A scenario that meets the “net-zero by 2050” goal would be the “cheapest” option for the UK, according to modelling by the National Energy System Operator (NESO).
In a new report, the organisation that manages the UK’s energy infrastructure says its “holistic transition” scenario would have the lowest cost over the next 25 years, saving £36bn a year – some 1% of GDP – compared to an alternative scenario that slows climate action.
These savings are from lower fuel costs and reduced climate damages, relative to a scenario where the UK fails to meet its climate goals, known as “falling behind”.
The UK will need to make significant investments to reach net-zero, NESO says, but this would cut fossil-fuel imports, support jobs and boost health, as well as contributing to a safer climate.
Slowing down these efforts would reduce the scale of investments needed, but overall costs would be higher unless the damages from worsening climate change are “ignored”, the report says.
In an illusory world where climate damages do not exist, slowing the UK’s efforts to cut emissions would generate “savings” of £14bn per year on average – some 0.4% of GDP.
NESO says that much of this £14bn could be avoided by reaching net-zero more cheaply and that it includes costs unrelated to climate action, such as a faster rollout of data centres.
Notably, the report appears to include efforts to avoid the widespread misreporting of a previous edition, including in the election manifesto of the hard-right, climate-sceptic Reform UK party.
Overall, NESO warns that, as well as ignoring climate damages, the £14bn figure “does not represent the cost of achieving net-zero” and cannot be compared with comprehensive estimates of this, such as the 0.2% of GDP total from the UK’s Climate Change Committee (CCC).
Net-zero is the ‘cheapest option’
Every year, NESO publishes its “future energy scenarios”, a set of four pathways designed to explore how the nation’s energy system might change over the coming decades.
(Technically the scenarios apply to the island of Great Britain, rather than the whole UK, as Northern Ireland’s electricity system is part of a separate network covering the island of Ireland.)
Published in July, the scenarios test a series of questions, such as what it would mean for the UK to meet its climate goals, whether it is possible to do so while relying heavily on hydrogen and what would happen if the nation was to slow down its efforts to cut emissions.
The scenarios have a broad focus and do not only consider the UK’s climate goals. In addition, they also explore the implications of a rapid growth in electricity demand from data centres, the potential for autonomous driving and many other issues.
With so many questions to explore, the scenarios are not designed to keep costs to a minimum. In fact, NESO does not publish related cost estimates in most years.
This year, however, NESO has published an “economics annex” to the future energy scenarios. It last published a similar exercise in 2020, with the results being widely misreported.
In the new annex, NESO says that the UK currently spends around 10% of GDP on its energy system. This includes investments in new infrastructure and equipment – such as cars, boilers or power plants – as well as fuel, running and maintenance costs.
This figure is expected to decline to around 5% of GDP by 2050 under all four scenarios, NESO says, whether they meet the UK’s net-zero target or not.
For each scenario, the annex adds up the total of all investments and ongoing costs in every year out to 2050. It then adds an estimate of the economic damages from the greenhouse gas emissions that primarily come from burning fossil fuels, using the Treasury’s “green book”.
When all of these costs are taken into account, NESO says that the “cheapest” option is a pathway that meets the UK’s climate goals, including all of the targets on the way to net-zero by 2050.
It says this pathway, known as “holistic transition”, would bring average savings of £36bn per year out to 2050, relative to a pathway where the UK slows its efforts on climate change.
The overall savings, illustrated by the dashed line in the figure below, stem primarily from lower fuel costs (orange bars) and reduced climate damages (white bars).
Note that the carbon pricing that is already applied to power plants and other heavy industry under the UK’s emissions trading system (ETS) is excluded from running costs in the annex, appearing instead within the wider “carbon costs” category.
This makes the running costs of fossil-fuel energy sources seem cheaper than they really are, when including the ETS price.
Net-zero requires significant investment
While NESO says that its net-zero compliant “holistic transition” pathway is the cheapest option for the UK, it does require significant upfront investments.
The scale of the additional investments needed to stay on track for the UK’s climate goals, beyond a pathway where those targets are not met, is illustrated in the figure below.
This shows that the largest extra investments would need to be made in the power sector, such as by building new windfarms (shown by the dark yellow bars). This is followed by investment needs for homes, such as to install electric heat pumps instead of gas boilers (dark red bars).
These additional investments would amount to around £30bn per year out to 2050, but with a peak of as much as £60bn over the next decade.
These investments would be offset by lower fuel bills, including reduced gas use in homes (pale red) and lower oil use in transport (mid green).
Notably, NESO says it expects EVs to be cheaper to buy than petrol cars from 2027, meaning there are also significant savings in transport capital expenditure (“CapEx”, dark green).
