MENU

Social Channels

SEARCH ARCHIVE

Daily Briefing |

TODAY'S CLIMATE AND ENERGY HEADLINES

Briefing date 08.12.2022
First UK coal mine in decades approved despite climate concerns

Expert analysis direct to your inbox.

Every weekday morning, in time for your morning coffee, Carbon Brief sends out a free email known as the “Daily Briefing” to thousands of subscribers around the world. The email is a digest of the past 24 hours of media coverage related to climate change and energy, as well as our pick of the key studies published in peer-reviewed journals.

Sign up here.

News.

First UK coal mine in decades approved despite climate concerns
BBC News Read Article

There is widespread global coverage of the news that UK “levelling-up” secretary Michael Gove has approved the first new coal mine in the country for 30 years, with BBC News saying the decision came “despite concern about its climate impacts among Conservative MPs and experts”. The broadcaster says the proposed mine at Whitehaven in Cumbria “would dig up coking coal for steel production in the UK and across the world”. It quotes Lord Deben, the chair of the government’s advisory Climate Change Committee, saying the decision to approve the mine is “absolutely indefensible”, adding “[he] said its approval would damage the UK’s leadership on climate change”. The article continues: “The secretary of state agrees with the assessment [of the planning inspector who recommended the mine be approved] that the effects of the development on carbon emissions ‘would be relatively neutral and not significant’.” It adds: “The local council had granted permission to dig for coking coal until 2049, with the mine expected to create about 500 jobs. But the two companies that still make steel using coal in the UK – British Steel and Tata – say they plan to move to lower carbon production methods. Steel industry expert Chris McDonald estimates that, at best, they will use less than 10% of the output of the mine and, by the mid-2030s, none at all. That means the new mine will export virtually all the coal it produces.”

The Financial Times says the decision to approve the mine “prompt[ed] a storm of protest from green groups and MPs across the political spectrum”. It says the “controversial decision…has been delayed several times”. The paper quotes the government approval letter saying: “This coal will be used for the production of steel and would otherwise need to be imported…The mine seeks to be net-zero in its operations and is expected to contribute to local employment and the wider economy.” It quotes the former head of British Steel saying the approval was “completely unnecessary” and adding: “The British steel industry needs green investment in electric arc furnaces and hydrogen.” Reuters reports: “The majority of the coal produced is expected to be exported to Europe. Planning documents show that more than 80% of the coal the mine will produce annually is forecast to, after five years, be sent to an export terminal on England’s east coast.” The newswire quotes Prof Paul Ekins saying: “Approving it also trashes the UK’s reputation as a global leader on climate action and opens it up to well justified charges of hypocrisy – telling other countries to ditch coal while not doing so itself.”

The Guardian says in a frontpage story that the project will produce nearly 3m tonnes of coal and “an estimated 400,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions a year”. Another Guardian article says “already moves have begun to challenge the decision before construction work can start”. It reports: “Climate campaigners are examining the decision with a view to a legal challenge, based on the UK’s national and international legally binding climate commitments. The Guardian understands that lawyers working for NGOs will be looking for grounds to bring a high court claim against the planning permission. If such a claim were to succeed, the court could strike down the government’s decision and send it back to ministers to redetermine.” The paper adds: “Another threat to the mine’s future is the general election that must take place within the next two years. Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Green party have all made clear their opposition to the new mine.”

The TimesCNNChannel 4ITV NewsBusinessGreen, the Independent‘s digital frontpage, the Daily Telegraph and Politico all have the story. The Guardian interviews locals about the mine, reporting that they are “divided” on the project. The Press Association has a Q&A on the project, including “why is it so controversial?” There is also widespread comment and analysis of the decision (see below).

Glencore ditches plans for $1.3bn Australian coal mine
Reuters Read Article

Mining firm Glencore has scrapped plans to invest £1.3bn in a new coal mine in Queensland, Reuters reports, saying it cited “global uncertainties and a hike in state royalties”. The newswire continues: “Its decision comes against a backdrop of uncertainty over the speed of global decarbonisation and as project finance has become harder to find for greenfield coal mines – those that are not expansions of existing projects.” The Australian Associated Press also has the story, noting that Glencore is “Australia’s largest coal producer”. The newswire quotes the firm saying in a statement that the decision fit with its “commitment to a responsibly managed decline of our global coal business and our ambition of being a net-zero total emissions business by 2050”.

