CDR comes from conventional CDR on land (dark yellow), while “novel” CDR (light yellow) has a negligible contribution.
In 2015, countries agreed under the Paris Agreement to keep warming “well below 2C” above pre-industrial temperatures, with an aspiration of limiting warming to 1.5C.
Rapid cuts in emissions are crucial to meet this goal. To make progress, countries are required to submit – and regularly update – their plans for reducing emissions. There is currently a sizeable “emissions gap” between the cuts included in these national proposals and those needed to limit warming to 1.5C.
In many future scenarios that meet the Paris limit, CDR features heavily. For example, in scenarios where global temperatures initially “overshoot” 1.5C, before falling below the limit by 2100, large-scale CDR would be used to remove carbon from the atmosphere and allow global temperatures to decline.
In its most recent assessment, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) modelled 541 pathways that hold warming to 1.5C or 2C. All of these pathways involve CDR implementation between 2020 and 2100, ranging from a total of 450bn to 1.1tn tonnes of CO2, in addition to deep emissions cuts.
However, there are currently no rules requiring governments to clearly report their CDR plans.
To assess the amount of CDR proposed by governments, the authors therefore had to analyse a range of documents submitted to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), such as countries’ nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and their long-term low-emissions development strategies.
The authors find that if countries implement their national targets, CDR could expand by 1.5-1.9bn tonnes of CO2 per year, compared to levels in 2020. The paper notes that many countries plan to expand land-based removals, but none has yet committed to “substantively scaling” novel CDR methods.
Warming threshold
To assess how much CDR is needed to meet the long-term goal of the Paris Agreement, the authors use Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs). These models look at the energy technologies, energy use choices, land-use changes and societal trends that cause, or prevent, greenhouse gas emissions.
The authors select a range of IAM scenarios from the latest IPCC scenario database for its sixth assessment report (AR6). Scenarios that limit warming to 2C require emissions to fall by 46-75% between 2020 and 2050, but CDR becomes the “main mitigation strategy” in the second half of the century, the study says.
The authors add that in these scenarios, conventional CDR on land “starts from a high baseline, but quickly reaches saturation by the mid-century due to land area constraints for afforestation/restoration”. Meanwhile, novel CDR scales up throughout the 21st century and accounts for more than half of cumulative emissions by the year 2100.
To assess the pathways in more detail, the authors select three scenarios that limit global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels
In the “demand reduction” scenario, humanity focuses on efficiency and sufficiency measures. This scenario requires an increase in land-based CDR, but no increase in “novel” CDR methods.
The “renewables” scenario sees a supply-side transformation towards renewable energy. This scenario mainly requires land-based CDR, but also includes a small contribution from novel methods.
The “carbon removal” scenario involves a rapid near-term reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, but fossil fuels are never entirely phased out, leading to higher “residual emissions” at net-zero CO2. Near-equal levels of land-based and novel CDR are needed by 2050, meaning that novel CDR needs to scale up more than a thousand times from its current capacity.
The plot below shows annual CDR under these three scenarios. The blue line indicates current CDR and each yellow line shows a different scenario. A lower (more negative) number means more CDR.
The study shows that current government plans – which would result in an extra 1.5-1.9bn tonnes of CDR per year by 2050 – are not ambitious enough to comply with any of the three 1.5C scenarios.
The table below shows the changes in different types of CDR required under the different scenarios by 2050, compared to 2020 levels. The column on the right shows the “CDR gap” between current plans and each scenario in 2050.
| Scenario | Total additional CDR (bn tonnes CO2/year) | Additional land-based CDR (bn tonnes CO2/year) | Additional novel CDR (bn tonnes CO2/year) | CDR gap (bn tonnes CO2/year) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Demand reduction | 2.3 | 2.3 | 0 | 0.4 |
| Renewables | 5.1 | 4.1 | 0.91 | 3.2 |
| Carbon removal | 7.4 | 4.0 | 3.5 | 5.5 |
The analysis shows that countries “lack progress in this domain of mitigation”, the study says. However, the size of the shortfall depends heavily on the scenario.
Under the demand reduction scenario, the CDR gap in 2050 is only 0.4bn tonnes of CDR per year, but this grows more than tenfold to 5.5bn tonnes of CDR per year under the carbon removal scenario.
Mind the gap
The prospect of relying on large-scale CDR to meet global climate goals is one that prompts concern in many experts.
One fear is that the promise of being able to use CDR in the future might dilute incentives to cut fossil fuel use today, a phenomenon known as “mitigation deterrence”.
Dr William Lamb – a researcher at the Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change and lead author on the study – tells Carbon Brief that the paper acknowledges this concern and tries to be clear that CDR is not a replacement for mitigation.
Prof Steve Pye is a professor at University College London’s Energy Institute, who was not involved in the study. He says that framing the lack of CDR as a “gap” is an “interesting idea”, but does not necessarily reflect a “definitive need for action” in the same way as the emissions gap:
“The implications of the CDR gap are much more open to debate as CDR is a category of mitigation action, with the size of the gap either a cause for alarm or not depending on one’s view of what role that option will or should play.”
