Climate

Nigel Farage’s new campaign group has accused a League One football club of a “Moscow-style rebuke to free speech” after it declined to host one of its rallies.The former Brexit Party leader is campaigning against climate action and was hoping to host a political event at a Bolton hotel owned by the club.But a statement issued by the Trotters on Monday said the rally was “not something the club and business wish to be associated with” and that it would be cancelled.Mr Farage’s group, called Vote Power Not Poverty, said in a statement on Tuesday that it was now seeking an alternative venue. “This morning we were made aware that the owners of Bolton Wanderers Football Club and the Bolton Whites Hotel had reneged on our contract to hold the first ‘Vote Power Not Povery’ Rally,” it said.”In a Moscow style-rebuke to free speech, this decision is an attempt to stifle a much needed debate on the expensive consequences of the government’s net zero plans, when there are better solutions.”The group said the decision was “difficult to understand” and claimed “wealthy owners of football clubs may not care about ordinary people”.The concluded: “We remain grateful for the incredible support we’re getting from all parts of our great country.”A statement issued by Bolton Wanderers said: “A ‘Vote Power Not Poverty’ Rally scheduled for later this month at the Bolton Whites Hotel will not be happening.“The event has been cancelled by BWFC and is not something the club and business wish to be associated with.”Some British right-wingers have started to organise against the government’s commitment to reaching net zero carbon, arguing that averting climate change will increase bills.But the Committee on Climate Change has dismissed this arguments and says investment in green energy is in fact the best way to bring down bills – and that new fossil fuel drilling will not help.Scientists say reaching net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 at the latest is a requirement to avert catastrophic climate change in the coming decades.In 2014 Mr Farage named Vladimir Putin as the leader he most admired, praising the Russian president’s skills as an “operator” and citing his “brilliant” handling of the civil war in Syria. More

Boris Johnson’s government has been urged to close the door on fracking forever, amid reports that Downing Street is considering a rethink on the controversial energy resource.Mr Johnson said the UK ban on Russian oil imports was an important “first step” to punish Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine – but he has thus far resisted Tory MPs’ calls to end the moratorium on hydraulic fracturing of gas in Britain.Ministers are considering handing over two Cuadrilla fracking sites in Lancashire to the Royal Geographical Society for research, rather than allow them to be concreted over as planned, according to reports.The prime minister has “opened the door” on the return to fracking by asking his ministers to explore whether it can help diversify the country’s energy supply, according to The Telegraph.Former cabinet minister Lord Frost – who has campaigned for the current fracking ban to be reversed – said it was a “sensible first step” from the government amid concerns over soaring energy costs from the crisis.Fellow ex-Tory minister Robert Jenrick said fracking could play a role in a “more pragmatic energy policy” – claiming it could ease soaring bills. “I personally was always a supporter of fracking … I think we should be revisiting that question,” he told BBC Newsnight.But green campaigners urged the government to resist pressure from Tory MPs and end dependence on all forms of gas.Greenpeace UK’s head of energy Rosie Rogers: “Trying to restart fracking now would only mean wasting more time when we have little. It will take many years to develop and if it ever gets produced, it will be sold to the highest bidder on the international market, with no impact on our energy bills.”She added: “UK government should work on an emergency plan to free our country from gas dependence. This would protect households from soaring bills, tackle the climate crisis and weaken Putin’s hand.”Jamie Peters, Friends of the Earth’s acting campaigns director, said: “Fracking is not the answer to the energy crisis, and would do little to slash soaring bills – as energy minister Kwasi Kwarteng acknowledged last week. It is polluting, disruptive and deeply unpopular across the country.”As recently as Monday, Downing Street had denied suggestions the fracking moratorium could be lifted in response to the Ukraine crisis.“It would take years of exploration and development before any quantities of shale gas could be extracted and wouldn’t have an impact on prices affecting Europe in the near future,” said a No 10 spokesperson.And energy minister Lord Callanan warned of “severe environmental problem” with shale gas production, adding that “Lancashire is not Texas”, being much more heavily populated.A moratorium was imposed on fracking in November 2019 after it caused two minor earthquakes in Lancashire.Last month, energy company Cuadrilla said the UK government’s Oil and Gas Authority had ordered the two shale wells in Lancashire to be filled and abandoned.Business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng said the move to phase out Russian oil products by the end of the year will “ensure a smooth transition so that consumers will not be affected”.US president Joe Biden ordered a ban on Russian oil imports, while the EU was also expected to announce a phasing out.The Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy department (BEIS) and No 10 are yet to comment on reports about a reconsideration of fracking policy. More

