Kemi Badenoch, the leader of the UK’s opposition Conservative party, is set to give a speech today rejecting the net-zero by 2050 target as “impossible”, the Guardian reports. [The government’s advisory Climate Change Committee (CCC) recently set out a “feasible and deliverable” way to hit the target.] The newspaper says the pledge was enacted by Badenoch’s “recent [Conservative] predecessor Theresa May” and was “emblematic of the cross-party consensus on tackling climate change”. It adds that news of the announcement “triggered anger among environmentalists in her own party”. BBC News says Badenoch is due to say that net-zero cannot be reached “without a serious drop in our living standards or by bankrupting us”. [The CCC recently said targeting net-zero would help cut household costs by £1,400 a year by 2050, concluding that the net cost to the UK of reaching the target was 73% lower than previously thought, at just 0.2% of GDP. The government’s Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) concluded in 2021: “Unmitigated climate change would ultimately have catastrophic economic and fiscal consequences.”] BBC News continues: “The Conservative leader did not set out a replacement for the target, but her words mark a sharp break from years of political consensus. A source close to Badenoch said the Conservative leader still backs net zero, but not by 2050.” [The OBR found that delayed action “could double the overall cost”.] The broadcaster continues: “[Badenoch] will say she is not making a ‘moral judgment’ on net-zero or debating whether climate change exists. But she said her Tory party is going to ‘deal with the reality’ of the target, something she argues Labour and past Conservative governments ignored.” [As a government minister in 2022, Badenoch gave a speech in which she praised the “opportunity, growth and revitalised communities” offered by “the clean energy revolution”, which she touted as the “future-proofing force that will help us create a better tomorrow”.] The Press Association reports that the Conservative Environment Network called the decision a “mistake” that “undermines the environmental legacy of recent Tory governments”. The i newspaper reports on the “Tory backlash” to Badenoch’s speech, as does the Mirror. BusinessGreen says: “It remains to be seen if Badenoch’s speech offers an alternative climate goal or decarbonisation strategy for the UK, or whether it will acknowledge the economic costs associated with failing to reach net-zero by 2050 and the increased climate impacts that would result.” Bloomberg says that Badenoch is trying to win back voters that her party has lost to Reform UK. A frontpage story in the Times reports that Badenoch will say Labour does not have a “plausible plan” for hitting the target. [The Labour government is shortly due to publish a new plan for hitting UK climate goals, after the previous Conservative government’s version was repeatedly ruled unlawful.] The story is the frontpage splash for the Daily Mail and is also carried on the frontpage of the Daily Telegraph. Another Press Association article says that Badenoch will also announce a “policy renewal” process for the party. Sky News and the Sun also have the story. Meanwhile, the Daily Telegraph and the Daily Mail report that Badenoch was heckled by two protestors from a group called Climate Resistance, during a speech in London’s Guildhall yesterday.

In other UK news, BusinessGreen reports that “Rachel Reeves will today advance plans for a major shake-up of the UK’s environmental regulations, arguing sweeping reforms are required to both boost economic growth and deliver on the government’s climate and nature targets.” The Times reports on a hydro power plant which “has been criticised by RSPB Scotland which says it will damage peatland and destroy the habitat of endangered birds”. 

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the energy department and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have re-hired many of the workers that they fired last month, to comply with recent court rulings that the firings were illegal, Axios reports. According to the outlet, the employees are being put on administrative leave while the court case plays out. Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that the EPA is planning to eliminate its largest department – the office of research and development – by “purging” up to 75% of the people who work there. According to the newspaper, up to 1,155 chemists, biologists, toxicologists and other scientists could be fired. The newspaper says the strategy was presented to White House officials on Friday for review. It adds: “The remaining staff members would be placed elsewhere within the EPA ‘to provide increased oversight and align with administration priorities’, according to the language shared with the New York Times by staff members who work for Democrats on the House science committee.” The Financial Times reports that science institutions in Europe are “racing to hire researchers from the US”. CNN reports on the impacts of the firings at NOAA under the headline: “Trump has fired scientists who monitor the ocean. It comes at the worst possible time.” The Guardian reports on the impact of the layoffs for Australian weather and climate science, warning that “Australian meteorologists and scientists rely on NOAA data and software for both operational weather forecasting and long-term predictions of the climate”. Separately, the New York Times reports that the EPA has not provided any evidence of “waste, fraud, or abuse” to justify why it cancelled a $20bn climate grant programme. The newspaper reports that last week, a federal judge ordered the EPA to justify its decision to freeze the funds and cancel the programme, adding: “But in response to the judge’s order on Monday, the EPA did not present new direct evidence. Instead, it referred to unidentified media reports as well as a video released last year by Project Veritas, a conservative group known for using covert recordings to embarrass its political opponents.” The judge is expected to decide whether or not to order the release of the funds, the newspaper says.

In other US news, the Hill reports that on Friday, president Donald Trump signed a resolution to block the implementation of an EPA fee on methane emissions from oil and gas companies. Elsewhere, Bloomberg says: “Trump said he would look to counter China’s economic advantage from coal-based electricity by authorising his administration to ramp up production of power from the fossil fuel.” [US coal plant retirements are due to double this year as the fuel gives way to “cheaper” gas and renewables.] The Guardian reports that the director of Project 2025 has said Trump’s actions are “way beyond my wildest dreams”. The New York Times reports on a group of Republicans and business leaders who “want to protect Biden-era tax credits for wind, solar and other clean energy”. And outlets including Inside Climate News continue to report on severe weather and fire warnings across the US.