He adds that the analysis could even be “interpreted as positive”, because it shows that countries are not being distracted by novel CDR.
Alexandra Deprez – a research fellow at the Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations, who is not involved in the study – tells Carbon Brief that the new study does not do enough to consider the “sustainability limits” of CDR.
She recently co-wrote a Carbon Brief guest post explaining these limits, which said:
“The large-scale deployment of land-based CDR could come with major challenges. These include significant ecological and societal risks – particularly to biodiversity loss, food security, freshwater use and human rights, among others – which have not been comprehensively assessed.”
Deprez and Lamb have “opposite starting points” in their work on CDR and therefore arrive at different conclusions, she explains.
Lamb starts by asking “how much CDR is needed” and concludes that it needs to be scaled up, she says. Meanwhile, she tells Carbon Brief that her own work starts by asking “how much CDR can be sustainably deployed” and finds that “‘Paris compatible’ scenarios overstep high CDR sustainability risk”.
Lamb says the authors were “very careful” in selecting the three focus scenarios for the study. He adds:
“We have a kind of selection criteria that includes thinking about the sustainability constraints, whether they’re using too much biomass, whether they’re scaling up novel methods too quickly. And so we’re quite conservative about the specific scenarios we choose.”
Meanwhile Prof Joeri Roglej – director of research at the Grantham Institute – tells Carbon Brief that the study “puts pathways that aim to keep warming as close to 1.5C as possible in the same basket as pathways that keep it below 2C only, therewith suggesting a lower overall ambition than the Paris Agreement”.
He adds:
“The study doesn’t distinguish scenarios with CDR levels that risk undermining sustainability. These presentation choices therefore perpetuate some of the reasons why CDR research is often criticised, including that CDR scholarship often turns a blind eye to the sustainability risks of large-scale CDR deployment.”
Pye adds a note of caution about using IAMs, saying they have “relied heavily on CDR to meet high ambition targets” without accounting for the “political reality” faced by many governments.
CDR reporting
According to the study, only about 40 countries, including the EU, have outlined scenarios in their long-term strategies that depict quantifiable levels of CDR by 2050.
For the other countries – which account for 62% of current conventional CDR on land – the authors assume that overall CDR levels will remain constant.
Lamb tells Carbon Brief that this is a “big assumption”. He notes that while CDR globally has been “quite stable over the past 20 years”, there is a lot of variation between countries. For example, he says that China has been “rapidly increasing” its CDR through large afforestation projects, while many countries in Europe have seen a decrease due to problems in their forestry sector.
The study also assumes that countries without quantifiable scenarios do not currently plan to implement novel CDR methods. “This includes China, Norway and Saudi Arabia, which are all developing technology roadmaps towards novel CDR and could contribute to closing the gap,” the paper says.
Dr Ajay Gambhir is a visiting senior research fellow at Imperial College London’s Grantham Institute for Climate Change and the Environment, and was not involved in the study. He tells Carbon Brief that many land-based carbon sinks, such as forests, have the potential to transition to sources of carbon over the coming years.
He adds:
“The authors are mindful of potential reversibility of forest carbon, but this highlights the risks that we are even further from our CDR, and emissions reduction, needs than might be indicated in this analysis.”
The lack of clear data shows that “we need more clarity” in CDR reporting, Lamb tells Carbon Brief. He argues that increasing transparency would “allow more critical reflection actually on carbon dioxide removal plans and whether they’re ambitious enough – or even too ambitious at the expense of emissions reductions”.
The analysis from this paper will be included in the next State of CDR report, which will be released this summer.
The post CO2 removal ‘gap’ shows countries ‘lack progress’ for 1.5C warming limit appeared first on Carbon Brief.
CO2 removal ‘gap’ shows countries ‘lack progress’ for 1.5C warming limit
Faster electrification is the best way to secure lower energy bills and stronger energy security, according to the Climate Change Committee (CCC).
The government’s official climate advisers have stressed the importance of electrification, noting that electric cars and heat pumps can “put money back into people’s pockets”.
Moreover, the UK’s net-zero targets face “significant risks” unless there is faster progress in electrifying cars, heating and industry, according to the CCC’s latest progress report
The report notes that the government has closed some of the gaps to its upcoming targets and introduced more “credible” plans.
However, challenges remain in the UK’s climate strategy, including accelerating the expansion of heat pumps, cutting emissions from farms and supplying planes with “sustainable” fuels.
The CCC notes that 17% of the emissions cuts required to achieve the UK’s 2030 Paris Agreement climate target are currently not addressed by any government plans at all.
Amid political and industry pressure, the committee also says the government should “stand firm” on its climate goals, including its strategy for encouraging electric-vehicle (EV) sales.
Carbon Brief has covered the CCC’s annual progress reports in 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021 and 2020.
