The UK is now firmly committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050. But, as Tom Grimwood reports, the latest progress from the Committee on Climate Change has once again highlighted a large gulf between words and actions.
If signing the net-zero target into law gave ministers a euphoric high, then last week brought the comedown.
Given the huge stakes involved, many commentators have called for a response to the climate crisis on par with the fight against Nazi Germany during the Second World War. But according to Lord Deben, chair of the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), the government’s current efforts are more “Dad’s Army” than SAS.
In its latest progress report, published last Wednesday (10 July), the climate watchdog says the UK was already off track to meet the fourth and fifth carbon budgets, which were set in line with the previous target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80 per cent on 1990 levels.
The gap has only widened over the last year, with the impact of new policies being outweighed by an increase in projected emissions. The net-zero target may require the upcoming budgets to be tightened up, leaving the UK even further behind.
Speaking at the launch of the report, Lord Deben warned that if the government doesn’t flesh out its plans it could find itself subject to a legal challenge. “I fear I might be the first witness for the prosecution,” he remarked.
Of the 25 key policy actions which the CCC recommended in its previous progress report, only one has been delivered in full. There has not been even partial progress on ten of the proposed actions. And of the 24 indicators which the committee uses to measure underlying progress, just seven are on target.
“Too often efforts have been isolated to single departments or have progressed too slowly,” the report states. “The foundations in the Clean Growth Strategy have not been developed into a coordinated approach that will deliver even the existing carbon budgets.”
The committee acknowledges that good progress has been made within the power sector. But it also criticises the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) for being “too slow” to develop plans for carbon capture and storage and holding back the deployment of onshore wind by refusing access to Contracts for Difference auctions.
It continues: “No large-scale trials have yet begun for heat pumps or low-carbon hydrogen. Development of these markets and of a skilled workforce needs to go hand-in-hand but there have been no serious steps towards their development, in buildings, industry or transport.”
“The need for action has rarely been clearer,” it concludes. “Our message to government is simple: Now, do it.”
Doug Parr, chief scientist at Greenpeace, described the report as a “truly brutal reality check” for ministers: “It paints the government as a sleeper who’s woken up, seen the house is on fire, raised the alarm and gone straight back to sleep.”
And the CCC wasn’t the only committee on ministers’ backs. A few days later on Friday (12 July), the BEIS Committee released its report on the government’s efforts to improve energy efficiency, or lack thereof.
Appearing before the committee in April, energy and clean growth minister Claire Perry accepted the vital role energy efficiency measures will play in meeting the UK’s climate targets.
But other than the now six-year-old Energy Company Obligation, which is being refocused on tackling fuel poverty, the minister had few concrete policies she could point to in order to demonstrate the government’s ambition. Promising new measures with the launch of the Green Finance Strategy, essentially her message boiled down to ‘don’t worry – we’ve got this’.
The BEIS Committee was having none of it. Its report accuses the government of using ECO to mask its “lack of commitment” to energy efficiency, as exemplified by the lower per capita spending in England than in the devolved nations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
It welcomes the subsequent announcement of £5 million of funding to support the development of new financial products such as green mortgages that offer discounts on energy efficient homes. But it says this amount is “woefully inadequate” given the need to unlock to between £35 billion and £65 billion of investment in order to bring all homes up to an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) rating of C.
“If the government lacks the political will to deliver energy efficiency improvements, how can we expect it to get on with the costlier actions needed to tackle climate change?,” asked committee chair Rachel Reeves.
“More energy efficient buildings are not only crucial for tackling climate change but are vital for lowering customers’ energy bills and lifting people out of fuel poverty. Despite a consensus on what needs to be done, ministers have continued to sit on their hands and failed to deliver the policies needed to boost energy efficiency.”
One of the common threads from both reports is the need to embed the net-zero mission across the whole of government – within all departments and at all levels.
The BEIS Committee report, for instance, says “crucial elements of its policy have been lost between departmental remits, allowing departments to shift accountability amongst one another.
“Although BEIS is the lead department for energy efficiency, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) makes decisions on building regulations and social housing, while HM Treasury has powers over fiscal levers and Exchequer revenue.
“But the benefits of energy efficiency investment span across departments, strengthening the case for a joined-up approach.”
The CCC says there also needs to be “strong leadership and coordination at the centre”. With this in mind, the committee suggests that the prime minister could chair regular meetings of a new climate cabinet, which includes the chancellor of the exchequer and the relevant secretaries of state.
One organisation that has been focusing heavily on the issue of governance is the University of Exeter’s Energy Policy Group.
In April, the group published its draft proposals for a new institutional structure for the GB energy system – the culmination of its seven-year IGov project. One of the main features is a new energy transformation commission.
“You need pollical leadership of course,” says research fellow Rebecca Willis. “You need direction setting from government.
“But you also need a body that can steer the process, involving other departments, regulators, devolved administrations and local-level government. That’s what we see the energy transformation commission doing.”
Speaking to Utility Week, she cites the decarbonisation of transport as a prime example of where this coordination is lacking. She says this issue involves not only the Department for Transport, but also BEIS, Ofgem and MHCLG, among others. “Who’s coordinating that?”, she asks. “At the moment, nobody is.”
The commission could also perform “deep dives” into particular issues such as aforementioned rollout of electric vehicles or the future of the gas grid.
IGov proposals for energy governance in Great Britain
Willis says each department should also be set its own climate change target as should unitary and higher tier local authorities.
A number of city councils have already set net-zero targets themselves – Edinburgh and Bristol by 2030, Manchester by 2038 – but Willis says there needs to be more coordination here as well: “At the moment, we have no clear direction setting but a lot of micromanagement. And we think that should be turned on its head.”
Summarising its position, CCC chief executive Chris Stark said the UK’s plans are insufficient now and were insufficient for the previous target: “The gap between where we need to be and where we are has widened: it’s time to do something about this.
“This means embedding net zero and the challenge of adaptation right across the whole of government.
“This need to run through the government like a stick of rock.”
With Theresa May soon to step down, the current crop of ministers are unlikely to remain in their posts for much longer. The job of weaving the net-zero mission into the fabric of government will be left to their replacements. But this will require the full support of the new leader.
Both Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt have signalled their support for the clean growth agenda of the current administration. Whether their warm words translate into action remains to be seen. At the moment, it seems far more likely that if broken in half the future government would read Brexit through the middle.