select search filters
briefings
roundups & rapid reactions
Fiona fox's blog
Scientists comment on the Conservative Party saying they will repeal the 2008 Climate Change Act.
Prof Pete Smith FRS, Professor of Soils & Global Change, University of Aberdeen, said:
“The Climate Change Act was passed with wide cross-party support. I have been very proud that the UK has not politicised climate change in the same way as it has been in some other countries. Alas, those days appear to be at an end. Current and future generations, as they experience even worse impacts of climate change, will judge the Conservative Party harshly on this policy decision in the coming years.”
Prof Myles Allen FRS, Head of Atmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics, University of Oxford, said:
“We need a conversation about how to stop climate change: perhaps the Climate Change Act, designed almost 20 years ago, needs updating, just as the NHS, designed almost 80 years ago, needs updating. But you wouldn’t announce you were going to scrap the NHS without explaining what you were going to replace it with. The Conservatives assure us they support action on climate change and believe in safeguarding our environment for future generations: so, if they are planning to scrap the Climate Change Act, what would they replace it with?”
Prof Michael Grubb, Professor of International Energy and Climate Change, University College London (UCL), said:
“The striking fact is how few UK businesses support scrapping the Climate Change Act. The reason is simple. Business knows that climate change is a real and pressing problem; that the future lies in low carbon energy and related innovation; and business values clarity and certainty within a firm legal framework. Scrapping a far-sighted Act, that was passed with huge bipartisan consensus, opposes all those realities.”
Prof Bill McGuire, Professor Emeritus of Geophysical Hazards, UCL, said:
“Repealing the Climate Change Act at the height of the climate emergency is nothing less than insane. Moreover, it reveals the complete ignorance of Badenoch and the Tory party in respect of the science. Our world is heading to hell in a hand cart, with extreme weather projected to cost more than one third of current global GDP by 2050, and societal collapse a real threat. And Badenoch and her party seem determined to help this along”.
Prof Stuart Haszeldine, Professor of Carbon Capture and Storage, University of Edinburgh, said:
“Conservative plans to focus on fossil fuel energy extraction and use will not only result in much higher fossil fuel prices as the UK imports gas and oil from unstable regimes globally, but will vaporise the billions of pounds from multinational companies invested and pledged to UK industrial growth during the past 12 months. That will cause a terminal loss of confidence in UK stability for global investment in industry and globally. Simple historical records show that North Sea hydrocarbon production has declined since the early 2000s.
“Citing China as an example of not following the UK lead shows an ignorance that China has built more solar PV and installed more wind power than any other country in the world. And that China CO2 emissions have flatlined since 2022, and will trend downwards to reach Net Zero by 2060, almost identical to the UK. China does not have an energy price crisis, nor is it “blessed” with febrile Conservative and Reform arithmetic, but has instead committed to evidence based actions which historically have overdelivered to curb climate change.
“The Climate Change Act has proven to be a stable legal foundation, providing what companies continually seek, a stable pathway into the investment future. To shred this foundation of the past 20 years will remove the UK from being best global location for future energy innovation. Instead the UK will de-industrialise as higher carbon prices are imposed by our trading neighbours. Instead of “bringing energy back home” The UK will choose to “forever walk alone”.
Prof Tim Osborn, Professor of Climate Science and Director of the Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia, said:
“Imagine someone suggesting this idea: “Mitigating threats to the rule of law costs British people money, adds burdensome rules and regulations on people and businesses. Let’s only take action to uphold the rule of law when the country can afford it and it doesn’t drive away businesses and wealth.” That would obviously be crazy, right? Now replace “rule of law” with “our climate”.
“This framing highlights the flaw in scrapping the Climate Change Act. Just as the rule of law is a foundational pillar of a stable, prosperous society – not something to be postponed until it’s convenient – climate action is similarly essential. Delaying action until it’s “affordable” or “non-disruptive” risks undermining the very systems that support long-term economic and societal wellbeing.”
Dr Shaun Fitzgerald, Director of the Centre for Climate Repair and Director of Research for Cambridge Zero, University of Cambridge, said:
“Repealing the climate change act would be a serious regression of our efforts to tackle climate change. Climate change is happening, and it is really clear on a scientific basis that we need to reduce emissions. It is right to question how we navigate the path of reducing emissions, but not whether we should navigate it at all. If the climate change act is repealed, then there has to be a replacement piece of legislation. What is it that the Conservative Party propose instead? Ignoring climate change is not an option.”