- Overall progress
- The electrification ‘prize’
- Policy gaps
- Road transport
- Buildings
- Industry
- Fossil fuels
- Electricity
- Agriculture and land
- Aviation and shipping
- Other sectors
Overall progress
Today’s progress report is the third since Labour swept to power in 2024.
It arrives amid a “red extreme heat warning”, on the day that parliament will vote on the seventh “carbon budget”, a legally binding limit on UK emissions in 2040.
The report comes at a febrile moment in UK politics, with prime minister Keir Starmer having just resigned and with newly re-elected MP Andy Burnham widely tipped to take his place.
The opposition Conservatives and Reform are lobbying to scrap UK climate goals – and senior Labour figures want to row back on EVs and North Sea oil and gas drilling.
Against that backdrop, the CCC insists that it is the UK’s reliance on fossil fuels – and the second fossil-fuel price shock in four years – that has caused a “cost of living crisis”.
Speaking to journalists ahead of the launch, CCC chair Nigel Topping warned against any moves to weaken UK climate policies. He said:
“U-turns are really damaging to inward investment confidence…[We should] hold the course and focus on electrification…which will unlock very significant savings.”
Whereas the CCC said last year it had become “more optimistic” that UK climate goals could be met under the new government, its latest progress report strikes a more cautious tone.
It says that the UK’s emissions fell by 1.8% in 2025 and that there has been “some positive progress” in terms of delivery over the past year, but that this has been “too slow”.
There was actually an increase in emissions from transport and electricity supplies in 2025, as shown below, despite the expansion of clean power and EVs.
The UK’s greenhouse gas emissions are now roughly 50% below 1990 levels, the CCC notes, with the lion’s share of this having come from cleaning up the power sector.
In contrast, there has been far less progress in transport, which is now the UK’s largest emitter, as well as in buildings, the second largest.
The CCC stresses that future emissions cuts will need to come from using clean power to decarbonise other sectors – particularly buildings, transport and industry.
It puts a major emphasis on the need to electrify these sectors by more rapidly rolling out EVs, heat pumps and electric heating for industrial sites.
The CCC adds that government plans for meeting future targets, published last year, leave a “significant gap” to the UK’s international climate pledge for 2030. (See: Policy gaps.)
The electrification ‘prize’
The most striking aspect of this year’s report is the way it centres on electrification, which the CCC says has been given “insufficient focus” to date.
Electrification has shot up the agenda in recent months, with the COP31 presidency calling for countries to back a global goal for 35% of “final” energy to come from electricity by 2035.
The text of the CCC’s latest report uses the word “electrification” far more often than previous editions, as shown in the figure below.
Early last year, in advice on the seventh carbon budget, the committee singled out electrification as key to cutting UK emissions. It said electrification had won out over alternative options, thanks to rapid cost reductions for technologies such as EVs.
Now, the CCC says that electrification is also the best way to secure lower energy bills, stronger energy security and a host of other benefits.
Topping said these benefits include “putting money back into people’s pockets”, but also cleaner air, stronger energy security and protection from fossil-fuel shocks:
“The prize is really significant here. By 2030 alone, the UK could save up to 80m barrels of oil and 1.5bn therms of gas each year. That would cost almost £8bn at current oil and gas prices.”
The emphasis on the topic is also clear in the CCC press release for its report, which is titled: “Faster electrification would cut UK household bills, say climate advisers.”
The report fleshes this out in a dedicated chapter that explores the financial benefits of electrifying household energy use, including heat and transport.
Topping said that the “home of the future” will be equipped with an EV, a flexible “time-of-use tariff” for its electricity supplies and a heat pump for keeping warm.
Moreover, the report shows that even today, this type of household would cut its annual energy bills by around £1,200, relative to using a petrol car and a gas boiler.
Crucially, this saving, shown in the figure below, includes the high upfront costs of installing an electric heat pump and solar panels. The analysis shows that electrified homes have far lower annual running costs, which easily outweigh this initial outlay.
(Due to “modelling limitations”, the CCC analysis does not consider home batteries, which can help unlock even larger savings.)
The CCC says that while not everyone is currently in a position to enjoy the financial benefits of electrification, its analysis points to savings both before and after the Iran crisis, as well as for high- and low-income households, with the latter eligible for grants to cover upfront costs.
Even more homes would be able to unlock these benefits if the government acts to resolve barriers, such as high public charging costs, says the CCC.
However, the report says that the government’s current plan to electrify the economy “lacks ambition” and that there are “worrying signs” in some areas, such as heat pumps and electric vans. (See: Road transport and Buildings.)
Ultimately, says the CCC, the best way to encourage faster and wider electrification is to make electricity cheaper. This has been its top recommendation for several years.
Policy gaps
Since the last CCC progress report, the government has published a new “carbon budget and growth delivery plan” (CBGD), explaining how it will cut emissions in the 2030s.
