The EU’s policies are not aligned with phasing out fossil fuels in the coming decades and will need to be revised in order to deliver net-zero emissions by 2050, according to a new report from the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change, covered by Reuters. The board states that “the EU needs to sharply decrease the use of fossil fuels, and almost fully phase out the use of coal and fossil gas in public electricity and heat generation by 2040”, according to the newswire. The report criticises EU policies supporting fossil fuels including subsidies and classification of gas infrastructure as a sustainable investment, the article notes. Politico says the “first-of-its-kind assessment” from a 15-member panel of top climate experts “laid out a host of recommendations for course corrections across every sector of the economy and urged new engagement from policymakers”. It describes the message as “stark”, with particular criticism aimed at inadequate efforts to cut emissions from agriculture across the bloc. The article notes that the report comes as “politicians across the bloc have called for a pause in green lawmaking” and farmers in Germany “are in revolt over a cut to their diesel subsidy”. Overall, it says the authors conclude that the pace at which emissions are cut must double, starting immediately, if the EU is to hit its 2030 goal to cut emissions 55% below 1990 levels. The Financial Times says the scientists call on the bloc to “implement previously announced plans to support clean technologies and the development of critical minerals”. On the topic of agriculture, EurActiv quotes one of the authors who says there is a lack of incentives for landowners to reduce emissions and increase emissions removals. Bloomberg notes that, with this in mind, the report calls for “some form of emissions pricing in the agricultural and land use sectors by 2031 at the latest”.

Meanwhile, according to Recharge News, trade body WindEurope has announced that last year saw record new capacity additions of offshore wind power across the continent. BusinessGreen reports that members of the European Parliament have voted to ban the use of terms like “environmentally friendly”, “climate neutral” and “eco” when they are unsubstantiated, starting in 2026. This move would include a “blanket ban” on such claims if they are “solely justified through the purchase of carbon offsets”. This comes as Climate Home News reports that developers are trying to get “junk” offsets from hundreds of controversial projects transferred into the new UN system for trading offsets, under Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement.

In related news, various outlets including the Press Association report on a new study from economists at the Delft University of Technology that finds sea level rise could cost the EU and UK up to £749bn by the end of the century under a very high emissions scenario. The Times reports that the UK alone could face costs of £100bn over this period.

The European Commission is set to call for the EU to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2040 in the latest stage of the bloc’s overarching climate goals, Politico reports, based on conversations with two anonymous officials. The article notes that “the target is in line with recommendations by the EU’s scientific advisory board” (see above), which has called for a reduction of 90-95% by 2040, compared to a 1990 baseline. The commission is set to reveal three options for the 2040 goal, which is a step on the way to net-zero by 2050, on 6 February, it explains. So far, Politico notes that only Denmark has supported the 90% goal, with Bulgaria and Poland saying they are open to discussing it. Reuters says “with EU Parliament elections in June, the new target is set to test political appetite to continue Europe’s ambitious green agenda”. The new commission, formed after the EU elections, will have to make a final proposal to fix the target into law, it adds.

Separately, another Reuters article reports that the EU Council and Parliament have reached a provisional deal to cut carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from heavy-duty vehicles, specifically new trucks over 7.5 tonnes and coaches, by 2040. While aiming for a 90% reduction by 2040, compared with 2019 levels, vehicle manufacturers will also have to cut emissions by 45% from 2030 and 65% from 2035, it notes.

Tata Steel has said it can no longer afford to continue steel production at its loss-making plant in Port Talbot, south Wales, while it completes a four-year transition plan to low-carbon production, the Guardian reports. The Indian-owned company, which is getting £500m from the government to help with its transition plan, rejected a trade union proposal designed to keep its blast furnaces running while it builds new electric arc furnaces to replace them, the newspaper says. Wales Online reports that the announcement threatens 3,000 jobs across Tata’s operations in Wales. Without the Port Talbot blast furnaces, the UK will be the “only major economy unable to make steel from scratch” as the nation’s other remaining steel manufacturer, British Steel, also transitions to electric arc furnaces, the Financial Times reports. It adds that electric arc furnaces use “a less labour-intensive process to make steel from scrap”, rather than from molten iron ore. The Daily Telegraph makes the link between the closure and the UK’s climate goals, noting that “Tata has argued that the installation of new electric arc furnaces are necessary for Britain to hit its net-zero targets”. The newspaper says trade union GMB “claimed Tata’s plan may actually create more carbon emissions…as it would leave Britain reliant on imported steel in some instances”. BBC News has an article considering how the move could impact the UK’s emissions, noting that Tata says the switch could cut the Port Talbot site’s emissions by around 90% a year. It quotes commentators who note that the UK and Welsh governments were failing to deliver a “just transition” to a greener future. The Times and Sky News also have the story.

