Delayed decisions on climate defence? Emissions debates pushed into the long grass?
No, this blog is not going to talk about what you might be thinking. I refuse to add to the media circus surrounding a certain, recently inaugurated, world leader. I’m talking about the UK.
The Climate and Nature Bill – which has been presented to the House five times since it was first introduced, and attracts (on record) support from 266 parliamentarians, six regional mayors and 385 councils has been delayed following a vote last week.
As a private member's bill, the CAN was never part of our government’s manifesto. Initially it was proposed by the Green’s Caroline Lucas back in September 2020 and has since been presented by both Labour and Lib Dem MPs.
The stated aims of CAN are simple, although as ever with politics, the implementation would be anything but. The Bill proposes a legal framework to:
Make the UK cut emissions fully, to stand the best chance of keeping 1.5°C alive
Reverse the destruction of nature in the UK by 2030
Involve citizens in deciding the fairest way forward
I’ll save the sections on nature, adaptation and community involvement for another day. For now, let’s look at greenhouse gases.
CAN’s main objective is to reduce UK emissions, including those associated with imported goods and services, to as close to zero as possible, by the end of the 2030s.
What makes CAN different from previous emissions reduction legislation – namely the Climate Change Act - is that it also seeks to address “implementation gaps” and unwitting negative impacts on biodiversity, by considering climate adaptation and nature protection as a joint challenge.
We’re all able to cite examples in politics or business, where a solution designed to tackle one catastrophe inadvertently creates or exacerbates another problem elsewhere. Joined-up thinking will always get my support.
However, the Bill is not without its critics. Whilst it would be easy to dismiss dissenters as climate sceptics or materialistic types unwilling to educate themselves on the dangers of biodiversity collapse, I think it’s important to understand concerns raised by anyone who’s not onboard with the order of business; if we don’t, we risk creating our own implementation gap.
So, let’s take a look:
The scale of the challenge
Zero Hour, the campaign group behind the CAN Bill, comprises cross-party political support as well as scientists, philanthropic foundations, universities and business leaders. Their Corporate Supporters include Arup, IEMA, JLL, Saba Parking, Co-op and ZSL.
Big organisations employing bright minds, who are not typically given to catastrophising or exaggeration.
With that context in mind, Zero Hour’s analysis suggests that current UK emissions are estimated to be around 800 MtCO2e (megatonnes of carbon equivalents) a year. This is almost double the official estimate.
Why the difference?
Zero Hour believes that our Carbon Budgets, created through secondary legislation under the Climate Change Act 2008, are insufficient, since these budgets only apply to territorial emissions.
Emissions from goods that we import, alongside those from shipping and aviation, are not included.
It’s a bit like calculating gas and electricity emissions for our business, but ignoring any damage associated with refrigeration leaks or the Scope 3 emissions associated with things we buy. Only on a national scale.
Image: schematic representation of the ambition gap between current UK Carbon Budget trajectories and the reduction curve needed to meet our Paris obligations. Source: https://www.zerohour.uk.
The Climate and Nature Bill would lay down statutory obligations to reduce UK emissions in line with the 1.5 deg.C objective set out in the Paris Agreement.
In particular, the Bill proposes that ALL consumption emissions must be reduced, not just territorial ones.
The current Carbon Budget, which covers the years 2023-2027 is set at only 487 Mt CO2e for territorial emissions, dropping to 345Mt per year in 2028 and an annual average allowance of 193Mt from 2033.
Zero Hour deliberately avoids putting a specific number on an emissions target as they point out that what matters is not the annual reduction, but the cumulative effect. However, working through under CAN, we would need to cut emissions, including those from imports, shipping and aviation, to around zero by 2040.
If the Bill is passed, we’d have only two options to stay compliant: either our territorial Carbon Budgets would need to be slashed, or we’d need to significantly reduce what we import.
In a country where we only produce around 54% of the food we consume, not mention our increased reliance on imports for construction materials, road vehicles and electronics, conversations on import restrictions would likely turn very nasty, very quickly.
Even cutting imports completely might not be enough. We’re still a long way from mass adoption of low-carbon heating systems; around 40% of our electrical generation is from oil and gas, and whilst sustainable aviation fuel is seeing some pilot successes, pun intended, it’s still very much an emerging solution. Almost three quarters of our primary energy demand is still drawn from fossil fuels.
But G, what does all this mean for business?
Horizon scanning, like music, is as much art as science.
I can tell you what debates are taking place, and which policies are under consideration, but in reading how the breeze might blow on any given topic, I listen more to subtext and conversation than to any official government update.
I think it’s unlikely that this Bill will pass without a lot of amendments.
It will have a lot of opposition. Mainly on the grounds of unaffordability – it’s not looking as though the cost-of-living crisis will have eased by July, and it’s difficult to get buy-in to ambitious projects when people are still battling for the basics.
There’s also the political angle. The government wants growth. Growth usually requires investment in infrastructure and whilst construction has many benefits, it creates a short term spike in emission generating activity. Including from imports. There’s even positive signals for a third runway at Heathrow.
But the government also wants to be environmental leaders. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband nailed his colours to the mast in favour of working “beyond party politics” to legislate on the Bill’s objectives – although this doesn’t necessarily mean the Bill itself, in it’s current form.
I think we will see parts of the Climate and Nature Bill become an Act. Even if under a different instrument. My predictions:
More focus on consumption emissions, not just production emissions. Expect future iterations of schemes like Climate Change Agreements to focus on carbon, not energy reduction and future iterations of SECR or the UK Sustainability Reporting Standards to require more companies to report on more emissions source, including some or all Scope 3 categories.
Mandatory reporting on nature and biodiversity. This is already happening for listed companies, as UK reporting standards align with those of the International Sustainability Standards Board, but I think it will go further and smaller businesses will also be asked to actively check for compliance with legislation such as the Wildlife and Countryside Act, or future nature-related lexes.
Do you know what’s on your site? Nature-wise, I mean. Whilst documenting protected or invasive species isn’t new for holders of ISO14001, even urban premises can have more biodiversity than you thought, when you start looking.
More support for community energy, with projects up to 100MW benefiting from the government’s other push to make planning easier.
The UK is very good at exporting professional services. We are leaders on many environmental topics, and we love the consultancy fees that come from helping other countries and companies develop policy and operational approaches.
And in my experience of commenting on policy for over 10 years now, ideas rarely disappear completely.
Even if it is rejected in a later reading, I fully expect one or more political party to pick up some of the more voter-friendly aspects, rework them, and present a variation on the theme under a manifesto pledge or policy ask in a few years’ time.
For now, we watch and wait… oh, and get our systems in place for more detailed Scope 3 reporting. It’s likely to come our way.
Wishing you low-carbon love and profit,
G
Notes:
The Second Reading and debate will now take place on 11th July – this will be stage two of twelve that a Bill starting in the Commons must pass in the UK before it is adopted in law as an Act of Parliament.
Image: Visual representation of the stages a Bill must go through before becoming law in the UK. Screenshot taken on 28th January 2025 from https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3776 .