The CBGD “projects slower emissions reductions for surface transport and buildings compared to the previous government’s plan”, according to the CCC.
This reflects both the slow rollout of some technologies – such as heat pumps – and “areas of reduced policy ambition”, including less support for low-income homes to install insulation.
The CCC says that without “sufficient progress on electrification” this year, the UK’s 2030 emissions target “may become out of reach” and future goals would face “significant risks”.
The chart below demonstrates the CCC’s view that the UK is “well on track” to meet its fourth carbon budget, between 2023 and 2027, and that there are “credible policies in place” to meet the fifth carbon budget out to 2032.
However, it also shows the “significant gap” that the CCC says still exists between projected emissions cuts (blue lines) and the UK’s international climate target for 2030, its nationally determined contribution (NDC) to the Paris Agreement (black circle).
(This is particularly notable as the NDC was the first official UK climate goal that was aligned with its 2050 net-zero target. The fourth and fifth carbon budgets were set before the net-zero goal and therefore need to be overachieved.)
Plans that are “credible” or only come with “some risks” are on track to cut emissions to 356m tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e) by 2030. This is 11MtCO2e lower than last year, but still a shortfall of 64MtCO2e.
Overall, the CCC says there are “credible” plans in place for 44% of emissions reductions by 2030, including those linked to renewable energy, EV sales growth and electrification of steel production at Port Talbot in Wales. Another 15% of reductions come with “some risks”.
The report concludes that there are “significant risks” attached to 19% of emissions cuts, including the expansion of heat pumps, future “sustainable aviation fuel” (SAF) supply and agricultural policies.
There are also 4% of required emissions cuts for which the UK has “insufficient plans”, including much of the electrification of the UK’s heavy industry.
The chart below shows how this assessment compares to previous CCC analysis of government plans, with the share of “credible” government plans increasing.
(As the latest report is based on the new CBGD rather than the previous 2023 plan, the assessments have different levels of baseline emissions and are not directly comparable. However, this chart shows the rough direction of travel.)
As the chart shows, a substantial chunk of the required emissions cuts need to meet the 2030 pledge – 17% of the total – are not covered by the CBGD.
This reflects the fact that the new plan simply does not achieve the 2030 target, according to the CCC, despite the government’s stated commitment to its NDC goal.
(The government’s plan had also acknowledged that it fell short of meeting the 2030 NDC.)
The CCC emphasises that “the government will need to bring forward additional policies and plans to make up this gap”.
The new report suggests several areas – including faster EV growth, more heat-pump installations and more ambitious recycling rates – that would close 17MtCO2e of the 26MtCO2e gap to the 2030 goal.
Unlike the 2030 NDC, the government’s plan does achieve the sixth carbon budget, between 2033 and 2037. However, the committee says “this is largely achieved through additional measures where we have assessed there to be significant risks or insufficient plans”.
Only around three-fifths of the required emissions cuts for the sixth carbon budget are covered by “credible” plans or plans with “some risks”.
According to the CCC, the government is relying on a rapid scale-up of engineered removals beyond 2030, but has provided little detail about how it will achieve this. (See: Other sectors)
“This approach carries substantial risks,” according to the committee.
Road transport
Road transport remains the UK’s highest emitting sector and its emissions increased by nearly 3% last year, according to provisional data in the CCC report.
Electric-car sales have continued increasing, reaching nearly a quarter of new sales last year. The number of electric cars on the road surpassed 2m in May 2025.
However, the emissions benefit of this rollout of electric vehicles (EVs) “is likely to have been offset by other factors”, such as driving rates returning nearly to pre-Covid levels, according to the CCC.
The report notes that EV costs “continue to fall” and have met price parity in some parts of the market, with grants providing an extra boost to sales.
The committee’s pathway to net-zero assumes faster emissions cuts from road transport than the government’s pathway. This is largely because it assumes an imminent “tipping point” will be reached, when EVs reach upfront price parity with petrol cars.
Nevertheless, the report says that sales will still “need to accelerate fast” over the next few years and that this will require consistent government support.
The CCC stresses the “key role” of the zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) mandate, which requires manufacturers to sell a rising share of EVs.
There have been reports that the government is planning a “U-turn” after a review of the ZEV mandate. The CCC says it is “essential” that the review “does not lead to further concessions”:
“Doing so would severely undermine prospects of achieving the UK’s 2030 NDC, exacerbate the UK’s dependence on imported oil, and leave more households paying the higher costs of petrol or diesel cars.”
As well as “stand[ing] firm” on the ZEV mandate, the committee says it is important that the government “remove[s] barriers to EV adoption”.
One key policy highlighted by the report is increased access to cheap EV charging, so the one-third of UK homes without off-street parking access can “benefit from lower running costs”.
(CCC analysis suggests that while the average home would save at least £660 a year by switching from a petrol car to an EV, their running costs could actually increase if they have to rely on public charging infrastructure.)