In other news from Australia, the Financial Times reports: “Mining magnate Andrew Forrest becomes Australia’s largest renewables player.” It says: “Billionaire buys country’s biggest wind power company for $2.7bn in bid to lead energy transition.” Separately, the Guardian reports: “Australia must adopt a ‘wartime mobilisation’ response to the climate emergency, former security leaders have told a review of the country’s defence policy.”

Reverse nature's decline or there is no future – UN
BBC News Read Article

UN biodiversity chief Elizabeth Maruma Mrema has called the COP15 talks currently taking place in Montreal, Canada, the “last chance” to halt loss of nature, BBC News reports. It says “she is worried about the amount of work still needed for the 196 countries to reach an agreement”. Forbes says the talks officially began yesterday: “Governments meet this week for COP15 in Montreal to discuss a new global deal to protect at least 30% of land, inland waters, and oceans by 2030.” Reuters reports: “Businesses want COP15 nature summit to deliver clarity.” BusinessGreen also has the story. (See Carbon Brief’s COP15 coverage via our Nature section.)

Heavy rains trigger floods in Portugal's capital, one dead
Reuters Read Article

Heavy rains have caused floods in the capital of Portugal, Lisbon, Reuters reports, adding that at least one person has been killed. It quotes Lisbon’s mayor Carlos Moedas saying: “These changes (due to global warming) are terrible…We have to be prepared.”

Meanwhile, another Reuters article reports: “India saw a big jump in extreme weather events such as heatwaves and lightning strikes this year and related deaths rose to their highest in three years, government data showed on Wednesday, with scientists blaming climate change for the heavy toll.” It adds: “The World Health Organization says that from 1998-2017, more than 166,000 people died due to heatwaves globally. It says that between 2030 and 2050, climate change is expected to cause about 250,000 additional deaths per year from malnutrition, malaria, diarrhoea and heat stress.” Elsewhere, the Guardian reports: “Rising temperatures driven by climate breakdown are causing distress to the foetuses of pregnant farmers, who are among the worst affected by global heating.”

EU agrees law to make airlines pay more to pollute
Reuters Read Article

EU member states and the European Parliament have agreed a deal to increase the carbon prices faced by airlines within Europe, Reuters reports. It explains: “Airlines running flights within Europe currently have to submit permits from the EU’s carbon market to cover their carbon dioxide emissions, but the EU gives them most of those permits for free. That is set to change under the law agreed by negotiators from EU countries and the European Parliament, which would phase out those free permits by 2026. Free permits would be cut by 25% in 2024 and 50% in 2025.”

Separately, Reuters reports calls from more than 40 firms including Siemens, Maersk and Unilever for an EU mandate that all new freight trucks sales should be zero-emissions by 2035. It says the EU has already proposed an effective ban on fossil-fuel passenger cars by the same date. Climate Home News reports: “EU agrees law to crack down on deforestation in supply chains.”

US floats new steel, aluminum tariffs based on carbon emissions
Reuters Read Article

US officials are proposing new carbon tariffs on imports of steel and aluminium, Reuters reports, citing “two people familiar with the plan”. It explains: “The proposal from the US Trade Representative’s office to be negotiated with the European Union would create a global ‘club’ of market-oriented countries seeking to reduce carbon emissions. The plan would set ‘emissions intensity’ standards for the production of specific steel and aluminium and products, according to a document describing the plan seen by Reuters.” The New York Times also has the story, reporting: “A concept paper sent to the EU suggests a new trade approach to tax metal made with higher carbon emissions in countries like China.”

In other US news, Reuters reports: “White House seeks to cut federal building emissions 30% by 2030.” Another Reuters article says an auction for rights to develop offshore wind off the coast of California “drew $757m in hig

US climate envoy Kerry hails holding COP28 conference in OPEC member UAE
Reuters Read Article

The decision to hold next year’s COP28 climate summit in the United Arab Emirates, a member of oil producers’ cartel OPEC, has been welcomed by US climate envoy John Kerry in an interview with Reuters. It quotes him saying: “I think it’s very exciting that the UAE is going to host COP and it’s so important that you have an oil and gas producing nation step up and say we understand the challenge of the climate crisis.” The newswire reports: “[Kerry] said his illness [due to Covid at COP27] cut short what he had hoped could be a US-China joint announcement on reducing methane emissions from the world’s two biggest emitters of the powerful greenhouse gas.” Separately, the Guardian reports: “If Qatar exploits all its [gas] reserves it will add 50bn metric tons of CO2 to atmosphere, more than entire annual emissions of whole world.”