Again, the biggest savings in “holistic transition” relative to “falling behind” would come from avoided climate damages – described by NESO as “carbon costs”.
Net-zero cuts fossil-fuel imports
In addition to avoided climate damages, NESO says that reaching the UK’s net-zero target would bring wider benefits to the economy, including lower fuel imports.
Specifically, it says that climate efforts would “materially reduce” the UK’s dependency on overseas gas, with imports falling to 78% below current levels by 2050 in “holistic transition”. Under the “falling behind” scenario, imports rise by 35%”, despite higher domestic production.
This finding, shown in the figure below, is the opposite of what has been argued by many of those that oppose the UK’s net-zero target.
NESO goes on to argue that the shift to net-zero would have wider economic benefits. These include a shift from buying imported fossil fuels to investing money domestically instead, which “could bring local economic benefits and support future employment”.
The operator says that there is the “potential for more jobs to be created than lost in the transition to net-zero” and that there would be risks to UK trade if it fails to cut emissions, given exports to the EU – the UK’s main trading partner – would be subject to the bloc’s new carbon border tax.
Beyond the economy, NESO points to studies finding that the transition to net-zero would have other benefits, including for human health and the environment.
It does not attempt to quantify these benefits, but points to analysis from the CCC finding that health benefits alone could be worth £2.4-8.2bn per year by 2050.
Investment is higher for net-zero than for ‘not-zero’
It is clear from the NESO annex that its net-zero compliant “holistic transition” pathway would entail significantly more upfront investment than if climate action is slowed under “falling behind”.
This idea, in effect, is the launchpad for politicians arguing that the UK should walk away from its climate commitments and stop building new low-carbon infrastructure.
As already noted, the NESO analysis shows that this would increase costs to the UK overall.
Still, NESO’s new report adds that “falling behind” would “save” £14bn a year – relative to meeting the UK’s net-zero target – as long as carbon costs are “ignored”.
Specifically, it says that ignoring carbon costs, “holistic transition” would cost an average of £14bn a year more out to 2050 than “falling behind”, which misses the net-zero target. This is equivalent to 0.4% of the UK’s GDP and is illustrated by the solid pink line in the figure below.
Some politicians are indeed now willing to ignore the problem of climate change and the damages caused by ongoing greenhouse gas emissions. These politicians may therefore be tempted to argue that the UK could “save” £14bn a year by scrapping net-zero.
However, NESO’s report cautions against this, stating explicitly that the “costs discussed here do not represent the cost of achieving net-zero emissions”. It says:
“Our pathways cannot provide firm conclusions over the relative costs attached to the choices between pathways…We reiterate that the costs discussed here do not represent the cost of achieving net-zero emissions.”
It says that the scenarios have not been designed to minimise costs and that it would be possible to reach net-zero more cheaply, for example by focusing more heavily on EVs and renewables instead of hydrogen and nuclear.
Moreover, it says that some of the difference in costs between “holistic transitions” and “falling behind” is unrelated to climate action. Specifically, it says that electricity demand from data centres is around twice as high in “holistic transitions”, adding some £5bn a year in costs in 2050.
In addition, NESO says that most of the “saving” in “falling behind” would be wiped out if fossil fuel prices are higher than expected – falling from £14bn per year to just £5bn a year – even before considering climate damages and wider benefits, such as for health.
Finally, NESO says that failing to make the transition to net-zero would leave the UK more exposed to fossil-fuel price shocks, such as the global energy crisis that added 1.8% to the nation’s energy costs in 2022. It says a similar shock would only cost 0.3% of GDP in 2050 if the country has reached net-zero – as in “holistic transition” – whereas costs would remain high in “falling behind”.
The post Net-zero scenario is ‘cheapest option’ for UK, says energy system operator appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Net-zero scenario is ‘cheapest option’ for UK, says energy system operator
Climate Change
Cropped 11 March 2026: Iran water worries | Seabed-mining treaty progress | Women farmers and climate change
We handpick and explain the most important stories at the intersection of climate, land, food and nature over the past fortnight.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s fortnightly Cropped email newsletter.
Subscribe for free here.
Key developments
Fertiliser disruption in Middle East
FOOD RISKS: The US-Israel war on Iran is “disrupting” the production and export of synthetic fertilisers, reported the Financial Times, which could lead to food price increases. The newspaper noted that the Strait of Hormuz passage, which remains at a near-standstill, is a “crucial shipping route for exports” including urea, sulphur and ammonia – all used in fertilisers. The Guardian noted: “Roughly half of global food production depends on synthetic nitrogen and crop yields would fall without fertiliser.”
