Five days after seemingly cordial US-China climate talks, US President Joe Biden has announced he will increase US tariffs on Chinese solar panels, electric vehicles (EVs) and batteries to run them.
Last Wednesday and Thursday, China’s new top climate diplomat Liu Zhenmin travelled to Washington DC for two days of talks with his US counterpart John Podesta, also fresh in the job.
They discussed co-operation on climate issues, including plans for both sides to ramp up renewables, and vowed to “intensify technical and policy exchanges”.
But the day after, with Liu still in the country, the US State Department briefed journalists that Podesta had told Liu that China was producing too many solar panels and lithium-ion EV batteries.
India wants its own solar industry but has to break reliance on China first
Then on Tuesday, the White House increased tariffs on Chinese EVs, lithium-ion batteries and solar panels, accusing the Chinese government of “unfair, non-market practices” and “flooding global markets with artificially low-priced exports”.
“Clear protectionism”
In response, the state-owned China Daily newspaper in an editorial described the tariffs as “a clear act of protectionism”.
The head of the China Automobile Association Fu Bingfeng agreed, adding that “the new energy industry is jointly created by mankind and can bring common benefits to mankind”, saying the tariffs were “very unreasonable”.
Asia Society analyst Li Shuo told Climate Home that, rather than thinking of over-supply of solar panels as a problem, “it is the world’s inability to deploy these products that is the problem”.
Lithium boom: Zimbabwe looks to China to secure a place in the EV battery supply chain
The tariffs reflect “the new reality global climate politics needs to deal with” – that low-carbon products will not be made in the most cost-efficient way and distributed around the world, he explained. India also has trade barriers against Chinese solar panels, designed to boost its domestic solar manufacturing.
Research from the Center for Strategic and International Studies has found that such trade barriers can, in general, delay the competitiveness of low-carbon technologies against their market rivals – like solar against gas, or EVs against internal combustion engines.
Limited effect on solar, batteries bigger
The US-imposed measures are designed to increase the cost of Chinese goods needed for the energy transition – and could therefore slow down America’s shift away from fossil fuels.
But BloombergNEF solar analyst Jenny Chase told Climate Home that the increase in the tariff on solar cells and modules from 25% to 50% would “have little effect”.
She noted that tariffs of 25% have been in place “for ages – and as a result the US imports almost no cells or modules directly from China, instead importing from Southeast Asia”.
In Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan’s net zero vision clashes with legacy of war
The Biden administration is currently weighing whether to impose tariffs on solar imports from four Southeast Asian countries over concerns that China is routing its panels through these nations.
US solar panel manufacturers are lobbying the government in favour of those tariffs, while US solar panel installers are lobbying against them. A decision is needed by June 6, two years on from a pause on tariffs affecting the Southeast Asian nations.
Similarly, the US already imports relatively few electric vehicles from China, as it already has Trump-era tariffs on them. The US’s adoption of electric vehicles is far slower than in Europe or China.
But US car-makers do import lots of lithium-ion EV batteries for their vehicles despite existing 7.5% tariffs. China produces about three-quarters of all the world’s EV batteries, with the US producing less than a tenth.
(Reporting by Joe Lo; editing by Megan Rowling)
The post Days after climate talks, US slaps tariffs on Chinese EVs and solar panels appeared first on Climate Home News.
Days after climate talks, US slaps tariffs on Chinese EVs and solar panels
Energy bills in the UK have continued to soar in 2026, with intense debate raging about how to bring them down.
In October 2026, the cap on household energy bills reached its highest level in three years, rising by £60 amid high gas prices driven by the Iran war.
The cap is forecast to jump by as much as another quarter in January 2027, pushing annual energy bills towards £2,200.
Energy bills have not been that high since 2022 when, in the fallout of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the UK government spent more than £60bn on supporting consumers through the crisis.
While expensive gas is behind the lion’s share of the rise in bills since 2020, policy costs and investment in the gas and electricity grids are also putting some pressure on prices.
This has sparked conflicting calls to continue the clean-energy transition to get off the “fossil-fuel rollercoaster”, to move more slowly – or to abandon climate goals in favour of more gas.
Below, Carbon Brief looks at the real drivers of high energy bills in the UK, what has been done to address them to date and what options are available to cut them going forward.
These include taking more policy costs off electricity bills, boosting flexibility or shifting to more efficient technologies with lower running costs, such as heat pumps and electric vehicles (EVs).
What is driving high energy bills?
In October 2026, UK household energy bills reached their highest levels since 2022, with the price cap for typical homes hitting £1,723 per year, up 47% in real terms since October 2020.
Industrial energy users also face high costs, particularly for their electricity.
For households, another sharp increase is now all but guaranteed under the price cap for January 2027, which is forecast to rise by around 25% from current levels.