In other COP-related news, Reuters reports the comments of German climate envoy Jennifer Morgan saying that the loss-and-damage fund agreed at COP27 would take two years to set up. The Associated Press reports: “Kerry said last month’s international global warming talks didn’t do enough to speed up cuts in emissions of heat-trapping gases.” Meanwhile, the New York Times says Kerry “plans to meet with [president Joe] Biden to discuss his future as climate envoy”.

Chinese premier meets Russian counterpart on cooperation
Xinhua Read Article

Chinese premier Li Keqiang has expressed China’s “willingness to maintain high-level exchanges, strengthen exchanges and cooperation in various fields with Russia, and deepen the China-Russia comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination”, reports state news agency Xinhua. Another Xinhua article says that with “opposition” from Russia, the price cap on Russian oil exports agreed this week by the US and EU could “trigger growing instability in the market, slowing oil production and even further exacerbating Europe’s pain inflicted by the energy crisis and soaring inflation”, citing observers. China Energy News, citing a report by Xinhua, notes that president Xi Jinping mentioned energy at the Politburo meeting on Tuesday. Xi said that “food security, energy security and people’s livelihood are effectively guaranteed” in 2022, the state-run industry newspaper notes.

Meanwhile, CNN writes that Xi landed in the Saudi Arabian capital Riyadh on Wednesday for a “multiple-day visit”, citing a report by Xinhua, adding that the visit came “amid frayed ties between the two countries and the US”. Shaojin Chai, an assistant professor at the University of Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates, is quoted saying: “They [Saudi Arabia and China] become closer as both sides need each other in many areas: energy transition, economic diversification, defense capacity building for KSA and climate change, to name just a few”, adding that “the diversification of security risk entails KSA including rising China in its hedge”.

Finally, Qin Gang, China’s top envoy to the US, said on Tuesday at the US-China Business Council that concerns about “national security” should not stand in the way of |economic growth and efforts to improve people’s lives in both countries”, the state-run newspaper China Daily notes. China’s special envoy for climate change Xie Zhenhua, speaking via video from Beijing, said the two countries have “different national conditions and are at different stages of development”, but both are “pursuing the most effective use of resources and energy, speeding up the transition toward green development and innovation, and promoting global climate governance”, the article adds.

Comment.

Cumbrian coal mine is a pointless distraction
Ben Marlow, The Daily Telegraph Read Article

Reacting to the government’s decision to approve the first new coal mine in the UK for 30 years in the Daily Telegraph, chief city commentator Ben Marlow writes: “The case for the Woodhouse Colliery near Whitehaven to be allowed to start production isn’t just flimsy, it’s non-existent.” He continues: “The project is being cheered on by a clutch of Tory backbenchers on the basis that it will ease Britain’s reliance on overseas coal imports, including from hostile foreign regimes…Yet, these claims, as rousing as they might be in the current climate, simply don’t stand up to basic scrutiny. 85% of what comes out of the pit is expected to be exported, while there are serious doubts about domestic demand for the remaining 15%. British Steel, one of the country’s two primary steel makers, has ruled out using the coal due to its sulphur content, while experts believe that Tata Steel would only want small amounts of what is produced. Therefore the idea that the mine could have a meaningful impact on Britain’s energy policy is laughable.”