-
Sign up to Carbon Brief’s free “Cropped” email newsletter. A fortnightly digest of food, land and nature news and views. Sent to your inbox every other Wednesday.
PLANT FOOD: The fertiliser situation is “especially troubling for farmers in the northern hemisphere” who are beginning to plant their spring crops, said the New York Times. An article in the Conversation said that “even modest reductions in nitrogen use can produce disproportionately large declines in yield”. Elsewhere, a Carbon Brief Q&A looked at the impacts of the war on the energy transition and climate action.
WATER WORRIES: Water – already in short supply in Iran, where long-running droughts have been exacerbated by climate change – has come into renewed focus in the conflict. Bloomberg columnist Javier Blas said water could become the “geopolitical commodity that decides the war”. Desalination plants came “under attack” in Iran and Bahrain, reported the New York Times. These types of plants offer the “only reliable water source for millions across the Arabian Peninsula”, said the Independent.
Negotiations of seabed mining resume
LEGAL BRIEF: The International Seabed Authority (ISA)’s Legal and Technical Commission held a meeting in late February, where they made “progress” in reviewing applications for deep-sea mining exploration and the development of regional environmental management plans, according to an ISA press release. The ISA’s 36-member governing council is currently in Jamaica for a two-week meeting to discuss the future of deep-sea mining in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
NEW RULEBOOK: The New York Times interviewed Leticia Carvalho, head of the ISA, who said the long-awaited deep-sea mining rulebook should be finalised by the end of this year. She said the Trump administration’s push for deep-sea mining is making such an agreement more urgent than ever. However, Grist said that an advocate from French Polynesia said that he does not expect the regulations to be finalised this year, as there are several agreements and discussions pending, including on environmental protections.
INDIGENOUS DEMANDS: Indigenous advocates, who have long worked for their rights to be included in seabed mining regulations, are “bracing for the outcome” of the Jamaica meeting, reported Grist. Some fear that the incorporation of Indigenous rights into those regulations will be dismissed, as has happened previously, said the outlet.
News and views
- LAWS OF NATURE: The EU court of justice fined Portugal €10m (£8.7m) for “failing to comply with environmental laws that require it to protect biodiversity”, according to the Guardian. The newspaper said the country will be penalised until the 55 unprotected sites are protected under EU biodiversity law.
- BURIED REPORT UNCOVERED: Last week, a group of scientists and experts released a draft assessment about the health of nature in the US that had been cancelled by the Trump administration last year, according to the New York Times. The report is “grim, but shot through with bright spots and possibility”, said the outlet.
- ‘BI-OCEANIC’ RAIL: Experts are concerned about the potential social and environmental impacts of a train “mega-project” between Peru and Brazil, reported Mongabay. One researcher told the outlet that the possible rail routes, which cross through the Amazon rainforest, could cause “colossal environmental damage”.
- CLIMATE COOPERATION: India and Nepal signed an agreement to strengthen transboundary cooperation in topics such as climate change, forests and biodiversity conservation, reported the New Indian Express. The collaboration will include the restoration of wildlife corridors and knowledge exchanges, the outlet said.
- REPORT CARD: Carbon Brief analysis showed that half of the world’s countries met a 28 February UN deadline to report on national efforts to tackle nature loss. As of 10 March, 123 countries out of 196 had submitted their national reports, which will inform nature negotiations in Armenia later this year.
- CROP LOSSES: Down To Earth covered a study finding that a “deadly” virus is threatening cassava crops in parts of Africa, partly due to climate change. Meanwhile, Carbon Brief updated an interactive map showing 140 cases of crops being destroyed by heat, drought, floods and other extremes in the past three years.
Spotlight
Women farmers in a warmer and unequal world
International Women’s Day occurs every year on 8 March. Carbon Brief explores the impacts of climate change and gender inequality on women farmers and how they are adapting to a warming planet.
Women farmers play an essential role in global food supply.
According to a report from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), around 36% of working women in 2019 were engaged in agri-food systems. On average, they earned 18% less than men in that sector.
The report found that women working in agriculture tend to do so “under highly unfavourable conditions”, including in the face of “climate-induced weather shocks”.
Typically, women farmers are concentrated in the poorest countries, produce less-lucrative crops and are often unpaid family workers or casual workers in agriculture, the report said.
Vulnerabilities
Research has shown that women farmers are more vulnerable to the impacts of climate change than men.
In Africa and Asia, for example, a 2023 study found that “climate hazards and stressors…tend to negatively affect women [in agri-food systems] more than men”. This is because gender inequality – in the form of discriminatory gender roles or unequal access to resources – is most pronounced in those regions, the study said.