Prof Kevin Anderson, Professor of Energy and Climate Change at the University of Manchester, said:
“When Putin invaded Ukraine, many UK households were pushed deeper into fuel poverty, not because we had “too many” renewables, but because we had too few. The real purpose behind attempts to weaken or replace the Climate Change Act has little to do with protecting households or driving economic growth. It is far more calculated: to secure the ongoing flow of revenue from UK families to oil and gas executives. With renewables, once the infrastructure is built, wind and solar power are virtually free. And that is the problem for them, no endless profits, no constant cash stream, and far fewer Party donations.”
Prof Hugh Hunt, Deputy Director of the Centre for Climate Repair, Cambridge University, said:
“The UK has led the way with action on climate change. The Climate Change Act was groundbreaking in 2008 setting a legally binding framework for net zero in the UK by 2050. Since then the impacts of climate change have substantially worsened. Now is not the time to lessen our resolve.”
Dr Garyfallos Konstantinoudis, Lecturer at the Grantham Institute – Climate Change and the Environment, Imperial College London said:
“The UK just experienced its hottest summer on record and estimated 1687 people died because of high temperatures across the nation.
“It is clear the climate has already warmed to a dangerous level. Every fraction of a degree of warming will lead to hotter summers, even larger surges in heat deaths and more pressure on the NHS. That is why it is so important that emissions are reduced to net zero as quickly as possible.”
Prof Friederike Otto, Professor in Climate Science at the Centre for Environmental Policy Imperial College London, said:
“This announcement is an insult to low-income and young people across the UK. They are the ones who already struggle and will experience the worst consequences of any delays to cut emissions.
“Climate change is already hurting the UK. Summer heatwaves are killing the elderly, people with health issues, lowering productivity and turning public transport and low-income neighbourhoods into heat traps. Wetter winters are flooding homes, farms and sports fields.
“Every political party in the UK has a simple choice – cater for the already rich and influential and continue to hang on to fossil fuels and watch these impacts intensify, or care for the vast majority of the population, actually fight inequality and shift away from fossil fuels and get to net zero for a safer, healthier future.”
Prof Joanna Haigh, Emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Physics and former Co-Director of the Grantham Institute – Climate Change and the Environment, said:
“To suggest that decarbonisation targets make “people poorer, destroy jobs, and make our economy weaker” is an extraordinary reversal of the truth.
“The cost of newly installed wind and solar power is often lower than new fossil fuel plants, making energy generation more affordable and accessible. It can provide income for landowners and generate property and income taxes for local governments, stimulating local economies.
“Developing new technologies for green industries provides jobs and supports the UK in leading engineering advances, alongside the sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions needed to stop global warming and provide a cleaner, healthier environment.”
Dr Luke Hatton, Researcher in Energy Economics at the Centre for Environmental Policy & Chemical Engineering, Imperial College London, said:
“Whilst still-rising domestic energy prices in Britain are rightly a cause for concern, the data is very clear – it’s our exposure to volatile global gas prices that are the cause, not net zero commitments.
“Natural gas sets the price of electricity in the UK in 2021 97% of the time, despite accounting for only a third of electricity generation. And we saw only too recently in the cost-of-living crisis what our continued reliance on natural gas means for the affordability of household energy bills.
“Ditching the Climate Change Act and maxing out the North Sea’s reserves will only maintain our exposure to volatile fossil fuel prices, which remain three times higher than before the energy crisis. Renewables – supported by a mixture of storage technologies and low-carbon generation sources – are the route to reducing the UK’s energy bills, not continued reliance on costly fossil fuels.”
Dr Caterina Brandmayr, Director of Policy and Translation at the Grantham Institute – Climate Change and the Environment, Imperial College London, said:
“This announcement reflects a fundamental misreading of the public mood on climate change. Opinion polls consistently show high levels of public concern about climate change and the desire for the Government to do more, not less, to tackle the climate challenge and speed up the transition to a modern, climate-resilient economy powered by home grown renewable energy.
“Taking action to combat climate change, in line with targets informed by extensive scientific evidence, can benefit communities across the UK in all kinds of ways – minimising our exposure to energy shocks, cutting air pollution, and reducing the risks posed by deadly heatwaves and floods.”