For the i newspaper, chief political commentator Paul Waugh writes under the headline: “Michael Gove’s approval of a new coal mine is a backwards step for our climate and steel industry.” He says: “[T]he claim that home-produced coking coal will help the British steel industry…doesn’t really survive much scrutiny.” He explains: “There are only two potential customers for this coal in the UK: Tata Steel and British Steel. Yet Chris McDonald, chief executive of the Materials Processing Institute, said earlier this year: ‘British Steel have said they cannot use the coal from this mine because the sulphur levels are too high. Tata Steel have said if the coal were available, then they may or may not use a small amount. There isn’t anyone in the steel industry who’s calling for the mine.’” Waugh adds: “[D]espite the coal mine approval, [prime minister Rishi] Sunak could show he really was a forward-thinking premier by shifting the debate towards more environmentally friendly steel production. Replacing coking coal with hydrogen to produce primary steel and using electricity to produce recycled steel is seen by the industry as its future. The clever policy, and politics, would be to announce new investment in clean steel technology. Germany and Sweden have their own pilots, but the UK could catch up and overtake them.” For the Independent, Harry Cockburn says the new mine “doesn’t make sense to anyone except Conservatives still in thrall to the last dirty coins of fossil fuel capitalism”. In the Guardian, environment editor Fiona Harvey writes under the headline: “Cumbria coalmine approval shows Sunak does not care if he is seen as green.” Also in the Guardian, Green MP Caroline Lucas writes: “The staggering hypocrisy of demanding other countries phase down coal, just when we’re phasing it back in again, sends a truly terrible message to global south countries and marks this decision as a climate crime against humanity.”

An editorial in the Daily Mail, meanwhile, with the subheading “the new king coal”, says the government “has shown commendable spine to approve a new coal mine in Cumbria”. It adds that this “is a sensible decision”. The paper continues: “The green lobby has, predictably, erupted in fury. But how would the campaigners prefer we meet our domestic needs? The alternative – transporting coal halfway around the world in emission-belching freighters – is infinitely worse.” (As noted above, there are doubts over whether UK steelmakers would use the coal produced at the proposed new mine in Cumbria.) Also in the Daily Mail, Royal columnist Robert Hardman writes under the headline: “Dirty? No, this new colliery will be a proud town’s ray of sunshine.”

Ron DeSantis’s war on woke puts BlackRock on the frontline
Editorial, Financial Times Read Article

An editorial in the Financial Times begins: “Woke Inc is under attack. Battle lines have been drawn in America’s latest culture war, with Ron DeSantis, Florida’s governor, its general. His most recent salvo against what he describes as ‘woke capitalism’ was fired against BlackRock, the world’s biggest money manager.” It says “Florida pledged this month to pull as much as $2bn in long-term securities and short-term funds from BlackRock…The moves are pure political theatre. Regardless, for BlackRock, they have created a policy nightmare and a patchwork of liability across the US, let alone the rest of the world. There are signs that such posturing is having its desired effect. Vanguard, a rival to BlackRock, announced on Wednesday that it is leaving the financial alliance that aims to tackle climate change and which has attracted Republican ire.” The piece concludes: “There are obvious issues with ESG, which has grown to be a $40tn industry where greenwashing and other cynical practices have emerged. But sustainable investing’s tension with money managers’ fiduciary duty is less clear cut. BlackRock argues that ignoring climate change risks investments over the long term. It is an argument that may need to be settled in court. Until then, in the manufactured war between big business and politics, it is ordinary pension holders who are caught in the crossfire.”

Meanwhile, the Hill reports: “An activist investment firm is calling on BlackRock’s chief executive to resign over his ‘apparent hypocrisy’ in the use of sustainability goals.” Reuters reports: “Vanguard Group Inc is pulling out of a major investment-industry initiative on tackling climate change, the world’s biggest mutual fund manager said on Wednesday, explaining it wants to demonstrate independence and clarify its views for investors. Top investors including Pennsylvania-based Vanguard, face mounting pressure from Republican US politicians over their use of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in picking and managing securities.” The Financial Times reports: “Vanguard is pulling out of the main financial alliance on tackling climate change at a time when Republicans in the US have stepped up their attacks on financial institutions that they say are hostile to fossil fuels.” Another Financial Times article reports: “The world’s largest sovereign wealth fund will become a more vocal shareholder and plans to vote against companies that fail to set a net zero emissions target, overpay their top leaders, or do not have sufficiently diverse boards.”

