MENU

Social Channels

SEARCH ARCHIVE

Daily Briefing |

TODAY'S CLIMATE AND ENERGY HEADLINES

Briefing date 30.03.2023
Push to build turbines and ditch gas in dash for energy security

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.

Powering up Britain: Push to build turbines and ditch gas in dash for energy security
The Times Read Article

There is widespread coverage across the UK press of the government’s new “Powering up Britain” set of policy announcements. The Times writes: “The government will extend its £5,000 grants for households to ditch polluting gas boilers and will move to speed up planning bottlenecks for offshore wind farms, under plans to boost energy security.

“Launching the Powering up Britain package today, ministers will attend a nuclear fusion research project near Oxford and spell out proposals for small nuclear plants, carbon capture schemes, electric car charging points and insulating homes, among other measures.

“The controversial Rosebank oil and gas field is also expected to clear a key regulatory hurdle today, but not yet receive final approval…In an effort to spur more homes to ditch fossil fuels, the boiler upgrade scheme, which offers homes £5,000 for heat pumps running on electricity, will be extended from 2025 to 2028. The higher price of electricity will be tackled by a consultation to shift green levies off electricity and on to gas bills.” BBC News says there are dozens of measures in the plans, which run to 1,000 pages, covering energy efficiency in domestic properties to large infrastructure projects. (It is important to note that the media has not yet seen all the details in full as the documents have only just started to be published online by the government. It is expected to do so in full later today. All the reporting is based on a press release, leaks and briefings.) BBC News adds: “[Today’s release of documents] also contains a detailed outline of how the UK will achieve its climate targets, after the High Court ruled last July that the original net-zero plan was not detailed enough to show how the UK would reduce its emissions. But Labour and experts have said that most of these measures have already been announced.”  Bloomberg says, overall, the new policies “show little in the way of new spending”, adding that “any meaningful funding could come in the autumn budget”. Politico says that “[prime minister Rishi] Sunak and [energy secretary Grant] Shapps are undoubtedly conscious of growing mutterings of discontent on Conservative backbenches about the UK’s net-zero targets, even as polling shows the British public overwhelmingly supports decarbonisation measures”.

The Guardian leads its frontpage coverage with a story headlined: “Government gambles on carbon capture and storage tech despite scientists’ doubts.” It says: “The UK government will defy scientific doubts to place a massive bet on technology to capture and store carbon dioxide in undersea caverns, to enable an expansion of oil and gas in the North Sea…Shapps said the continued production of oil and gas in the North Sea was still necessary, and that the UK had a geological advantage in being able to store most of the carbon likely to be produced in Europe for the next 250 years in the large caverns underneath the North Sea.” The Daily Telegraph chooses to focus its frontpage splash on plans to shift government levies from electricity bills onto gas bills, telling its readers that “households are to be penalised if they do not switch away from gas”. It adds: “Ministers are planning to overhaul subsidy rules so gas is relatively less attractive compared to electricity in an attempt to drive the uptake of green power and hasten the end of fossil fuels. The proposals risk forcing household gas bills up by as much as £100 a year, while electricity costs will come down.” The Financial Times highlights that Shapps has “vowed” to “press ahead with a UK ban on sale of new petrol and diesel cars”, despite the European Union agreeing this week to an exemption for vehicles powered by so-called “e-fuels”. The newspaper says: “Shapps said the government was sticking with its ‘path’ for a transition to electric vehicles, which would phase out hybrid vehicles from 2035 and has no exemption for e-fuels. ‘That position remains the same,’ he told reporters. ‘We’ve always been more forward-leaning on this stuff than the EU,’ he added. The UK car industry had also been expecting the government to announce the details of a new ‘zero emissions mandate’ on Thursday, which would compel them to sell a certain proportion of electric vehicles from the start of 2024. But instead, officials said the government planned to launch another consultation on the mandate later this week to ‘provide certainty to the sector’.” The Daily Telegraph notes that, despite calls from some Conservative MPs to follow the EU’s move, Shapps has told reporters: “We’ll always have a look at what’s developing elsewhere. But our policy doesn’t change as a result. This is not a change of policy. We’re sticking with our plans. We are not in Europe, we don’t have to do what Europe does on this stuff. We’ve always been more forward-leaning on this than the EU. We believe that the future is by and large the EV or at least zero carbon – it could be a hydrogen vehicle out the other end.” Relatedly, another Daily Telegraph article says “Northern Ireland will become a backdoor into Britain for non-electric cars after the UK bans petrol and diesel engines because of Rishi Sunak’s new Brexit deal, Tories and unionists have said”.