The report also stresses the use of EV “time-of-use tariffs”, which it says can help people save even more money. It notes that “measures to support consumer awareness” of this “could drive further uptake”.
Also, with a new 3p per mile EV tax due to start from April 2028, the committee says it is “essential that this new tax is implemented in a straightforward manner” to minimise the “hassle factor” that could disrupt the EV transition.
While electric-car sales have so far remained slightly ahead of the level needed to hit the ZEV mandate, the CCC notes that both electric van sales and prices are “significantly off track”. Unlike cars, electric vans still cost considerably more than their combustion-engine equivalents.
The committee says government support, including improved access to fast charging and “regulatory reforms”, is also “key”. As an example of the latter, it notes that certain licensing and testing requirements are based on vehicle weight, which puts heavier battery-powered vehicles at a disadvantage.
Finally, the CCC criticises recent policy decisions that incentivise sales of plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) “based on emissions factors which underestimate real-world emissions”. It notes:
“Providing incentives for emissions savings that PHEVs do not deliver distorts the market and risks eating into the demand for EVs.”
Buildings
The CCC says that the rate of growth in heat-pump installations in homes slowed last year, rising just 7%, compared to the 56% jump seen in 2024.
Around 52,000 heat pumps were installed in 2025, according to the report. Of these, 31,200 were installed with the support of grants from the “boiler upgrade scheme”.
This was not enough to meaningfully reduce emissions, says the CCC, only delivering around 0.1MtCO2e of extra savings in 2025.
(To eliminate emissions from homes by 2050, heat pump installations in existing homes need to reach 1.4m per year by 2035, according to the CCC.)
Overall, emissions from the buildings sector fell by 1.2MtCO2e in 2025, amounting to a reduction of 1.3% for non-residential and 1.6% for residential buildings compared to 2024.
This was despite the winter months being colder in 2025 than the previous year, generally meaning greater heating demand. This suggests factors other than weather are driving the reduction, it says, such as higher energy prices leading to lower heating use.
The CCC notes that while emissions did drop, this “does not indicate progress on decarbonising home heating”. It adds:
“Without further actions to decarbonise buildings, it is likely that emissions will rebound if energy prices fall or weather conditions revert to average.”
The slowdown in the rate of heat pump installations was largely due to the closure of the ECO scheme, which delivered around one-third of heat pump installations in existing homes over the last three years.
In terms of government policy, the CCC notes that there has been some “positive progress” for buildings, due to the new “warm homes plan” and the “future homes standard”.
The former provides support to help people install electric heat pumps, rooftop solar panels and insulation. In total, 5m homes are expected to benefit from £15bn of grants and loans earmarked by the government for these upgrades by 2030.
While installation rates in the UK in 2025 were significantly below this level, the CCC report says that growth rates in other European markets – and indeed, in the UK between 2023 and 2024 – suggest that higher rates could be achievable.
The CCC notes that while there is £1bn a year earmarked for supporting upgrades of low-income households under the warm homes plan, this is still a “significant decrease in investment” from that provided by ECO.
The future homes standard, meanwhile, is an update to existing regulations in England. From March 2028, new-build homes in England will be required to have on-site renewable energy generation and a low-carbon heating system.
From then on, newly built homes will produce 75% less greenhouse gas emissions than under previous regulations.
The CCC report notes that the installation of heat pumps in new homes, specifically, is currently on track to achieve targets, with 25% of new homes built with a heat pump in 2025. However, it says retrofit installations of existing homes are significantly below where they need to be and “urgently need to accelerate”.
The CCC notes that while there has been some progress in removing policy costs from household electricity bills, the ratio of electricity to gas prices remains a major barrier to heat pump take-up. (See: The electrification ‘prize’.)
It also notes that there has been no action to address this barrier for non-residential buildings.
Fewer than 2% of homes have a heat pump in the UK, it says, placing the nation among the lowest rates of installation in Europe, as seen in the chart below.
Industry
Industry accounted for the largest share of emissions reduction in the UK in 2025, according to the CCC, with a 5.4MtCO2e (12%) drop from 2024.
As such, sectoral emissions for industry are now 56% lower than they were in 2008.
This was largely due to the closure of blast furnaces at the Port Talbot steelworks towards the end of 2024, ahead of reopening with new electric arc furnaces. Emissions from iron and steel production therefore fell by 3.2MtCO2e year-on-year in 2025, according to the CCC report.
The rest of the reduction was due to a fall in the output of energy-intensive, which the CCC says is in line with the longer-term trend in UK manufacturing seen since the 1990s.
However, the CCC notes that while some specific progress has been made to decarbonise industry, barriers to further progress remain.
It urges the government to set a clear plan for how electrification can become the economically rational choice for a wide range of industries.
As for buildings, the CCC points to the high electricity prices, relative to gas, as a major barrier to the decarbonisation of UK industry.
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) has taken some “positive steps”, according to the report. This includes the government allocating £9.4bn of funding to support its development.