The UK government is only on track to meet 10% of its green targets, according to England’s green watchdog the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP), in a report covered by the Financial Times. The OEP highlights climate change adaptation as one of the areas in which the government has failed to make sufficient progress, the newspaper notes. BusinessGreen reports that “the state of England’s natural world is continuing its decades-long decline, with little notable progress towards reversing nature loss over the past year”, according to the OEP. The Daily Telegraph has a separate article taking aim at the opposition Labour party, and specifically its plans to “fast-track the building of wind and solar farms in the countryside”. It says this raises concerns that “rural communities will struggle to block net-zero projects”.

Another Financial Times article reports that the UK government is set to extend subsidies for the Drax biomass power plant beyond 2027, when the current regime expires. The move has led to criticism from campaigners “who want the plant to focus on wind and solar technologies”. The Guardian says the proposals “defy” the government’s own climate advisers at the Climate Change Committee, which it says has warned against extending subsidies beyond 2027 for biomass plants that do not use carbon capture.

Elsewhere, “exclusive” analysis from the NGO Global Witness covered in the Guardian concludes that the share of UK’s oil and gas that is exported has increased from 60% to 80% over the last two decades. The newspaper notes that this goes against the government’s claims that “maxing out” the North Sea will increase UK energy security. The Daily Mirror also has an “exclusive”, reporting that the government is increasing taxes on domestic flights, namely air passenger duty, but not for people flying by private jet and helicopter.

China’s commerce minister Wang Wentao says that China will continue with the “Made in China” strategy amid increasing efforts “from foreign investors to diversify their portfolios”, reports the South China Morning Post, pointing to China’s success exporting electric vehicles, lithium batteries and solar cells as examples of “new industries enhancing the country’s status despite weaker global trade growth”. The state-run newspaper China Daily quotes H L Yiu of Hong Kong Science and Technology Parks as saying that “‘de-risking’ through measures such as subsidies and tariffs…won’t work”. Chinese financial outlet Yicai shares comments by Liu Sushe, deputy director of the national development and reform commission (NDRC), who says that “there is a tremendous demand for investment” in the green transformation”. The Wall Street Journal says that “the hope is that growth in…the ‘new three’ industries and other favoured sectors will help China’s economy banish the spectres of deflation and Japan-style stagnation”. The Financial Times carries a commentary by European economics commentator Martin Sandbu, who writes that “the EU could see itself overtaken as the world’s fastest-decarbonising region by a China flush with EVs on its own roads and solar and wind farms in its own fields”. He adds that this “should make it a lot easier for [China’s] companies to adapt to policies such as the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM)”. 

Meanwhile, according to the national energy administration (NEA), the country’s top energy regulator, China’s total electricity consumption in 2023 “reached 92,241 terawatt-hours (TWh), a year-on-year growth of 6.7%”, reports the state-run industry newspaper China Energy News. Another China Energy Net article says that China is, for the first time domestically, using “existing thermal power channels to bundle and transmit newly generated renewable energy”. Once the project reaches full capacity, it will annually produce “more than 4.1TWh of green electricity, saving more than 1.4m tonnes of standard coal and reducing carbon dioxide emissions by over 3.5m tonnes”, the article adds. Chinese energy website IN-EN.com covers the same story, saying that this project “not only pioneers the combination of existing thermal power channels for transmitting multiple complementary new energy sources, but also establishes a new model for the export of new energy power in China”. A separate article by China Energy News reports that an official from the national development and reform commission (NDRC) says that the “centrally dispatched power plants maintain a coal inventory of over 200m tonnes, an increase of approximately 30m tonnes compared to the same period last year”. 

Elsewhere, the industry newspaper China Electric Power News reports that Liu Deshun, the director of the energy conservation and technology equipment department of the NEA, says that the NEA would “take technological innovation to guide the construction of a new energy system and further promote the high-quality development of energy”. Finally, the 21st Century Business Herald quotes analyst He Siyao from the consultancy MSCI as saying that “the cleantech revenues of MSCI China Index companies have already surpassed those based on fossil fuels”.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) has forecast larger global oil demand in 2024 than previously projected in its latest monthly market report, the Hill reports. It says demand will likely grow by around 1.24m barrels per day, up from the 1.1m it estimates back in December, the article notes. The IEA says the proliferation of electric cars will contribute to projected growth this year being lower than the 2.3m barrels per day last year, the article adds. The Times also has the story. Separately, Reuters reports that, according to thinktank Ember, global electricity generation from coal hit record highs in 2023.