A 2025 study focusing specifically on the Sleman region of Indonesia found that 63% of women farmers suffered from food insecurity due to vulnerability to climate change. This arises from both frequent exposure to drought and low ability to respond to climate impacts, the study explained.
Geraldine García Uribe has been a farmer at the U Neek’ Lu’um agroecology school in Yucatán, Mexico, since 2023. She told Carbon Brief:
“When you have fixed [planting and harvesting] cycles and you start to see changes in the climate – longer droughts or changes in rainfall patterns – plants take longer to grow and pests start to arrive, and that affects the farmers’ pockets and the livelihoods of [their] families.”
She added that women farmers also face inequalities when it comes to deciding how to manage agricultural lands:
“When government support comes, they take [women] less into account because, in general, there are more men present at meetings.”
Adaptation needs
Women farmers face constraints that make them less able to adapt to climate change, according to the FAO report. For example, the working hours of women farmers “decline less than men’s during climate shocks such as heat stress”, said the report.
Josselyn Vega has been farming on her own agroecology farm in Cotopaxi, Ecuador, for three decades. In the Andean region comprising Ecuador, Bolivia and Peru, droughts and floods are frequent, but there are also frosts which, although expected to decrease with climate change, cause crop losses and can have a “drastic” impact on the local economy, according to the Adaptation Fund.
Vega told Carbon Brief that her farm has used “living barriers” to help protect from weather extremes:
“Living barriers are a wall of forest and fruit trees [that] block the wind and prevent drought and frost from passing through.”
The 2023 study recommended that transforming agri-food systems into fairer and more sustainable ones requires reducing and preventing gender inequality.
At the international level, countries have an agreement to implement climate solutions that take women into account, including women farmers. At the most recent UN climate negotiations in Belém, Brazil, countries adopted a new gender action plan, which will last nine years and encourages countries to develop climate policies and plans with a gender perspective.
Vega said that public policies are needed to empower women farmers and ensure that they are included in decision-making. She told Carbon Brief:
“We need to benefit from something that encourages us to continue planting and caring for the land.”
Watch, read, listen
CASH CUTS: In a four-part series, BioGraphic explored how US federal funding cuts have impacted biodiversity and conservation.
RIGHT WHALE ROLLBACK: A News Center Maine video looked at how the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is considering rolling back a rule to protect endangered North Atlantic right whales in the US.
ON THE FARM: “Women farmers are an overlooked force in climate action,” the deputy director of the climate office at the FAO wrote in Reuters.
JUSTICE: Drilled marked the 10-year anniversary of the murder of Indigenous leader Berta Cáceres and looked at why Honduras is “still so dangerous for environmental activists”.
New science
- Large-scale reforestation in different parts of the world could bring “robust net global cooling” of -0.13C to -0.25C | Communications Earth & Environment
- Insects in many parts of the tropics have a “limited capacity” to deal with future projected warming levels | Nature
- The flowering time of tropical plant species has changed by an average of two days per decade since 1794 due to climate change | PLOS One
In the diary
- 9-19 March: Part one of the 31st session of the International Seabed Authority | Kingston, Jamaica
- 15 March: Republic of the Congo presidential election
- 22 March: World Water Day
- 23-29 March: Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals COP15 summit | Campo Grande, Brazil
- 23 March-2 April: Third session of the preparatory commission for the High Seas Treaty | New York
Cropped is researched and written by Dr Giuliana Viglione, Aruna Chandrasekhar, Daisy Dunne, Orla Dwyer and Yanine Quiroz.
Please send tips and feedback to cropped@carbonbrief.org
The post Cropped 11 March 2026: Iran water worries | Seabed-mining treaty progress | Women farmers and climate change appeared first on Carbon Brief.
The Paris Agreement’s official oversight body is set to decide this month how to deal with over 60 countries that have still not submitted updated national climate plans, over a year after the deadline.
Composed of 12 experts from different regions of the world, the little-known Paris Agreement Implementation and Compliance Committee (PAICC) is tasked with ensuring that nations respect their obligations under the landmark 2015 climate accord.
The Paris Agreement requires each signatory government to submit climate plans known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs), setting out how they will help limit global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.
Governments also agreed in Paris that NDCs should be updated every five years and submitted 9–12 months before the next UN climate summit. For COP30, that deadline was 10 February 2025. But, over a year after that deadline, sixty-two countries have not yet produced an updated NDC including significant emitters like India, Vietnam, Argentina and Egypt.
PAICC cannot punish countries, but it can publicly reprimand them for their failure to file new NDCs and other transparency reports and ask them to explain themselves.