There has also been a final investment decision for the first CO2 storage facility at a UK manufacturing site and the construction of transport and storage infrastructure for the nation’s first CCS industrial “clusters”.
Fossil fuels
The CCC’s report states that “many countries are responding” to the current global energy crisis triggered by the Iran war by “rapidly reducing dependency on fossil fuels”.
It continues that emissions from the UK’s fossil-fuel supply sector fell by 1.5MtCO2e in 2025, in line with the “significant historical decline seen over the last three decades”.
Emissions in the sector are now 45% lower than 2008 levels, it adds.
Key drivers of emissions decline from 2024-5 were a fall in emissions from oil refining of 0.9MtCO2e, mostly due to the closure of Grangemouth and Prax Lindsey refineries in 2025, according to the CCC.
Declines in production emissions associated with oil and gas were due to the closure of North Sea fields “as they reach the end of life”, says the report.
It adds that this is a “continuation” in a longer-term trend. Production emissions from oil and gas have fallen by 58% since 2008 and by 75% since their peak in 2000. The CCC continues:
“The decline in oil and gas production is expected to continue as oil and gas reserves in the mature North Sea basin are increasingly depleted – the NSTA [North Sea Transition Authority] projects a further decline in combined oil and gas production of 93% by 2050.”
The report does not directly address the Labour government’s policies on oil and gas production in the North Sea.
Labour has ruled out new oil and gas licences – a manifesto commitment that has been subject to intense lobbying from the oil and gas industry and right-wing media. (See Carbon Brief’s factcheck on nine false or misleading myths about the North Sea.)
However, the government has indicated it might approve new projects that already have a licence, if they can pass an environmental impact assessment that will consider the emissions from burning the oil and gas produced.
Speaking at a briefing for journalists, CCC chair Nigel Topping noted that oil and gas production is projected to continue to plummet in the coming decades, regardless of whether the government issues new drilling licences, adding:
“The real road to energy security is not through some marginal drilling decisions, but through electrifying the economy.”
Electricity
Emissions from electricity supply rose in 2025, following a 5% increase in unabated gas generation year-on-year.
According to the CCC, this offset the reduction in emissions from coal, with the closure of the UK’s last coal-fired power plant in 2024.
This is in line with Carbon Brief’s analysis from January, which similarly found that there was a small increase in emissions per unit of generation in 2025.
This bucks the trend seen in the UK since 2008, over which period emissions from electricity supply have fallen by 82%.
The CCC says the rise in gas generation was likely due to a combination of factors, including a 12% drop in nuclear generation, an 11% decrease in net imports, underutilisation of wind capacity due to grid constraints and lower-than-average wind capacity additions.
Last year, offshore wind capacity increased by 0.7 gigawatts (GW), bringing the UK’s total to 16.6GW, according to the CCC.
This is expected to more than double to around 37GW by 2032, once the existing pipeline of new projects is built – including those that secured subsidies in the most recent auction for “contracts for difference” (CfDs).
The CCC notes, however, that further additions will be needed to reach the government’s “stretching goals” for offshore wind.
An additional 0.3GW of onshore wind capacity was added in 2025, bringing the national total to 16.4GW. It says between 2.1GW and 2.5GW will need to be added annually up to the end of the decade to meet government targets.
The UK installed more solar capacity in 2025 than in any year since 2015, adding 2.8GW to bring the national total capacity to 21.7GW.
To reach government targets, the CCC says installation of solar power still needs to increase, with around another 5GW required by the end of this decade.
The CCC highlights that faster progress is needed on expanding and modernising electricity networks, as well as deploying storage.
For example, in 2025, some 9.4 terawatt hours (TWh) of wind generation was “curtailed” – when windfarms are paid to turn off – up 77% on 2024.
Agriculture and land
The CCC’s report says “emissions in agriculture and land use have not fallen significantly in recent years” and that progress addressing this has been “too slow”.
Cattle and sheep numbers fell by 1% and 2% respectively in 2025, continuing a longer-term trend, with livestock numbers at their lowest since 1990, says the report.
This has led to a reduction in methane emissions from 2022-24, but this was offset by an increase in CO2 emissions in these sectors. It continues:
“This was in part driven by a smaller forestry sink due to an ageing woodland profile and removal of trees for habitat restoration priorities.”
The report adds that household beef and lamb purchases fell by 5% in the last year and have dropped by 9% since 2021, likely “driven by high beef and lamb prices and cost-of-living pressures”.
It continues that one area of “positive progress” is an increase in peatland restoration rates.
Some 21,400 hectares of peatlands were restored in 2025 – a 26% increase on the previous year and around three times the level in 2020, according to the CCC.
It adds that there is grant funding in place for peatland restoration across the country “until at least 2027”.
Tree-planting has seen “more mixed” progress, says the report. Planting rates fell by 25% from 2024-5, following a large boost to forest creation the year before.
The reduction was “driven by funding cuts in Scotland, which continues to lead in the establishment of new woodlands for the UK, planting more than half of the total in 2024-25”, says the report.