Blackouts will trigger a people’s revolt against the new eco-tyranny
Allister Heath, The Daily Telegraph Read Article

In another breathless column for the Daily Telegraph trailed on the paper’s frontpage, climate-sceptic Sunday Telegraph editor Allister Heath writes: “We will soon find out whether we can keep the lights and heating on, or whether Britain is about to be plunged into a nightmare of energy rationing, rolling blackouts, three-day weeks and untold human misery…Public rage if and when it all goes wrong will make Brexit look like a walk in the park.” Elsewhere in the Daily Telegraph, another climate-sceptic columnist, Ross Clark, criticises the decision to end the de-facto ban on onshore wind in England: “[Rishi] Sunak’s government has miscalculated in giving in to Tory eco rebels. Green energy is popular in theory, but not in practice.” Clark admits: “A YouGov poll published at the weekend claimed that 64% of Tory voters would support the construction of a wind farm ‘near’ their home, with only 30% against.” [Indeed, polls consistently show wide popular support for onshore wind among the general public, those living near windfarms and Conservative voters.] Clark writes: “One of the reasons gas power seems so expensive at the moment is that the market has to pay through the nose to keep gas power stations on standby for use at short notice. If we used gas power to generate a steady baseload as we used to do it would be a lot cheaper per kWh.” [If the UK replaced its windfarms and other sources of renewable energy with gas power, demand at gas-fired power stations would be more than twice as high and net gas imports would rise by more than 50%. This would increase gas prices.]

Meanwhile, columnist Donnachadh McCarthy writes in the Independent that the de facto ban on onshore wind in England was “the insane poster boy for the democratic, economic and climate shambles of current UK climate policy”. He continues: “Wind is the cheapest form of electricity on the market, around nine times cheaper than the current price of electricity generated in gas-fired power stations. The Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) estimates that without the ban, onshore wind could have electrically powered another 1.5 million homes this winter, cutting dependence on soaring fossil gas markets and £800m from consumer bills.” For the Daily Telegraph, Matt Ridley, the climate-sceptic former Conservative hereditary peer who was chair of Northern Rock when it collapsed a decade ago and whose inherited estate has earned income from coal mining, writes: “The Tory party’s move to fall back in love with wind energy, despite its manifest disadvantages of cost, unreliability and inefficient use of land, is a death wish.” [Windfarms are widely acknowledged to be the cheapest way to generate electricity in the UK.]

In other comment, Bloomberg Opinion’s Javier Blas “looks at how the latest spike in European power prices stokes concerns about the continent’s industrial backbone”. He writes: “The continent is facing a triple whammy of cold, windless weather; expensive natural gas and coal because of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine; and nuclear outages in France and Sweden. As a result, electricity markets are extremely tight, with the possibility of national grids calling on consumers to reduce demand in the next few days, particularly if wind speeds fall.” The Times reports: “Electricity prices are forecast to soar in the coming days as cold weather and low wind speeds put Britain’s power system to the test.” Bloomberg reports: “European Union leaders are poised to urge stronger coordination among member states to prepare for the next winter as the bloc struggles to cope with a cut in natural gas supply from Russia that has triggered a jump in energy prices.”

Science.

Plastic futures and their CO2 emissions
Nature Read Article

Global production of plastics are already responsible for 4.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions, a new study says, and could almost triple by 2100. The researchers analyse three alternative CO2 emission-mitigation pathways for the global plastics sector until 2100, covering the entire life cycle from production to waste management. If no new policies are implemented, the researchers “project a doubling of global plastic demand by 2050 and more than a tripling by 2100, with an almost equivalent increase in CO2 emissions”. However, “circular bioeconomy approach combining recycling with higher biomass use could ultimately turn the sector into a net carbon sink, while at the same time phasing out landfilling and reducing resource consumption”, the authors find. An accompanying News & Views article says that “it seems plausible that plastics could become a carbon sink in future”, but this “hinges mainly on society’s ability to create a socioeconomic and political landscape that facilitates the transition, rather than on the development of necessary technologies”.

Climate change adaptation responses among riparian settlements: A case study from Bangladesh
PLOS ONE Read Article

A new study assesses how rural communities in the Sundarbans in Bangladesh – the world’s most extensive mangrove forest – are adapting to climate change. Using past research and empirical case studies, the researchers find that “many households have adopted several autonomous reactive adaptation strategies rather than planned ones” to cope with storm surges, rising sea levels, seawater intrusion and riverbank erosion. The main barriers to adaptation include “the high cost of improved crop varieties, inadequate agricultural extension services, and a lack of knowledge on effective climate adaptation”, the authors say. They note that “government organisations and NGOs provide less than optimal technical and financial support to households for planned and anticipatory adaptive responses”.

Expert analysis direct to your inbox.

Get a round-up of all the important articles and papers selected by Carbon Brief by email. Find out more about our newsletters here.