UK & EU Climate News
Spain hit by deadliest floods in decades
Over a year’s worth of rain fell on several areas in eastern Spain, including Valencia, resulting in flooding which caused the deaths of over 200 people. It is one of the deadliest natural disasters in Spanish history.
Many citizens felt that the response from the Spanish and local governments was inadequate; Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez was evacuated from Spain’s flood disaster zone following the event as locals pelted mud at political leaders and the Spanish King over a string of failures that they felt had left them helplessly exposed to a deadly deluge.
According to analysis from the World Weather Attribution, climate change made the intense rainfall about 12% heavier and twice as likely. However, whilst climate change may be the cause, many have argued that the region was woefully ill-prepared for an event such as this. World Meteorological Organization (WMO) officials have stressed that effective flood warning systems could help avoid the level of destruction that has occurred in Valencia.
NESO publishes advice to government on pathways to clean power
On the 5th of November 2024, the new National Energy System Operator's (NESO) published its Clean Power 2030 report, setting out how to achieve clean power by 2030 (CP30). NESO defines clean power as when “clean sources produce at least as much power as Great Britain consumes in total and unabated gas should provide less than 5% of Great Britain's generation in a typical weather year".
The report sets out two possible pathways for reaching CP30: (1) Further Flex and Renewables, which envisages 50GW of offshore wind (OSW) and no new dispatchable plants; and (2) New Dispatch, which contemplates 43GW of OSW and new, clean dispatchable plants up to 2.7GW using low-carbon hydrogen or power CCS. Both pathways are predicated on increased electrification of heat, transport and industry across Great Britain.
Ongoing planning reforms as well as grid connection reforms are acknowledged in the report as critical enablers to achieve CP30. In addition, clarity for investors in future, reformed electricity market arrangements and investment support schemes will be crucial to mobilising the £40 billion investment needed each year in energy infrastructure to deliver CP30.
The government will review the pathways set out in the report and will publish its own Clean Power Action Plan, which is expected towards the end of the year.
Global Climate News
Outcomes of COP29 – are the measures set out enough to combat climate change?
With global temperatures potentially breaching 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels this year, COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, arrived at a pivotal moment in the fight against climate change. Delegates from nearly 200 nations gathered to make progress on scaling climate finance, reducing fossil fuel usage, and operationalizing key aspects of the Paris Climate Agreement.
Azerbaijan faced accusations of conflict of interest and malpractice throughout the event. In his opening address, the President of Azerbaijan referred to oil and gas as a “gift of god”, criticising “Western fake news” about the country’s emissions and saying that nations “should not be blamed” for having fossil fuel reserves. The country also plans to expand gas production by up to a third over the next decade. These remarks foreshadowed the difficulties in progressing on a fossil fuel phase out throughout the conference. While stronger language around the transition from fossil fuels made its way into draft texts, the final text was little changed from that agreed upon at COP28 in Dubai.
They did manage to find agreement on the remaining sections of Article 6 on carbon markets, meaning all elements of the Paris Agreement have been finalised nearly 10 years after it was signed.
COP29 also marked another win for transparency, with enhanced reporting requirements for emissions, climate finance, and adaptation progress. Several nations submitted their first Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs), offering detailed insights into their emissions trajectories and efforts to meet their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which are country-specific commitments under the Paris Agreement for emissions reductions.
The conference concluded on the 24th of November with an agreement calling on developed countries to deliver $300 billion per year to developing countries by 2035 to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect lives and livelihoods from the worsening impacts of climate change. Despite this, many developing countries were hoping for a more ambitious deal.
CO16 biodiversity summit
The two-week CO16 biodiversity summit in Colombia reportedly ended in disarray on the 3rd of November, with some breakthroughs but key issues left unresolved. Governments failed to reach a consensus on crucial issues such as nature funding and how this decade’s targets would be monitored.
Discussions ran on 12 hours longer than expected; many were forced to leave the talks early to catch flights, and negotiations were suspended at 8.30am when fewer than half of the countries were present. Countries will need to continue the talks next year at an interim meeting in Bangkok.
Many countries expressed fury at the way the talks had been dragged out and the order of discussions, which left crucial issues undecided at the final hour.
Trump’s second Presidency is bad news for the climate
Analysis from Carbon Brief published in March 2024 found that a Trump victory could lead to an additional 4bn tonnes of US emissions by 2030 compared with Joe Biden’s plans. This is enough to negate – twice over – all the emissions savings from deploying wind, solar and other clean technologies around the world over the past five years.
The Trump campaign said that the incoming president would withdraw the US from the Paris Agreement, as Trump did during his first term as president. Last time, the US was only out of the Paris Agreement for a few months, but now Trump would only have to wait a year to leave, giving him three years to chart his own course without any need to report to the UN or be bound by its rules.
However, some experts say that a second Trump administration will not be able to stop the US’ transition to low-carbon energy, due to the rapidly falling cost of these technologies.
There is also speculation around the possibility of Trump breaking up key departments such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). California’s clean air rules, including a ban on new fossil fuel-powered car sales by 2035, are also potentially under threat because they have not been approved by the Biden administration and now face outright rejection by the incoming Trump administration.
Investors who were running bets against renewable energy stocks have racked up profits of more than $1.2bn from the heavy sell-off that swept the sector in the wake of Trump’s victory.
Shortly after his win, Trump picked oil and gas industry executive Chris Wright to lead the US Department of Energy. Wright is the founder and CEO of Liberty Energy, an oilfield services firm based in Denver. He is expected to support Trump’s plan to maximise production of oil and gas and to seek ways to boost generation of electricity, demand for which is rising for the first time in decades.
Wright also made a media splash in 2019 when he drank fracking fluid on camera to demonstrate that it was not dangerous. Additionally, in a LinkedIn video last year, Wright said: “There is no climate crisis…the only thing resembling a crisis with respect to climate change is the regressive, opportunity-squelching policies justified in the name of climate change.”
Shell wins appeal against court ruling requiring it to slash emissions from use of products
A Dutch appeals court issued a ruling in Shell’s favour, reversing a landmark 2021 ruling holding the company responsible for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting from its customers’ use of its products, and ordering the company to dramatically reduce emissions by the end of the decade.
In its 2021 ruling, the court ordered Shell to slash emissions by 45% by 2030, on a 2019 basis, encompassing its Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions, which would include those resulting from the use of its products by customers.
In its more recent ruling the court acknowledged that “fossil fuel consumption is largely responsible for creating the climate problem and that addressing climate change is something that cannot wait,” adding that “companies like Shell, which contribute significantly to the climate problem and have it within their power to contribute to combating it, have an obligation to limit CO2 emissions in order to counter dangerous climate change.”
Despite noting Shell’s obligation to cut emissions, however, the court found that sufficient scientific evidence does not currently exist to support a specific emissions reduction requirement such as the 45% ruling.
New Research