It adds that planting rates increased in England and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) is expected to launch a woodland creation strategy this year.
Despite this mixed progress, the chart below shows how the UK government is “on track” on most key agriculture and land use indicators, when compared to the CCC’s central pathway to net-zero and the government’s own ambitions.
The report says that another area of “positive progress” is the publishing of England’s long-awaited land-use framework in March of this year.
The framework used “high-resolution modelling” and found that there is enough land in England to meet climate and nature goals, while also producing more food and building new homes.
To increase progress, the report says that the government should “put policies and incentives in place to ramp up tree-planting and peatland restoration”.
One key upcoming policy development will be the “25-year farming roadmap”, the government’s long-term direction for farming in England. This is due to be published later this year, according to the CCC.
Aviation and shipping
Emissions from flights fell by 0.5% in 2025, despite a 3% increase in overall distance flown by UK passengers.
The CCC says this is likely due to fuel-efficiency improvements within the nation’s aircraft fleet and “a small contribution” from the use of “sustainable aviation fuel” (SAF).
The report concludes that fuel-efficiency improvements are “almost on track” compared to the CCC’s net-zero pathway. The share of jet fuel provided by SAF reached 2.5% in 2025, which is above the level set by the government’s SAF mandate.
While people flew more last year, the overall distance travelled via planes is still below the projected levels in the CCC’s pathway for 2025.
The committee says emissions growth from aviation has “slowed down”, but notes that “it is too early to say whether aviation emissions will grow, plateau or decrease in the future”.
Overall, the CCC says there has been “mixed progress” in the aviation sector. This year’s SAF Act included a mechanism designed to drive domestic production of SAFs, but the report stresses that “significant challenges remain around scaling up supply”.
Meanwhile, for the first time, the government plans to use international carbon credits under CORSIA – the UN’s aviation emissions scheme – to deliver its sixth carbon budget. According to the CCC:
“This introduces significant risk, including uncertainty over the availability and quality of high-integrity credits.”
As for shipping, the CCC says this has seen “limited progress”. It welcomes the inclusion of domestic shipping in the UK emissions trading scheme (ETS) as “an important step”, but points out that this is only a small fraction of the sector.
Most emissions come from international shipping. The committee says delays to the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) net-zero framework – following opposition from the US and big fossil-fuel producers – has “significantly increased” the risk of hitting emissions targets for this sector.
Other sectors
The CCC report highlights “significant risks” with the use of engineered removals in the coming years.
The government’s plan for achieving emissions targets over 2033-37 relies on a “rapid ramp-up” of technologies that suck CO2 out of the atmosphere, the report says, but there is still a lack of detail on how this will be achieved.
During this period, the amount of CO2 removed through these technologies is expected to reach an average of 17.4MtCO2e per year.
But the CCC says that 94% of removals planned for 2033-37 have “significant risks or insufficient plans”.
There is greater confidence in achieving planned removals over 2028-32, the report says, but this is due to scaled-back plans and policy progress.
The CCC says it is “essential” for the government to develop a strategy for delivering and monitoring engineered removals, along with “sufficient contingency plans…for any shortfall”.
The report also looks at emissions from waste, which are expected to reduce by an average of 1.1MtCO2e per year between 2024 and 2037.
The CCC has greater confidence in the government’s ability to meet waste goals compared to last year’s assessment.
But the report notes that there has been “little improvement” in recycling rates in UK homes. It says that further policies will be needed to meet plans to reduce waste, boost recycling and prevent waste going to landfill.
Looking at hydrogen, the CCC says there has been “good progress” in developing low-carbon hydrogen, but risks remain due to tight timelines and delays in funding.
The report mentions missed or upcoming deadlines to award contracts for some hydrogen projects and to update the UK hydrogen strategy. It notes that progress on hydrogen “must continue on the ground” in the meantime.
The post CCC: Faster electrification of UK will ‘put money back into people’s pockets’ appeared first on Carbon Brief.
CCC: Faster electrification of UK will ‘put money back into people’s pockets’
The head of the United Nations has launched an initiative aimed at holding artificial intelligence companies accountable for their exploding environmental impacts, including their carbon emissions, the amount of water and land used for data centres, and the energy they consume.
During a speech at London Climate Action Week on Tuesday, António Guterres noted that AI can accelerate climate solutions, among other key challenges, and said its potential must be harnessed.
“But AI is also hungry for land, water and power,” he emphasised, adding that the data centres needed to run AI models already consume more electricity than most countries.
The UN Secretary-General repeated a call he first made in July 2025 for all big AI companies to commit to power every data centre with renewable energy by 2030.
Some tech firms have announced they are sourcing or building out clean energy to run their hubs, but growing power demand is also contributing to gas-fired generation in the US, according to data from Global Energy Monitor.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that data centres are set to more than double the emissions from the electricity they use between 2024 and 2030 in a high-growth scenario. But AI’s use could lead to far larger reductions in the energy sector through efficiency gains if adopted widely.