The government did not sufficiently consider whether targets for a tree-planting scheme were realistic, according to a public spending watchdog. It said the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) looked set to miss its aim despite working quickly to set up schemes. The government has pledged to boost the number of trees planted in a bid to help the UK reach net zero emissions in the fight against the climate crisis. Defra has a target to plant at least 7,500 hectares every year in England by spring 2025.But the new report by the National Audit Office has cast doubt over how this goal was established. “Defra did not sufficiently consider whether its tree-planting target was achievable, particularly given the broad range of benefits it is trying to achieve,” the public spending watchdog said in its assessment on how the Nature for Climate Fund Treet Programme was set up. It said tree planting rates have not reached 7,500 hectares a year in the past half a century, and has only surpassed 6,000 in three years in this time period. The report said: “Defra told us that it determined the 7,500 hectare per year target is realistic based on available evidence about: historic woodland expansion statistics; potential sector capacity; land availability; and current policy drivers for woodland expansion. “But Defra did not undertake a detailed assessment of this evidence or consider whether historical planting rates could be exceeded when also trying to achieve the programme’s multiple environmental objectives by ensuring the right trees are planted in the right place, which adds to the complexity of increasing tree-planting rates quickly.”Gareth Davies, the head of the NAO, said: “Defra has done well to launch new schemes to support landowners to plant trees. Yet despite its efforts, it is not expecting to achieve the amount of new tree-planting in 2021-22 that it set out to, and should have done more to make sure its targets were realistic.”Trees, woodlands and forests play a key rome in removing greenhouse gases in the air, and can benefit communities by improving air quality and providing a flood barrier, according to the government’s own climate advisers. Figures last year showed the rate of tree planting was falling in England despite pledges to boost it. In November, the government said it had allocated funding to support the planting of 260,000 more trees in England.George Eustice, the environment secretary, said in response to the public spending watchdog’s assessment: “The challenge of climate change requires stretching targets and high ambition.“The NAO report acknowledges that we have worked at pace in difficult circumstances to rise to this challenge but we are under no illusion that there is more to do. That is why we will treble the number of trees planted rates by the end of this parliament, backed up by over £500m.” More

A London council has urged the mayor to scrap plans for a new road tunnel running through its borough, which has been called “the most polluted” in the country.Newham Council voted unanimously for Sadiq Khan to stop building the Silvertown Tunnel, saying this project was incompatible with its climate action and goals. Campaigners have estimated the tunnel – which would connect run under the Thames – would attract tens of thousands of vehicles a day into the south London borough and have raised concerns over how it would impact air quality. But Transport for London claims it will benefit the environment by reducing congestion on polluting roads and by giving public transport networks a boost.All 60 councillors in Newham – all Labour expect for three Independents – voted against the project earlier this week and urged the mayor to cancel it amid concerns over how it could work alongside plans to tackle the climate emergency and air quality. “As walking and cycling would not be permitted in the tunnel, it could obviously make no contribution to active travel infrastructure,” the motion said. The tunnel will connect Greenwich in south London to Silvertown on the other side of the river and is expected to start being built in late spring, with a planned opening date of 2025. Rokhsana Fiaz, Newham’s mayor, said ahead of the vote: “Recent estimates show at least 115 people die prematurely each year in our borough because of life threatening vehicle fumes; and that we have the highest rate of child hospitalisation for asthma related conditions in the country.” She also said one in seven