Meanwhile, the Times on its frontpage says that the UK chancellor Jeremy Hunt has accused President Biden of leading a “distortive” global subsidy race with his $400bn green investment package, known as the Inflation Reduction Act. Writing in the Times, Hunt says: “Our approach will be different – and better. We are not going toe-to-toe with our friends and allies in some distortive global subsidy race. With the threat of protectionism creeping its way back into the world economy, the long-term solution is not subsidy but security. Yes, we will continue to back industries of the future, however, we will target public funding in a strategic way in the areas where the UK has a clear competitive advantage. That’s why we are investing £30bn to support our green industrial revolution, with an additional £6bn for energy efficiency, and up to £20bn for carbon capture, utilisation and storage. While taxpayer support is important to kick-start new industries, we need to leverage billions more in private capital. In a sense, this is ‘the British way’. Not massively distortive subsidies, but fantastic science, innovation-rich companies and a pro-growth regulatory regime – powered by private capital from our global financial centre. This tried and tested model works. That is why we are clearing the path so that money that sits in the City of London can be used to fund our green industrial revolution. Our updated Green Finance Strategy, published today, will unlock billions of private capital for energy security and clean growth.” The Evening Standard and Independent both report that the UK will not lay out its response to US and EU green industrial strategies until the autumn – a move that has been described by Labour’s shadow climate secretary Ed Miliband as “absolutely shameful”. However, the Financial Times notes: “Britain and the EU are boosting coordination of efforts to tackle climate change and respond to a massive US green subsidy programme, in a sign of warming relations between the two sides. Rishi Sunak, prime minister, said this week that Britain and the EU could coordinate moves on a new carbon border tax that would place a levy on imported carbon-intensive goods arriving in Europe. [Today], the government will launch a consultation on whether to introduce a UK ‘carbon border adjustment mechanism’ as part of a broader net-zero strategy.” In other coverage of the plans, Bloomberg reports that shares in power firm Drax have “dropped the most in 10 months” after its bioenergy with carbon capture and storage project was “rejected” by the UK government, failing to get “so-called Track 1 status”.

Finally, BBC News reports that senior cross-party MPs have warned that the UK is at risk of losing jobs and investment in the “net-zero race”. And the Press Association carries the views of Friends of the Earth, which warns that the government is potentially facing more legal action after releasing a “lacklustre” set of climate policies.

Top UN court to assess countries’ climate obligations after resolution passes
Financial Times Read Article

The International Court of Justice will assess the legal obligations of states to protect current and future generations from climate change after countries yesterday backed a resolution at the UN, reports the Financial Times. The newspaper continues: “The [forthcoming] advisory opinion of the ICJ, the UN’s top legal body, could increase the risk of litigation for countries failing to adhere to existing international laws and treaties, while providing guidance to governments about what they must do to defend human rights and the environment from climate harm. Countries approved the resolution by consensus without a vote, following a years-long campaign led by Vanuatu, the Pacific island nation that is at risk from rising sea levels. More than 100 nations co-sponsored the resolution but the US and China – the world’s largest two annual emitters – did not.” The Guardian says the UN resolution has been hailed as a “historic victory for climate justice”. It quotes Ishmael Kalsakau, prime minister of Vanuatu: “Today we have witnessed a win for climate justice of epic proportions. Today’s historic resolution is the beginning of a new era in multilateral climate cooperation, one that is more fully focused on upholding the rule of international law and an era that places human rights and intergenerational equity at the forefront of climate decision-making.” BBC News explains that “the International Court of Justice will now prepare an advisory opinion that could be cited in climate court cases”, adding: “The idea for the legal opinion was originally proposed by law students in Fiji four years ago…The resolution gained support from many countries because it was carefully crafted to avoid blaming the countries like the US and China that have contributed most to the warming gases that are driving up temperatures. Experts say that while the ICJ’s legal view would be non-binding, it could then be cited in climate court cases around the world.” Politico claims that the move by Vanuatu has been “freaking out the US and could unleash a cascade of lawsuits across the globe”. The New York Times says the “tiny Pacific island nation has pulled off the kind of diplomatic win that can elude global superpowers”. Climate Home News also covers the story.