Meanwhile, the Press Association reports that the Met Office has noted that CO2 “is building up in the atmosphere faster than what is needed to limit global temperatures to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels”.

The Washington Post has an editorial about the likelihood that the world will breach the 1.5C Paris Agreement limit. It says that while “those who like clutching at straws” can point out that it is still technically possible, “most people can surmise that the world is missing this goal”. It notes: “The evidence that global efforts have not met global ambitions does not change the nature of the task…Even if the world is, in fact, careening toward some catastrophic scenario, it remains true that each ton of carbon dioxide removed from the world’s energy matrix, and each ton of methane and nitrous oxide removed from the livestock and agriculture industries, will help limit climate change and its associated damage.” The editorial says the news should simply spur leaders to take bolder action, develop technologies and even “cautiously” consider geoengineering. The article says “too many technologies and mechanisms have been left by the wayside”, highlighting nuclear power and carbon taxes as examples.

Separately, an editorial in the Financial Times warns that the world’s cities, “where over 80% of global gross domestic product and the majority of the planet’s population live”, are not adequately prepared for climate change. It says “too many cities are taking inadequate action”, highlighting London as a key example. “It is essential…that national and local governments find a way through the myriad difficulties. Otherwise their urban economic powerhouses will come under increasing strain, multiplying their problems in the process,” the editorial concludes.

BusinessGreen editor James Murray comments on the UK Labour party’s climate plans and the attacks that Conservative and right-leaning media have aimed at them. “As Labour’s newly released campaign ‘bible’ for prospective candidates makes clear, it is set to go into the election with one the most ambitious green economic programmes ever proposed by a major party in an industrialised nation,” he writes. Murray notes that there are many questions that Labour will need to answer around its plans, including the £28bn of annual spending on green infrastructure, but says most of these questions can be answered. “The problem is a lack of message discipline from parts of the Labour party is undermining a pitch that polling suggests is actually very popular with the public,” he says.

Elsewhere, the Daily Mirror has an editorial about the closure of the steel making facilities and Port Talbot, and associated job losses. “It did not have to be. If owners Tata had put together a proper transition plan as it moves towards a greener future then the plant and the jobs would have been saved,” it says.

Meanwhile, climate-sceptic writer Ross Clark has published one of his regular attacks on heat pumps and electric cars in the Daily Telegraph, in which he claims that the devices do not work in the cold. [It is worth noting that Norway, the country with the highest share of electric cars, is a famously cold country. For more on common electric vehicle myths see Carbon Brief’s factcheck. Heat pumps, too, are very popular in Nordic countries, as this Carbon Brief guest post explains.] Columnist Richard Littlejohn has published a climate-sceptic article in the Daily Mail, in which he refers to “the Great Climate Change Hoax”. He writes: “Climate change is a religion. Not in the conventional sense, but more like those televangelical conmen in the US who set up their own Church of the Sacred Bleeding Heart of Jesus, located somewhere in Southern California, to fleece gullible Godbotherers of their hard-earned.”

According to a new study, bottom trawling – fishing by dragging a net along the sea floor – may have released up to 370m tonnes of CO2 each year over the past two and a half decades. Researchers combine carbon-cycle models, fishing data and satellite imagery to estimate the impacts of this type of fishing on atmospheric CO2. They find that up to 60% of the CO2 stirred up from the seabed by trawling is released into the atmosphere over seven-to-nine years. They also reveal more localised effects, noting that trawling may have lowered pH in some heavily fished seas.

Sea level rise may cause losses of more than 20% of GDP in some localities across the EU and UK under a very-high emissions scenario, a new study says. Using an economic model, a natural disaster damages dataset and projections of future sea level, researchers find “striking regional disparities” and sectoral differences in the impacts of sea level rise. They find that industry and public services feel “significant” effects from sea level rise, while construction benefits from the work needed for recovery. The researchers write that their work “underscor[es] the necessity of region-specific adaptation policies that embrace uneven geographic impacts and unique sectoral profiles to inform resilient strategy design”.

New research shows that a 1C increase in annual average temperatures will reduce life expectancy at birth by an average of nearly half a year. A researcher uses life-expectancy data from 191 countries across the period 1940 to 2020, along with temperature and rainfall data, to model how changes in climate will affect lifespans. He finds that temperature alone will reduce life expectancy by 0.44C, but in combination with changes in rainfall, life expectancy will fall further. He also finds that climate change will “disproportionately” affect women’s life expectancy and concludes that the study “underscores the urgency of addressing climate change as a public health crisis”.