Thread by @7Kiwi

The Government is about to approve the 7th Carbon Budget (CB7) on the basis of an Impact Assessment that its own numbers show is worse than a cheaper alternative. Is it time to put Ed Miliband in the dock and test his arguments in a fair judicial review? A thread 🧵(1/11)

The IA compares three options. The “Looser Option” (84% cut) delivers a higher Net Present Value (£905bn) and better benefit-cost ratio (2.3) than the recommended 87% Option 2 (£865bn, BCR 2.1). Yet Ed Miliband chose Option 2 anyway. (2/11)

This looks like an irrational decision. The Minister’s own evidence favours the cheaper, looser target — but he overruled it with vague claims about “transformational change”. Classic Wednesbury unreasonableness territory? (3/11)

The biggest “benefits” in the IA come from carbon savings valued at up to £679/tCO2e. These prices are derived from the very targets they’re trying to justify. Circular reasoning that inflates the benefits dramatically. (4/11)

All the real costs of CB7 fall on UK bill-payers and taxpayers. The vast majority of the claimed benefits are notional global carbon savings. The IA fails to properly weigh who pays versus who supposedly benefits. (5/11)

UK territorial emissions are falling, but global emissions keep rising. Much of our “success” has come from offshoring heavy industry. CB7’s deeper cuts risk accelerating this without delivering real global reductions. (6/11)

The Government’s pathway relies on 70-80 MtCO2e of engineered removals by 2050 — more than double the CCC’s estimate. This depends heavily on unproven, expensive tech like CCUS, DACCS and BECCS at massive scale. (7/11)

Many CCUS and BECCS projects worldwide are being cancelled as uneconomic. The IA itself admits these technologies are immature and high-risk. Yet the entire budget rests on them working perfectly. (8/11)

The IA ducks proper analysis of impacts on families, fuel poverty, and businesses — calling it a “level-setting” decision. This looks like a breach of the duty to properly assess effects on UK society before locking in the target. (9/11)

It questionable whether the legally binding 7th carbon budget can be approved based on such dodgy foundations. It is surely time to put Ed Miliband in the dock and test his arguments in a fair judicial review. (10/11)

If you enjoyed this thread, please like and share. You can sign up for free to read the full article on the link below: (11/11)
open.substack.com/pub/davidturve…

Hi @threadreaderapp unroll please.