-
UN chief says fossil fuel industry must cut methane for warming “relief”
The UN Secretary-General urges drastic reductions in methane emissions, starting with the energy sector, to limit an expected overshoot of global warming beyond 1.5C -
China’s coal-chemicals boom risks repeating the mistakes of the past
By reviving the problematic industry in the name of energy security, China runs the risk of higher emissions, stranded assets and setting back its ambitions as a clean energy leader -
Mombasa ocean summit drives progress on marine protection, but threats persist
At the 11th Our Ocean conference in Kenya, its founder John Kerry says the ocean must become central to climate solutions and needs to be looked after
‘No more hidden costs’
Proposing the new “AI Environmental Transparency Initiative” on Tuesday, Guterres also urged big AI firms companies to measure and publicly disclose the full environmental impact of their systems, including their carbon, water, and land footprints.
“No more hidden costs. No more shifting the burden onto those least able to bear it. It is time to come clean,” he said in a major speech on responding to the world’s twin climate and energy crises. “If AI is to help build a better future, it must be honest about what it costs us now.”
A report issued earlier this month by the UN University Institute for Water, Environment and Health noted that most current assessments of AI’s environmental cost focus on carbon emissions from training models. But, it added, this misses a substantial part of the picture.
Every kilowatt-hour of electricity for AI also carries a water footprint, from cooling and generation, and a land footprint, from infrastructure and supply chains, it said.
Explainer: Will AI data centres make or break the energy transition?
The report estimated that AI data centres globally could consume 945 terawatt-hours of electricity annually by 2030 – more power than all but five countries and roughly twice France’s 2025 consumption.
Offsetting this carbon footprint by 2030 would require growing some 6.7 billion trees over 10 years, it calculated. Producing power for the data centres would consume water equal to the basic needs of 1.3 billion people in sub-Saharan Africa for a year and take up land of more than 14,500 square kilometers, roughly twice the Jakarta metropolitan area.
The European Union said earlier this month it will develop minimum energy-efficiency standards for both new and existing data centres, with a “needs assessment” due by 2027, Reuters reported. It’s also planning a sustainability label for data centres, covering criteria including water use and clean energy supply – but that has been delayed.
US community push-back
Asked after his speech what the response had been, the UN chief said “we’ll see”, without giving more details.
But, he argued that, in his view, the push for transparency “is perfectly reasonable and even positive for the AI industry, because eventually some people will say that they consume much more than they really do”. “I think the truth is essential,” he added.
Concerns about the environmental impacts of AI and the infrastructure needed to run the technology have led to growing opposition in some communities, especially in the US.
This month, Monterey Park in Los Angeles County was the first city in the United States to enact a citywide prohibition on data centres through a voter-approved ballot measure. The developers behind a proposed centre in the area had already pulled the project in April amid an increasingly hostile local environment and regulatory uncertainty.
The vote that stopped a data center: US communities query resource-hungry AI
According to nonprofit Data Center Watch, around $64 billion-worth of data centre projects nationwide were delayed or blocked between May 2024 and March 2025 as communities pushed back against them.
Industry lobby groups argue that data centres can provide economic benefits in their host communities. According to the US-based Data Center Coalition, which represents big operators and developers, data centres generate tax revenue, support construction and technical jobs, and provide infrastructure needed for cloud computing, scientific research and AI development.
The industry has also challenged claims that data centers necessarily raise electricity costs for households.
Force for good?
The UN chief said benefits can be few in the places that are home to the data centre, while “communities are often left in the dark about the environmental impact of the infrastructure rising around them”.
Guterres said companies have an “obligation” to be clear and open about the services they are offering but also the level of resources they require.
“Transparency is essential for the decisions that communities must make – and transparency is essential even for the future of artificial intelligence, and to make sure that artificial intelligence is essentially a force for good,” he told an audience of climate professionals in London
A senior UN official told journalists ahead of Tuesday’s announcement that the AI industry has started to talk about and disclose some of their impacts, but those efforts are not yet comprehensive enough.
The hope is that the new initiative will “encourage the industry to come together and take further action on it”, the official said.
The post UN asks AI companies to reveal full environmental impacts appeared first on Climate Home News.
Phillipe Ciais has spent almost four decades researching the planet’s carbon cycle – and the ways in which humans have been impacting its balance.
Based at the Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l’Environnement (LSCE) on the outskirts of Paris, Ciais (pronounced “see-es”) has been listed as an author on more than 1,300 peer-reviewed studies.
In fact, analysis of Carbon Brief’s Cosmos database reveals that – by some distance – he is the most highly cited climate scientist in the world.
In a wide-ranging interview, he discusses:
The post Prof Philippe Ciais: The world’s most highly cited climate scientist appeared first on Carbon Brief.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/prof-philippe-ciais-the-worlds-most-highly-cited-climate-scientist/
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy8 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测