Climate

A row has erupted over the government’s use of real fur for the military, as critics claimed new tests prove that bear skins are outperformed by a fake fabric which ministers have rejected.The Ministry of Defence has long insisted the artificial skin, called Ecopel, is not a suitable alternative to the fur from slaughtered Canadian black bears used to make Queen’s Guards’ caps.But now tests by a fabric technologist have shown that Ecopel not only performed on a par with bear skins but actually gave better results in several areas, according to Peta.The animal-rights organisation has written to Boris Johnson to outline the test results, which used the MoD’s own five criteria.The independent expert’s tests showed the faux fur was more durable, more comfortable and more sustainable and dries more quickly, Peta says.The fabrics expert, Atom Cianfarani, said: “I believe that the combination of Ecopel, along with a waterproof membrane such as Tyvek, will produce a fast-drying, lightweight cap that will be more comfortable and less toxic for the wearer.”Real bear fur must be treated with toxic chemicals such as formaldehyde to stop it from decomposing.Peta said the tests, conducted at an MoD-accredited laboratory, “conclusively show that Ecopel’s faux bear fur performs in a way very similar to – or better than – real bear fur in all five areas”.It said Ecopel’s offer to supply the MoD with unlimited faux bear fur free of charge until 2030 still stood, despite having been rejected previously.But the government disputes the reading of the results, and has again refused to consider switching away from bear skins despite.The MoD has always said it would stop buying real fur as soon as a “suitable and affordable alternative” became available.The government spent more than £1m on bear fur hats between 2014 and 2019.The letter to the prime minister, seen by The Independent, reads: “A petition in support of Peta’s campaign is fast approaching the threshold for triggering a debate in Parliament, and a growing number of MPs are backing our call for humane ceremonial caps.“Please honour the commitment made in the Queen’s speech last year that the government would ‘ensure the UK has, and promotes, the highest standards of animal welfare’ by acting on the wishes of the British public, which overwhelmingly – with a 75 per cent majority, according to a new Populus opinion poll – opposes the use of taxpayers’ money to fund the pursuits of trophy hunters overseas, and bringing the superior faux fur caps into service.”An Army spokesperson said: “Bears are never hunted to order for the MoD. The iconic bearskin cap is made from bear pelts obtained from licensed culls by the Canadian authorities to manage the wild population.“Ensuring the Guards’ caps remain both practical and smart is vital, and currently there are currently no artificial alternatives available that meet the essential requirements for these ceremonial caps.”The Independent understands that the government advisers insist Ecopel did not meet the standard required to replace bear skins and that it met only one of the five requirements – that of water penetration.As a result, the MoD has again refused to replace its use of bear fur. More

A Tory-linked lobby group campaigning against net zero climate action has received hundreds of thousands of pounds from an oil-rich foundation with large investments in energy firms, it has been revealed.The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) – which has close links to Tory MP Steve Baker – refuses to disclose its donors in the UK and says it does not take money from fossil fuel interests.But US tax documents identified by investigative journalists at the OpenDemocracy website show the lobbyists, who also use the brand “Net Zero Watch”, have a donor with $30 million (£24.2 million) shares in 22 companies working across coal, oil and gas.It has also received half a million dollars through a fund linked to the controversial oil billionaire Koch brothers.Labour said the revelations showed US right-wing groups with links to big oil were “desperate to stop action against the climate crisis” and influence UK debate.The group’s US arm, the American Friends of the GWPF, received more than $1.3m from US donors, with at least $864,884 (£679,000) forwarded to the British group over the last four years.Of the £1.45m in charitable donations received by the UK-based group since 2017 at least 45 per cent has come from the US – raising questions about the influence of the American right in Westminster.The donations include $620,259 from the Donors Trust, a secretive organisation that has given hundreds of millions of pounds to more than 100 groups working to cast doubt on the scientific consensus on climate change.That group has received millions from the Koch brothers, who inherited their father’s oil empire. The GWPF claims the Donors Trust is “middleman, matching donors to those seeking funding” and that it was “able to vet [donors with which it was matched] in line with our funding policy”.The UK anti-climate action lobby group also received $210,525 in 2018 and 2020 from the Sarah Scaife Foundation – an organisation set up by the billionaire libertarian heir to an oil and banking dynasty. Greenpeace UK characterises the Global Warming Policy Foundation as an organisation which has “spent the last twenty years campaigning to preserve our addiction to fossil fuels”.Conservative MP Steve Baker is a trustee of the foundation, as is Labour MP Graham Stringer also sits on its board and has questioned the scientific consensus on the climate emergency.Through Mr Baker the group has links 20 Tory MPs and peers, who form the backbench Net Zero Scrutiny Group, which campaigns against net zero plans. Mr Baker and another Tory MP Craig Mackinlay are regularly quoted in press releases from Net Zero Watch – often repeating its talking points.Labour’s shadow secretary Ed Miliband said: “US right-wing groups with links to big oil are desperate to stop action against the climate crisis. Now they are trying to extend their reach into UK political debate.”The Global Warming Policy Foundation rejects the claim that the Sarah Scaife Foundation represented oil interests, telling openDemocracy: “The wealth that ultimately created the Scaife Foundation was created at the end of the nineteenth century and the start of the twentieth. It would be ludicrous to suggest that three generations on, it represents an oil company interest.”Tory MP Steve Baker said: “I understand the GWPF has already given a response to these allegations, which appear to be ridiculous.”It is an extraordinary fact that the same newspapers and commentators who would usually be the first to protest any kind of poverty are wasting the public’s time with these attempts to distract from the real issues at hand. “It would be better if the political world focused their attention on how our current energy strategy has driven up energy prices and contributed to the terrible cost-of-living crisis that so many are experiencing.”The Independent has contacted Mr Baker, the Global Warming Policy Foundation, and Net Zero Watch to offer the opportunity for further comment on this story. More