people in Newham are exposed to levels of air pollutant nitrogen dioxide “above the UK limit for human health.She added: “That’s why it is a moral and health imperative to do all that we can to oppose the Silvertown Tunnel.”Ms Fiaz later tweeted to say all councillors had voted in favour of the motion opposing the project. Last month, campaigners against the tunnel met with Seb Dance, the city’s deputy mayor for transport. The Independent understands Mr Dance told them any sudden cancellation of the project – as per their demands – would incur a substantial financial cost.Following the meeting, campaigner Victoria Rance said the tunnel would be “devestating” for Newham, which she called “the most polluted borough in UK with the most polluted schools”. It was reportedly named as the area with the worst pollution rates in British Heart Foundation research in 2019.A spokesperson for the Mayor of London said: “The Silvertown Tunnel will transform the way people can travel in a part of London that currently has few options for getting across the river. In addition to providing new zero-emission cross-river bus services for an area in need of them, the tunnel will massively reduce the chronic congestion problems currently associated with the inadequate, Victorian-era Blackwall Tunnel.”They said this nearby tunnel is closed 700 times a year on average, which leads to a long line of vehicles “emitting toxic pollutants”. “Both tunnels will be tolled and, when combined with our overall policy of reducing car use across Greater London in favour of active and public transport options, the Silvertown tunnel can help reduce congestion and poor air quality around the Blackwall Tunnel area without increasing the volume of traffic crossing the river,” the spokesperson said. More

The UK has given the green light for a “bee-killing” pesticide banned in the EU to be used on a type of crop – sparking criticism from environmental groups. The British government said this was because of the spread of yellows viruses throughout the country and the threat this posed to sugar production. But the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds said it was “sad” to share the news of the move. “Without bees, our farming system will collapse,” it said. Last year, the UK government authorised the emergency use of a neonicotinoid pesticide treatment for sugar beet crops due to the risk from yellows viruses. This would only come into practice when a certain threshold for its use was reached. The Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs (Defra) said on Tuesday the conditions had been reached, with modelling predicting a 68 per cent level of virus incidence.It said this meant “the threshold for use has been met and the seed treatment can now proceed under strict conditions”. Evidence suggests neonicotinoids harm brain development and weaken immune systems in bees, and can also leave the animals unable to fly. A wildlife charity said these pesticides can also harm butterflies and other wildlife. Julie Williams, the Butterfly Conservation chief executive, said: “The UK is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world, and it is simply unacceptable for the government to allow the demonstrable harm of pollinators and other wildlife at a time when nature is already in crisis.”“The time has come for neonicotinoids to be completely banned with no exception,” she said, calling them a group of chemicals “simply too toxic and too damaging to use in any circumstances”. A Defra spokesperson said: “The decision to approve an emergency authorisation was not taken lightly and based on robust scientific assessment. We evaluate the risks very carefully and only grant temporary emergency authorisations for restricted pesticides in special circumstances when strict requirements are met and there are no alternatives.They added: “The threshold for use has now been met according to the independent scientific modelling conducted on the virus spread. Under the terms of this authorisation seed treatment can go ahead with strict controls in place to mitigate risks.” More

Ukraine is attempting to link up to the EU’s power network after disconnecting from the Russian and Belarusian electricity grid.Kyiv and Moldova took part in a three-day test of electricity independence and hope to join the synchronous grid of Continental Europe permanently.Ukrainian Energy Minister Herman Galushchenko is lobbying the EU for permission to link up with the European Network of Transmission System Operators (ENTSO-E) immediately.He said: “We refused to return to parallel work with the systems of Russia and Belarus. We have proved the graveness of our intentions to integrate with the European system, even in this difficult time of war.