Concern over lack of responses
After the overwhelming majority of nations missed the February 2025 deadline to submit their NDCs, PAICC opened over 170 separate cases to engage with governments on why they had not yet issued a climate plan and what steps they were taking to address the delay. Cases are closed once countries submit their NDCs.
While the majority of countries responded to the panel’s enquiries, the PAICC’s annual report said that over 45 nations had failed to provide any information by October 2025. This raised the committee’s concern.
-
China eases climate target but clean energy could still cut emissions, experts say
Beijing’s new five-year economic plan leaves questions unanswered on growing coal power fleet -
New summit in Colombia seeks to revive stalled UN talks on fossil fuel transition
Colombia will host the first conference on transitioning away from fossil fuels, after more than 80 countries pushed at COP30 for an end to coal, oil and gas -
Paris agreement’s police force begins with rebuke to Vatican
The Pope’s home state has not yet issued a climate plan, which is against the rules of the Paris Agreement it ratified last year
A PAICC member who did not wish to be named told Climate Home News that, while efforts to maintain an open dialogue will continue, the committee will now also discuss how to proceed further with countries that remain out of step with their commitments under the Paris Agreement. The committee will hold a meeting in the German city of Bonn, home to the UN climate change body, between 24-27 March.
“This is a new era, so every step we take we do it for the first time,” they said, adding that the actions the committee will take may vary from country to country, taking into account their individual circumstances.
Deciding next steps
Governments defined the committee’s mandate at COP24 in Katowice, Poland, in 2018 and produced a list of “appropriate measures” it can take to promote compliance with the Paris Agreement. Those include helping countries access technical help or finance, recommending the development of an action plan or “issuing findings of fact” when a country fails to submit an NDC.
The PAICC member said the committee still needs to determine exactly what the last option means in practice, but it will likely take the form of a public statement identifying countries that have failed to comply. The panel could potentially take other actions beyond those listed in its mandate as long as they are not punitive or adversarial.
“The legal obligations [of the Paris Agreement] are few and far between, so it is even more important to keep tabs on whether countries respect them,” the PAICC member added.
Andreas Sieber, head of political strategy at campaigning group 350.org, said national climate plans are “the currency of the Paris Agreement and how the world tracks progress and how countries plan their transitions”.
“Countries, especially the largest emitters, must honour their obligations under the Paris Agreement and submit credible NDCs,” he told Climate Home News, adding that the same applies to wealthy nations that have pledged climate finance.
Many reasons for delays
Many of the governments that have not yet submitted NDCs are low-emitting small or poorer nations, especially in Africa. But major economies that have not issued an updated climate plan – some of which also have energy transition deals with donors – include Egypt, the Philippines and Vietnam.
Countries without a new NDC contribute to 22% of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to data compiled by ClimateWatch.
In their discussions with PAICC over the past year, countries have cited a range of reasons for the delays, including financial constraints, technical challenges, limited data, changes in government, political instability and armed conflicts, according to the committee’s annual report.
India is the largest emitter without an NDC. At COP30 last November, the Indian government said that it would submit its climate plan “on time”, with environment minister Bhupender Yadav telling reporters it would be delivered “by December”. But that self-imposed deadline was not met.
The right-wing government of Argentina, which has considered leaving the Paris Agreement, unveiled caps on the country’s emissions for 2030 and 2035 in an online event on November 3, but has yet to formalise those targets in an NDC.
Undersecretary of the Environment Fernando Brom told Climate Home News that the country would present its NDC during the first week of COP30. That did not happen, although Argentinian negotiators participated in the climate summit.
Some local experts have pointed to the trade deal signed with the US in November as one of the reasons for the delay in submitting the NDC, while others cited the government’s disinterest in the climate agenda.
In January, the Vietnamese government said it was still working on the draft of its NDC, while the Philippines’ government has organised consultation events on its new NDC but has not indicated when it would be released.
The post Paris Agreement watchdog weighs action against countries missing climate plan appeared first on Climate Home News.
Paris Agreement watchdog weighs action against countries missing climate plan
Unstable housing and job loss are key drivers of psychological distress among survivors of the 2023 wildfires, a new study finds. The ripple effects reach across Maui.
On the day of one of the deadliest natural disasters in Hawaii’s history, Blake Kekoa Ramelb watched his hometown go up in flames.
Maui’s Mental Health Crisis Goes Far Beyond the Wildfire Burn Zone
Cropped 11 March 2026: Iran water worries | Seabed-mining treaty progress | Women farmers and climate change
Ditch the Plastic Pouf: Try This All-Natural Shower Sponge Instead
China’s New 2030 Climate Playbook and What It Means for the EV Market
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago
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