Reuters reports that China’s thermal power generation, “fuelled mainly by coal”, fell in both January and February this year, according to data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) on Monday. The newswire adds that overall, the country’s power generation dropped by 1.3% year-on-year to 1,492 terawatt-hours (TWh), which is only the third time the country’s power demand has fallen since 1998 – the others being in 2020, at “the start of Covid-19”, and 2009, “following the global financial crisis”. Bloomberg also covers the story, saying that the “rare early-year decline” comes amid “milder winter temperatures”, adding that the slowdown in electricity generation “contrasted with increased output” of coal and gas. China’s coal production rose 8% year-on-year in January and February, according to Reuters, meeting analysts’ expectations for “output to tick up again slightly this year”. Another Reuters article says the government “denied reports” of deliberate plans to slow imports by extending wait times on inspections of imported coal. Industry news outlet BJX News reports on a new government data release showing wind power generation rose by 10.4% and solar power by 27.4% year-on-year. State-run newspaper China Daily publishes an article titled “clean hydrogen gets green light”, as part of a series “illustrating the country’s efforts to achieve its carbon peak and carbon neutrality goals”.

Meanwhile, state news agency Xinhua reports that Qinghai lake in northwestern China has seen “rising water level[s] and expanded water area for 20 consecutive years”, due in part to “intensified global warming”. The National Energy Administration (NEA) has issued a notice on “effective flood and drought prevention work in the power sector for 2025”, adding that firms should prepare for potential power outages caused by flooding, BJX News reports.

Elsewhere, the Guardian reports that Chinese EV company BYD has “unveiled a new charging system that it said could make it possible for EVs to charge as quickly as it takes to refill with petrol and announced for the first time that it would build a charging network across China”. According to the newspaper, the “super e-platform” will enable cars to travel 400km on a five-minute charge. Charging speeds would be twice as fast as Tesla’s superchargers, it adds. The Financial Times reports that shares in BYD reached a record high on Tuesday following the news. The South China Morning Post, Bloomberg, CNN and Reuters also cover the story. 

UK energy secretary Ed Miliband has announced a “new annual UK-China climate dialogue”, with Chinese environment minister Huang Runqiu expected to attend “the first summit…in London later this year”, according to the Guardian. Agence France-Presse reports that Miliband also met Wang Hongzhi, head of the NEA, as well as executive vice-premier Ding Xuexiang. The Times reports that yesterday, Miliband said the Labour government “is launching a new drive to co-operate with China on green technology and efforts to reduce carbon emissions”. Reuters reports that Xuexiang told Miliband that “China is willing to work with the United Kingdom to deepen cooperation in financial services, trade and investment, as well as green and low-carbon development”. 

An annual review from the United Nations Environment Programme finds that emissions from the building and construction sector have stopped rising for the first time since 2020, the Independent reports. It continues: “Over the past year, the energy intensity of the global building sector has dropped by nearly 10%, while the share of renewable energy use has risen by almost 5%. However, the report also highlighted a glaring gap: around half of all new buildings worldwide are still constructed without mandatory energy codes.” The newspaper adds that the report “calls on major carbon-emitting nations to adopt mandatory zero-carbon building codes by 2028, with all other countries following no later than 2035”. BusinessGreen adds that over 2015-23, CO2 emissions from buildings and construction worldwide rose 5.4%. It adds that according to UNEP, this is “far below the estimated 28% reduction required to align the industry with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5C warming pathway”.

An editorial in the Daily Telegraph welcomes the decision by Kemi Badenoch, leader of the opposition Conservative party, to drop her support for the UK’s legally-binding net-zero by 2050 target. It quotes former Conservative prime minister Theresa May saying as she signed the target into law in 2019 that the goal was “a conservative mission to end our contribution to climate change and build a more prosperous and resilient economy”. The newspaper adds: “This is a remarkable reversal since no Conservatives voted against the 2019 decision and just a handful opposed the Climate Change Act when it was first introduced in 2008.” Still, the newspaper says the net-zero target is “unrealistic and economically harmful”. An editorial in the Sun says: “At last, after all these years, a Tory leader will today tell the truth about net-zero. Not that it isn’t desirable long-term. Simply that it can’t be done, even by 2050. Kemi Badenoch’s statement will be a sea change after all the vacuous eco posturing of successive Tory governments and now Labour energy secretary Ed Miliband, whose delusional fanaticism poses a dire threat to our economy and security.” 

William Becker, an opinion contributor at the Hill and a former regional director at the US Department of Energy, writes that there is a method to Donald Trump’s “alarmism”. He says that Trump is “distracting America” from its “true emergency” of climate change, while “methodically destroying the federal policies that were doing something about it”. He continues: “As Team Trump dwells inside its bubble of false facts and alternative realities, the rest of America is experiencing a relentless succession of tragedies. The human and economic costs are devastating.” Becker lists the lives lost and financial costs of recent extreme weather events. He adds: “Oil companies and banks that had promised to become carbon-neutral are now capitulating to Trump by canceling their pledges.” However, he says that “pressure from voters and consumers could change this trend”, noting that more than 70% of Americans “accept that global warming is underway”.

New research explores how “legacy” cities – post-industrial cities experiencing population and economic decline – are incorporating environmental justice into their climate action plans. Assessing 15 cities in the US, the researchers find that few “provided enough details to determine if equity and justice will be prioritised during the implementation process of their planning efforts”. Specifically, legacy cities showed a “promising understanding of distributive justice issues”, the authors say, “such as by discussing groups that face disproportionate exposure to climate change impacts”. However, cities “demonstrated less priority for matters of procedural justice, using vague language when describing who will be involved in decisions regarding climate action strategies”, the study adds.