European human rights court hears landmark climate lawsuits
Climate Home News Read Article

Climate Home News says that, “after a pair of historic hearings, the future of European and international climate action is hanging on the decision of judges at the European Court of Human Rights”. It explains: “The two lawsuits, heard today in Strasbourg, accuse the governments of France and Switzerland of breaching the human rights of their citizens by not doing enough to cut national emissions. It is the first time climate change has come before the European Court of Human Rights, but is unlikely to be the last.” The lawsuits were filed by a former French mayor and a group of Swiss seniors, all of whom argue that their governments have breached their rights to life and to respect for private and family life under the European Convention on Human Rights. Climate Home News says campaigners claim the judgements could set a “pivotal” precedent for climate action, as they “could make states take more ambitious climate action as part of their human rights obligations”. Isabella Kaminski has also written a report on the story for the Guardian.

Climate change causing dangerous shift in Antarctic’s water flow
The Times Read Article

Several outlets cover a new study published in the journal Nature which, reports the Times, shows that “a dramatic shift in the flow of deep sea waters around Antarctica threatens to starve large parts of the world’s oceans of nutrients and oxygen within decades”. The newspaper adds: “The research focused on what is known as ‘overturning circulation’ – where enormous volumes of cold, dense water sink into the ocean depths close to the poles. This water, enriched with oxygen, carbon and nutrients, eventually returns to the upper ocean at lower latitudes where it sustains marine ecosystems. The mechanism was mentioned in the Hollywood film The Day After Tomorrow, where it collapsed in the North Atlantic due to climate change, leading to disaster. The new research looks at the equivalent system in the southern hemisphere, which has been the subject of far less study.” The Guardian quotes co-author Prof Matt England, of the Climate Change Research Centre at the University of New South Wales, who says the whole deep ocean current is heading for collapse on its current trajectory: “In the past, these circulations have taken more than 1,000 years or so to change, but this is happening over just a few decades. It’s way faster than we thought these circulations could slow down. We are talking about the possible long-term extinction of an iconic water mass.” Reuters highlights the study finding that “deep ocean water flows from the Antarctic could decline by 40% by 2050”. BBC News says the “study’s findings also suggest a slowdown in circulation would also mean the ocean could not absorb as much CO2 from the atmosphere as its upper layers became ‘stratified’”.

Boao 2023 highlights how financial incentives drive China's carbon-neutrality goals

Chinese officials have talked about “how the financial sector can facilitate the country’s ambitious goal of hitting carbon neutrality in 2060” at the Boao Forum for Asia (BFA) on Wednesday, reports CGTN. Yi Gang, governor of the People’s Bank of China (PBOC), the central bank, highlighted the need for both “carrots” and “sticks” to achieve the country’s “green goals”, the state news agency says, adding that he referred to financial incentives as “carrots” to spur market participation whereas “sticks” are carbon prices and carbon taxes. Through a PBOC “support tool”, commercial banks can apply for “low-cost funding” from the central bank “after the loans for carbon reductions are made”, the article adds.

Meanwhile, Xinhua reports that “officials and experts” from China and Northern Ireland have expressed their “desire to boost cooperation on new energy innovation, amid such challenges as climate change and biodiversity loss”. China’s UK ambassador Zheng Zeguang said yesterday at the China-UK/Northern Ireland Forum on New Energy Innovation that “green and low-carbon transformation” is “guiding countries as they upgrade their economic structures”, the state-controlled newswire notes. 

Nature has an article which says that US President Joe Biden’s “latest budget request outlined his vision for a US economy that is fueled by science, innovation and a bullish brand of industrial policy”. It adds that the request follows a “trio of historic funding bills that are already enabling investments in everything from climate and public-health technologies to domestic semiconductor manufacturing”, as well as activities “intended to promote scientific and economic competitiveness with China”. Fox News carries a comment piece by ​​Mike Gallagher, a Wisconsin Republican in the US House of Representatives, titled: “Biden’s climate agenda makes us dangerously dependent on China. Here’s what we must do.”

Comment.

