Read the already hugely influential Foundations essay over the weekend and it is really impressive. But I have some thoughts on the section on energy and decarbonisation... 🧵 ukfoundations.co Have put those thoughts in a new blog post, but the tl;dr is the idea renewables are inherently flawed and nuclear is the low cost and the logical path to clean power is highly contested, and that is putting it very mildly. businessgreen.com/blog-post/4363…

Absolutely damning post mortem on recent Conservative governments' climate efforts from @theCCCuk. Two years wasted that have undermined UK energy security, competitiveness, and climate action. And all for zero political gain. businessgreen.com/news/4336859/m… Lots more detail here, but this is the scale of the task Labour has been left with. businessgreen.com/analysis/43369…

Arguably the most granular analysis to date of future economic impacts from climate change estimates we will knock 19% off anticipated incomes by 2050 even if we slash emissions. If we don't we'll knock 60% off incomes and enter an era of global austerity. businessgreen.com/news-analysis/… This is against a baseline without climate impacts, so we would still be richer in 2050 than we are now. But development would be significanly slower and the authors reckon their estimates are conservative. Tipping points could make things far worse.

Fair play to the government, this is a good package of measures. More funding for energy efficiency, local authority-led schemes, a big boost for heat pumps, and new carbon border tariffs. This is what a transition away from fossil fuels looks like. businessgreen.com/news/4157529/n… (They'll be furious when they find out who oversaw the previous collapse in insulation rates, etc)

It’d be wrong to say it’s being underestimated, as I don’t doubt Number 10 fully comprehends how horrendously bad it is, but you could hardly make up a story more perfectly designed to achieve cut through than this concrete crisis. We had a birthday party for one of the boys today, and every single parent in attendance brought it up completely unprompted, all with a combination of disbelief and fear it could be about to ruin their autumn.

Four separate reports today all raising the alarm over worsening water insecurity, all of which beg the question 'if we can 'just adapt' to climate change, why aren't we?' BG+businessgreen.com/news-analysis/… Why are those who argue we should 'just adapt' to climate change so intensely relaxed at our failure to do so?

Every time I tweet something like this that is positive about net zero my mentions are now flooded with people (mostly blue ticks) telling me why its bullshit/a con/doomed to failure/a global conspiracy (thanks, Elon).

https://twitter.com/James_BG/status/1688852647372111872

What's interesting is the 'critiques' always fall into three categories:

1. The scientific 'analysis', which continues to insist climate change isn't happening, CO2 is good for us, etc. Am still waiting for someone to put their hypothesis up for peer review and win a Nobel.

Bit of a long read on today's @RockyMtnInst report on how clean tech deployment is going exponential and as such net zero is closer than you think. BG+businessgreen.com/news-analysis/… Now, as a cynical hack I am inclined to think this analysis is almost certainly overly optimistic. Clean tech deployment is happening faster than you think, but the idea it can keep on accelerating at the required pace feels Panglossian when there are so many obstacles. But...

Fully appreciate this is a howl into the void, but wouldn’t it be nice if those sources in both parties and their media outriders who are now attacking the net zero transition took the time to engage properly with the seriousness of the topic and the reams of underlying research? If you’re going to say going green is unaffordable or cost jobs, could you at least try to explain why the CCC and myriad other economic analyses of this transition say the opposite? How are they wrong?

If I thought ending new UK oil and gas projects was ‘economically illiterate’, I would simply explain why the IEA’s analysis showing new projects are incompatible with the global 1.5C goal is wrong and set out in detail how I’d make new projects compliant with net zero targets. If I wanted to accuse others of ‘an ideological vendetta against British energy independence’, I would simply not serve in a government that has spent the best part of a decade blocking onshore wind projects and cutting energy efficiency funding.

UK government now just actively pursuing plans to stifle productivity. theguardian.com/business/2023/… 'The department said it was looking for “value for money” and wifi was low on passenger’s priorities, particularly on shorter journeys.'

Low on passenger's priorities? Have they ever actually met a busy commuter.

If King Charles lives as long as his mother and father the next coronation should take place in an almost entirely net zero emission economy. For the first time in its history the UK should be powering itself without burning stuff. Almost every vehicle on the road should be electric, almost every building should have a heat pump, our homes should be warm, all our power should come from giant fleets of offshore wind farms, rooftop solar panels, nuclear power plants and back up hydrogen plants.

The Greens success in Suffolk is really interesting. For a long time the problem for the Party at a general election has been that it’s target seats for building on its success in Brighton have been places like Bristol and Norwich where they are competing with Labour. Come General Election time lots of prospective green voters are bound to break for Labour as they fear splitting the vote and aiding the Conservatives.

At @Forum4theFuture reception to celebrate @jonathonporritt. @sallyuren praises him as a man who was able to be a critical friend of businesses without being chucked out of the room. ‘A study in charm and candour - mostly’. Porritt describes part of Forum’s job as being ‘to put itself in harms way’. Stresses the importance of wrestling with the knottiest sustainability issues like palm oil and biomass.

Regret to inform you Rory Stewart is doing his regretful, slightly doomist thing on the net zero transition and climate again.
open.spotify.com/episode/3jcziB… Entirely legitimate concerns about mineral supply security, China, energy costs, etc, but I do find the glossing over of the upsides of the net zero transition and the absence of an alternative plan frustrating.

It is extremely hard to see how the government is going to make this add up. If you want all this new gas production to tally with legally binding net zero goals you are going to need *a lot* more CCS capacity. ft.com/content/913db0… One of the many weird things about launching an ‘energy security day’ in Aberdeen on the same day as updating the Net Zero Strategy is the government put Scotland’s plans for a CCS hub on its reserve list.

This looks shocking on the face of it, but worth noting CCS and hydrogen is not inherently bad and is likely to be required to some degree to reach net zero. The question is to what degree and the extent to which it’s used to justify new fossil fuels. theguardian.com/environment/20… Also worth remembering this updated strategy is the result of a court ruling. The numbers will have to add up. There has to be a credible plan to reach net zero, as well as a coherent economic response to the US and EU green industrial moves.

Remember how in his first few days in office Rishi Sunak secured plaudits from business and green groups by signalling he'd u-turn and lift the de facto ban on onshore wind farms? The renewables industry is now very worried he could u-turn on his u-turn. businessgreen.com/news-analysis/… You'll recall he was bounced into the u-turn by a rebellion organised by @SimonClarkeMP, but regardless of how the change of heart came about everyone was left with the impression new onshore wind farms would be allowed where they could command public support.

Real frustration and not a little anger from conservation groups over this one. Government originally assessed over 30 marine habitats that could be highly protected, whittled it down to five pilot zones, and then ditched two of them. businessgreen.com/news/4076760/n… All this just weeks after signing up to the Global Biodiversity Framework that promises to properly protect 30 per cent of land and sea.

Some of the responses from Lance, Howard, et al in this thread (which is now into its third day) are, if not interesting exactly, then at least revealing. And they’re worth unpacking a little to understand precisely what they are proposing for this country.

https://twitter.com/LanceForman/status/1629212299733991427

As ever, they don’t seem to have a detailed policy prescription but the overarching idea seems to be that the UK should ditch the net zero ‘religion’.

Solid few days for my ‘this country doesn’t really like children very much’ hypothesis. Two days out from a strike that will see hundreds of thousands of kids out of school yet again and it barely featured in the weekend papers, is largely absent from the news today, and we’re no closer to any sort of solution from the government.