Wholesale costs for electricity and gas make up 44% of the current cap of £1,723 per year, according to Carbon Brief analysis of figures from thinktank Nesta, shown in the figure below.
The wholesale cost of both electricity and gas is tied to gas prices, due to the marginal pricing system used in power markets in the UK and most other countries.
Network charges make up a further 24% of bills and operating costs are another 17%, whereas policy costs only account for 7% of the total.
There has been increasing interest in the so-called “non-commodity costs” – those not related to wholesale energy – that now make up a significant portion of bills, as shown in the figure above.
Yet while these costs have been increasing – particularly those related to investing in energy networks – they are not the reason why energy bills have soared once again in recent months.
Indeed, Nesta analysis recently published by Carbon Brief shows that, contrary to widespread UK media and political narratives, a surge in wholesale costs driven by expensive gas is responsible for more than 80% of the rise in dual-fuel household energy bills since 2020, as shown below.
The second-largest driver of the rise in costs since 2020 is due to the cost of operating, maintaining and expanding gas and electricity networks, as shown in the figure above.
At the end of 2025, energy regulator Ofgem approved £29bn of upfront investment into the national gas and electricity grids, as well as the gas distribution network that connects to homes and businesses. This is part of a wider package of up to around £90bn of investment out to 2031.
As a result of these investment plans, network charges are expected to increase by around 50% between 2025 and 2030, from £222 a year to £330 for a typical dual-fuel household.
(This figure covers gas and electricity transmission and gas distribution, but not electricity distribution. A further package of increased investment in the electricity distribution network, for the period from 2028-2033, is due to be approved by Ofgem by the end of 2027.)
The increase in network costs is often attributed to the need to connect increasing levels of geographically dispersed renewable energy sources, particularly wind power.
However, a significant proportion of these increases relate to the need to update ageing infrastructure after decades of under-investment.
This package of investment represents a “once-in-a-generation renewal of our energy infrastructure”, Ofgem head Tim Jarvis told a recent conference attended by Carbon Brief.
Ofgem says some three-fifths of the £108 per household per year rise in network charges to 2030 is due to “business-as-usual” costs such as ongoing maintenance of the gas and electricity networks. It says only £30 is due to investing in expanding the electricity transmission grid.
Similarly, according to the Energy Networks Association, up to 80% of the investment in electricity grids is required to maintain existing assets, with the remainder going towards expansion.
Another point of contention is “constraint costs”, where windfarms are switched off if the network lacks the capacity to transmit their power – and gas plants are switched on to meet demand.
These costs sit within network balancing charges and – despite rising steeply in recent years, partly due to high gas prices – these still make up just £35, or 4% of typical annual electricity bills.
Today, rising constraint costs are partly a reflection of the decision in the 2010s to postpone network investments under a policy known as “connect and manage”. Ofgem says the investments it has now approved in the electricity grid would help limit constraints in the future.
Trade association RenewableUK’s head of policy Steven Agnew points to a recent review by the National Audit Office and says investment in the grid is “critical to avoid large rises in consumers’ bills as more of the country’s electricity is generated from clean sources”. He adds:
“The current crunch is the result of inaction by successive previous governments to tackle this issue. Consumers are losing out on some of the benefits because low-cost wind has to be turned down and expensive gas turned up elsewhere.”
Projections from the National Energy System Operator (Neso) illustrate how constraint costs depend on the relative pace of expansion in new generating capacity and the electricity network.
It says balancing costs could rise from £2bn to £8bn by 2030, if the grid faces delays. However, its central projection is £3-4bn, with a range of options available to limit this increase.
Finally, following years of elevated energy bills, the cost of “bad debt” has increased. This is where unpaid bills are recovered by energy companies through a charge on all households.
These charges add around £60 to typical bills, according to Carbon Brief analysis of Ofgem data. This is an increase of around £40 since 2020 – more than half of the rise in “operating costs”. Trade association Energy UK says rising debt could add another £10-15 to bills by next year.
What has been done to limit bills so far?
The Labour government was elected in 2024 on a manifesto that pledged to cut bills by £300 per year by 2030, relative to levels in late 2023.
The government has taken a number of steps in this direction.
At the 2025 budget, it closed the “energy company obligation” (ECO) efficiency scheme and moved 75% of the “renewables obligation” support scheme for legacy renewables into general taxation.
Collectively, these two changes were expected to save a typical household £134 per year, or £154 when including households that use electric heating. (These savings only apply to households.)
Many groups, from industry to politicians, had long called for policy costs to be taken off electricity bills in an effort to bring down prices, but this had previously been resisted by the Treasury.
In addition, new prime minister Andy Burnham announced in July that his government would