The UK’s ‘green day’ has turned into a fossil fuel bonanza – dirty money powers the Sunak government
George Monbiot, The Guardian Read Article

Many UK publications carry comment reacting to the UK government’s raft of new energy announcements. In the Guardian, columnist George Monbiot writes: “Rather than announce the comprehensive change required to defend Earth systems, Rishi Sunak’s government will defend the fossil fuel industry from its competitors. It is likely to set no meaningful new green targets: instead, it will pump money into false solutions, such as carbon capture and storage, which has not materialised at scale for 20 years and never will. This fabled technology’s purpose is to justify fossil fuel extraction, on the grounds that ‘one day’ the carbon emissions could be buried. Sunak will also promote ‘sustainable aviation fuel’, though there is, and can be, no such thing. Worse still, he is likely to announce the licensing of a huge new oilfield: Rosebank. Its development, by the Norwegian state company Equinor, will be almost entirely subsidised by the UK’s tax relief for new oil and gas development. While Sunak will doubtless justify this generosity by claiming that it helps secure our future energy supplies, 80% of the oil the field produces is likely to be exported.” A column in the Times by chief leader writer Simon Nixon looks back to the Spring budget and says: “What was missing was action to address the most pressing long-term challenge: the dire state of Britain’s infrastructure and the urgent need to upgrade it to support growth and prepare the economy to meet new challenges, including climate change and the clean energy transition.” Nixon continues: “Britain risks falling further behind in future unless bold action is taken. After the Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act, which provides subsidies for clean energy investment, the European Union has finalised its own Net Zero Industry Act…The danger is that Britain will not only fail to meet its net-zero targets but will lose competitiveness internationally.”

In stark contrast, many other right-leaning national newspapers criticise the government for going too far with its net-zero policies. An editorial in the Daily Telegraph says: “Unachievable and costly moves such as compulsory solar panels and heat pumps need to be revisited. Above all, environmental policy needs to be realistic. A more nuanced debate both in the political sphere and in schools, where children are being scared witless by apocalyptic climate-change forecasts, would also not go amiss.” An editorial in the Sun asks: “Is energy secretary Grant Shapps alive to the insanity of trying to get to net-zero too quickly? We hope so.” It adds: “The Tories must be far more honest about the crippling limits and unaffordability of battery cars – and U-turn now. With the wider world pressing the brake on net-zero aspirations, the UK sticking to hastily-agreed, random ­targets is not a source of national pride. It’s economic and political suicide.” A Daily Mail editorial warns of a “mad dash” to net-zero: “No one denies global warming. But the UK is responsible for just 1% of global CO2 emissions. We need policies based on rational analysis, not the hysteria of climate alarmists. We need to ensure energy security and not impoverish ourselves. Our green dream must be the springboard for a leap forward – not a leap in the dark.”

The Daily Telegraph has a column by Allister Heath, the climate-sceptic editor of the Sunday Telegraph, in which he tries to claim that “net-zero is a Trojan horse for the total destruction of Western society”, adding: “The net-zero fanatics have already overreached. Our politicians must break with these extremists, or they will unleash a popular revolt that will make Brexit look like a gathering of Davos technocrats.” The Daily Telegraph also gives space to another climate-sceptic columnist, Ross Clark, under the headline: “The EU’s net-zero plan is in tatters – and not a moment too soon.” (His premise that the EU’s plans are in “tatters” comes after the bloc finalised plans for all new cars to be net-zero by 2035.) Similarly, the Daily Mail carries the view of Stephen Glover over a full page under the headline: “Having erased all memory of the diesel fiasco, are Britain’s eco obsessed elite about to inflict a new disaster with electric cars?”

Science.

Increasing extreme melt in northeast Greenland linked to foehn winds and atmospheric rivers
Nature Communications Read Article

The most intense melt events in north-east Greenland are driven by long, narrow bands of water vapour called “atmospheric rivers” and warm, dry downslope winds known as “foehn winds”. The authors combine regional climate models and a high-resolution atmospheric model simulations with “atmospheric river detection algorithms” and a “foehn identification procedure”. They find that near low-elevation outlet glaciers, 80-100% of extreme melt occurs during foehn conditions, while 50-75% occurs during atmospheric rivers. The paper finds that both events have become more frequent during the 21st century, adding that their influence on north-east Greenland extreme melt “will likely continue to grow as regional atmospheric moisture content increases with climate warming”.

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.