Households living in nearly 1 million homes built since 2015 have been hit by an additional “energy bill bombshell” totalling £1.8bn because of the government’s decision to scrap net-zero targets, Liberal Democrats have said.And the average £200-a-year cost for each household is due to soar higher over the coming year, following the massive hike in the energy price cap in April, which is expected to be repeated in the autumn.Laws passed under the coalition government to require every new-build home to have zero carbon emissions were scrapped by David Cameron’s administration soon after Conservatives took sole control in 2015.Since this time, almost 1m homes which do not meet zero-carbon standards have been built.Lib Dem climate emergency spokesperson Wera Hobhouse said that the “abysmally short-sighted” decision will have pushed many families towards fuel poverty as the price of gas and electricity increased by an average £700 earlier this month.The party is putting cost-of-living concerns at the heart of its campaign for local elections across Britain on 5 May.Figures from the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) suggest that measures to make homes zero-carbon typically save households around £200 a year on their energy bills, thanks to factors like better insulation.Over the seven years since the policy was scrapped, the total extra cost in bills is estimated to have reached £1.8bn and the figure is climbing ever-faster.“Families up and down the country are being driven into fuel poverty, having to make agonising choices between heating and eating because of the Conservatives’ cost of living crisis,” said Ms Hobhouse. “This pain and misery for millions had been coming down the track for a long time. Scrapping zero carbon homes has proven to be an abysmally short-sighted move from a government that has failed with all hands to protect people from sky-high energy bills.“New homeowners can send the Conservatives a message in May by voting for your local Liberal Democrat champion. They have failed families struggling with their energy bills and it’s time to send them a message.”Ms Hobhouse’s party is calling for a windfall tax on energy firms to pay for measures to reduce energy poverty and insulate homes. More

Boris Johnson has signalled he is ready to fight to defend green levies on energy bills, amid growing pressure for them to be scrapped.The prime minister lashed out at “prejudice” against the levies, which fund renewable energy schemes at an average cost of £153 a year to households.Backbench Tories are pushing for them to be stripped out of domestic gas and electricity bills to help consumers facing soaring costs.Business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng this week faced criticism after failing to deny reports that their removal is being considered as part of the government’s response to the cost of living crisis. More

A new natural history GCSE focusing on how to protect the planet is set to be announced by the education secretary, Nadhim Zahawi, on Thursday.The new qualification – set to be available from September 2025 – will focus on topics such as climate change and biodiversity.Environmentalists have welcomed it as a means of helping teenagers with mental health issues.Mary Colwell, who led the campaign for the subject, said it will be “very nurturing and life-enhancing” by connecting secondary school students with the natural world.She also said understanding nature will help students recognise impacts of climate change as they happen.“But it’s not just about problem solving and tackling climate change,” she said. “I think that the natural world provides people with a lot of solace and inspiration and we are in challenging times, being surrounded by things that nurture us. The study of natural history is very nurturing and life-enhancing.”The lack of engagement with nature among the youth population is a growing concern for policymakers. Spending time in nature is known to have a positive effect on mental health but research has found that three-quarters of children spend less time outdoors each day than prisoners. Ms Colwell said the new GCSE “could help young people with mental health issues and I think that was one of the reasons why [former environment secretary] Michael Gove was very keen – he was very supportive of the idea when we went to see him back in 2018 and he kept raising the idea that I can see the connections between this and a mental health crisis in young people.“There is a connection between connecting with nature and better mental health.” More