“Despite military aggression by Russia, rocket attacks, attacks on critical infrastructure, the Ukrainian power system – working autonomously – has proven its reliability and security of electricity supply to consumers.”We have proved the seriousness of our intentions to integrate with the European system, even in this difficult time of war,” he added.”I appeal to our European partners to synchronize Ukraine’s energy system with ENTSO-E as soon as possible. We need your support and solidarity with the Ukrainian people more than ever!”On Monday, EU Energy Commissioner Kadri Simson met with ENTSO-E to discuss Ukraine joining the grid early, Politico reports.He said: “Ukraine is asking for emergency synchronization with the European grid as soon as possible. This is technically challenging, but as Europe this is something tangible we can do for our partners.”Russia is advancing on Kyiv with a huge convoy of armoured vehicles, tanks and other military equipment spanning more than 40 miles, according to new satellite images.As the troops advance, Russia’s defence ministry has warned that it will carry out a number of strikes on security sites in Kyiv, according to state news agency Tass. More

Ministers must end the expansion of oil and gas exploration across Britain with a “presumption” against new projects in the North Sea, the government’s own climate advisers have said.In a letter to business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng, the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) said it was time for Britain to “send a clear signal” about the climate emergency at home and abroad.Green groups said the advice should lead to a “paradigm shift” and welcomed it as “a clear blow for the fossil fuel industry”.The government recently invited oil and gas companies to help write their own rulebook on when new drilling should go ahead.It comes as The Independent’s Stop Fuelling the Climate Crisis campaign calls for a halt on new drilling to help tackle the emergency.In its letter to the business secretary the CCC, a statutory but independent body that advises on how the UK can reach its climate goals, said: “We would support a tighter limit on production, with stringent tests and a presumption against exploration. “An end to UK exploration would send a clear signal to investors and consumers that the UK is committed to the 1.5C global temperature goal. “That would also help the UK in its diplomatic efforts to strengthen climate ambition internationally.”The government is currently drawing up a so-called “climate checkpoint” for new oil and gas exploration, which will govern when exploration and drilling should go ahead.But green campaigners reacted angrily in January after the business department said its consultation was “predominantly” for the oil and gas industries to take the “opportunity to input on the design” of the policy.The letter from the CCC criticises a hole in the claims by some Tory MP that more fossil fuel drilling will help drive down household bills. New extraction will have “at most, a marginal effect on the prices faced by UK consumers in future”, the committee says – arguing that a better way to drive down energy prices would be “shifting to a renewables-based power system and electrifying end uses in transport, industry and heating”.It also blamed backwards steps by the government on green power generation and home energy efficiency, which it said had in fact added £140 to every bill. Heather Plumpton, policy analyst at Green Alliance, said the intervention from the CCC was “a clear blow for the fossil fuel industry”.“They’ve made a clear call for tighter limits on the production of oil and gas – and made crystal clear how important it is that the climate test has real teeth if it is going to be credible,” she added.“The climate advisers say with absolute clarity that increasing domestic extraction would have a minimal impact on prices faced by UK households – and reiterate what the government itself knows to be true: that the government’s primary focus should be accelerating the transition away from volatile fossil fuel markets to an energy-efficient, renewables-based power system.”Rosie Rogers, head of oil and gas transition for Greenpeace UK, said that “anyone who’s read this advice and thinks the North Sea’s future lies in oil and gas is utterly deluded” and that the government should “stop hoping to resurrect a declining fossil fuel industry”.She added: “The future of the North Sea is in renewables. Our economy, our energy security and our climate depends on it.”Danny Gross, climate campaigner at Friends of the Earth, also welcomed the letter, stating: “Recommending a presumption against oil and gas exploration spells a paradigm shift for the future of the North Sea. “This assessment bolsters what scientists and the International Energy Agency have already said: that all new fossil fuel projects are incompatible with the international goal of limiting global heating to 1.5C.”A report by the International Energy Agency, commissioned by the UK’s Cop26 president Alok Sharma, warned last year that new oil and gas production was incompatible with reaching net zero by 2050. A separate domestic review by the government, however, said that drilling could proceed subject to some conditions – a suggestion that led to the government consulting on its “checkpoint”.But ministers say they want to “safeguard the future” of the oil and gas industry, which welcomed the move as potentially being a boon to “investor confidence” in fossil fuels.The committee’s letter says UK extraction has a “relatively low carbon footprint”, at least for gas, and that “the UK will continue to be a net importer of fossil fuels for the foreseeable future, implying there may be emissions advantages to UK production replacing imports”. But they said that “the extra gas and oil extracted will support a larger global market overall” and that the situation is “not clear-cut” as in the case of coal.Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey, a former energy secretary in the coalition government, said the committee’s advice “disproves once and for all the net-zero myths being peddled by Conservative MPs”.“The answer to Britain’s long-term energy strategy is not more oil and gas. Instead, we need a green energy revolution, investing in renewables and insulating our drafty homes to cut bills and give us energy security for decades to come,” he said. “If we want to cut household bills today then the clear answer is a Robin Hood tax on the billions oil barons are raking in. What is the government waiting for?”Officials at the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy said they would consider the letter alongside all other responses.A spokesperson appeared to downplay the possibility of strict rules and said: “There will continue to be ongoing demand for oil and gas over the coming decades as we transition to cleaner and cheaper forms of energy generated in this country.“As the business ​and energy secretary has said, turning off North Sea gas overnight would put energy security, British jobs and industries at risk, and we would be more dependent on foreign imports.“We welcome the committee’s acknowledgement that carbon budgets can still be met if new oil and gas fields are developed in the UK.” More

Households could have saved nearly £400 a year in bills during the energy crisis if the government had not scrapped a green policy on homes, according to new analysis.Data from the Liberal Democrats, seen by The Independent, increased this figure from previous estimates to reflect the rising cost of living.It found plans to make all new homes achieve net zero emissions would have shaved hundreds of pounds off household bills when another price cap increase will see them soar in spring. “This is yet another example of how acting sooner on climate change can save consumers money on their bills,” Chris Venables, head of politics at the Green Alliance think tank, told The Independent. The scrapped environmental rules would have prevented new houses from releasing a net amount of carbon into the atmosphere during day-to-day running. Among other factors, this would have been achieved through good energy efficiency – considered key to keeping bills, as well as emissions, down. The Zero Carbon Homes policy was scrapped in 2015, the year before it was due to kick in. A subsequent report estimated it would have saved recently built houses up to £200 a year on energy bills. New research from the House of Commons library, requested by the Lib Dems, said this figure will rise to up to £370 when household bills increase with the new price cap in April. Large family homes built after 2016 could have saved up to this amount under zero carbon homes rules, while the minimum savings were estimated at £265, according to the data. Bills could have been up to £220 a year less in terraced homes and up to £140 less in flats, the research suggests. Wera Hobhouse, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for climate change and energy, said: “These figures lay bare the Conservatives’ failure in tackling the climate crisis and how their incompetence has worsened the cost of living crisis for so many people.”She added: “Hundreds of pounds have been slapped onto people’s bills by the Conservatives because of their short-sighted decision to scrap energy efficiency standards.”The Independent previously revealed around 800,000 new homes have been built to lower emission standards or without carbon offsets than otherwise have been mandated since. Mr Venables said: “The sooner the UK insulates its leaky housing stock, the sooner millions of Brits will be protected from volatile global fossil fuel markets and be less reliant on gas from Putin’s Russia.”Homes are estimated to account for around a fifth of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions.A Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities spokesperson said it rejected the analysis, claiming it “misunderstands the zero carbon homes policy” and does not take into account other government action. They said the policy involved carbon offsetting “rather than making homes zero carbon” and would have promided “limited benefits to consumers as it wouldn’t necessarily have increased the efficiency of their homes”. The spokesperson said the future homes standard, put forward for 2025, would deliver “genuinely zero carbon ready” homes.The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Standards has been approached for comment. More