Tory ministers are being urged to put British clocks forward an extra hour to help alleviate the pressures caused by the cost of living crisis.The Liberal Democrat peer John Lee said moving to Central European Time would help reduce household bills as it would maximise daylight in the evenings. Inflation has reached the highest level in 30 years and energy bills continue to rise.“It’s a serious, long-term issue for a sizeable proportion of the population and I think the government should look very seriously at it,” he said.“Double summer time would be relatively cheap, it wouldn’t really cost the government anything of significance as far as I’m aware.”Lord Lee said he would call on the government to consider its position on double summer time when the House of Lords returns from recess later this month.Extending daylight hours would save households 152 hours’ worth of electricity annually, it is claimed. A 1993 study by the Policy Studies Institute estimated that the change would save more than £260m in electricity bills, but according to the government, the effects were “likely to be small in magnitude” and potentially “uncertain in direction”.The potential change would adjust British clocks two hours ahead of Greenwich Mean Time during the summer and one hour ahead in winter. This means people would enjoy an extra hour of light for an additional 11 months of the year, but there would be an extra hour of darkness during the winter months.Clocks were last changed to save energy during the Second World War but went back to normal after the war.British Summer Time first came about in 1916 after a campaign led by William Willett, who after riding his horse in the early hours of one summer morning noticed that many people slept through a large proportion of a summer’s day. More

Keir Starmer has been confronted by a youth climate activist after his party called on the government to ban fossil fuel protests across Britain.The opposition leader looked uncomfortable when Lauren MacDonald, a 21-year-old Scottish climate activist, asked him: “Why do you think that people like me deserve to go to prison?”Labour on Monday called for a nationwide injunction banning demonstrations outside oil infrastructure or on roads. The policy announcement came after activists from Just Stop Oil blockaded depots while calling for an end to new investment in fossil fuels.In a video of the exchange shared by the Green New Deal Rising group Sir Keir appears visibly flustered and flees the scene without addressing the topic of the injunction. “I just wanted to ask, whose side are you on when it comes to the climate crisis? Currently, it seems like you’re siding the UK Government,” Ms MacDonald can be heard to ask the Labour leader.”Currently it seems like you think that young people like me, who are so, so terrified about the future deserve to go to prison?”When the activist says she is suffering from stress-induced hair loss from worrying about the climate emergency, Sir Keir tells her: “I agree with you the climate crisis is the number one priority.”But she replies: “Why do you think that people like me deserve to go to prison? You said that the UK Government should should use a UK-wide injunction on protesters.”The Labour leader replies that the party has pledges “huge” sums to address the climate – but would not discuss Monday’s call for an authoritarian crackdown.Civil liberties campaign group Liberty was among those to criticise Labour’s call for a ban on demonstrations.”Both Labour and the government calling for a ban on protest should ring alarm bells,” a spokesperson for the group said this week.”Stifling dissent and restricting protest only pushes people to new and more urgent ways to make their voices heard. The government and opposition should be engaging with concerns, not banning entire protests.”After the exchange Ms MacDonald said: “I confronted Keir Starmer today because his actions on climate change simply are not good enough. We are on a trajectory for 3.2ºC of warming by the end of the century – this means extinction. “In the face of our futures being taken away from us, Mr Starmer is siding with Boris Johnson’s crackdown on climate protests. He is advocating for young people like me, who are kept up at night terrified of the future, to be arrested or worse go to prison for taking action to defend our lives. It’s unthinkable really.” She added that Sir Keir’s response was characterised by “apathy and defensiveness”.Keir Starmer’s office declined to comment on the episode when approached by The Independent.Fatima Ibrahim from Green New Deal Rising said: “We feel betrayed by Keir Starmer and the Labour Party for calling for more police powers to prevent young people worried about their future from peacefully protesting.“At a time when the country is desperate for a different vision of the future, the Labour Party could be calling for a massive shift towards renewables to bring down energy bills and deliver new jobs. Instead, they’ve relegated themselves to government cheerleaders.“If political leaders think they can betray an entire generation and comfortably get on with their jobs, they are wrong. Young people up and down this country are at a breaking point, and politicians should expect to be more regularly challenged by them on the street, and eventually at the ballot boxes.”The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) this month warned that greenhouse gas emissions must peak by 2025 to stave off catastrophic global warming. More