Prof Jim Watson, Professor of Energy Policy and Director of the UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources, said:
“Repealing the Climate Change Act would be a big mistake. It is an important mechanism for ensuring that the UK delivers an equitable share of the emissions reductions required to tackle climate change. It is also an important symbol of UK leadership, which has attracted attention – and emulation – by many other countries. Whilst UK emissions are small on a global scale, its position as a leader on climate action means that the impact of the UK’s emissions reduction is much larger.
“The Conservatives are wrong to blame the Act – and climate change policies – for the high energy bills households and businesses have experienced over the past few years. The primary driver of the energy price shock many are still living with is the steep rise in international gas prices due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Producing more gas in the UK will not bring these prices down – nor will it mean significant reductions in energy bills. By contrast, action to shift our energy system away from gas will provide resilience against future fossil fuel price rises.”
Bob Ward, Policy and Communications Director at the Grantham Research I statute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science, said:
“It is disappointing that the Conservatives under Kemi Badenoch’s leadership are aligning themselves with Donald Trump and Nigel Farage by ignoring the science and abandoning any serious effort to stop climate change. The claim that keeping Britain dependent on fossil fuels is good for economic growth is demonstrably false. Our dependence on fossil fuels causes high prices for electricity and heating for businesses and households. And we are experiencing growing costs from the impacts of climate change, including sea level rise and more intense and frequent extreme weather events. The only pro-growth strategy is to invest in domestic clean energy. It is clear that the Conservatives cannot now be trusted on the environment or the economy.”
Prof Neil Ward, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of East Anglia, said:
“Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is not a drag on economic development but a stimulus to it. It has the added benefit in the UK of cutting other forms of pollution and strengthening national resilience.”
Prof Andy Turner, Programme Lead in Climate & Global Change, National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Reading, said:
“In the space of only five years, the Conservative Party have gone from “follow the science” to “follow the ignorant”.
“We’ve known for decades that greenhouse gas emissions lead to warming of the planet, and the evidence for this only strengthens with each new climate report from the IPCC. Each fraction of a degree of extra warming that we don’t prevent will lead to worsening floods, droughts, heatwaves, and other extreme weather in the UK and across the world.
“Far from giving us greater energy security and lower costs, repealing the Climate Change Act and deprioritising investments in and expansions of renewable energy will make us more reliant on foreign fossil fuel imports, often from questionable regimes and now-unreliable allies. In the long run, we will also suffer economically due to worsening food, energy, and water security across the world, leading to more conflict and migration.
“Where we could be seen as a world leader in shaping green policy, invention, and investment, this will set us back years.”
Prof Ed Hawkins, National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Reading, said:
“Climate change is already making people’s lives more difficult through more frequent floods, heatwaves, and other extreme weather. Without continued and rapid climate action we’re essentially throwing away the tools halfway through fixing the problem. We will regret not acting faster on climate change.”
Prof Daniela Schmidt, Professor of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, said:
“Repealing the Climate Change Act will not make the impacts of climate change go away. While people with wealth can find a house not impacted by flooding, afford higher costs for food and have air conditioning in their houses, many people in the UK will not have the ability to adapt their life to the accelerating climate change. Massive extraction of oil from the North Sea is not without costs, as climate change is impacting health, killing people in the UK in heatwaves, and destroying livelihoods and nature. Importantly, the companies extracting are under no obligation to sell it back to the UK market, showing a lack of understanding how global economy works. If the idea is to generate cheaper energy, all the information is out there that renewables are a cheap source of energy.”
Prof Jan Rosenow, Professor of Energy and Climate Policy, Environmental Change Institute (ECI), University of Oxford, said:
“Repealing the Climate Change Act would be a monumental error and an act of national self harm. The UK would become less attractive for clean technology investment, more dependent on volatile fossil fuel imports, and would fall behind its peers. Many countries followed the UK by putting climate targets into law. At a time when the US president is denying that climate change is a problem the UK needs to show leadership, not backtrack from its commitment.”
Prof Mark Maslin, Professor of Climatology, University College London (UCL), said:
“The Conservative Party announcement to scrap the 2008 Climate Change Act (CCA) is pure political theatre and shows a deep lack of understanding of the modern global economy and would undermine the UK credibility globally. First, the cheapest and most secure energy for the UK is renewables which the CCA advocates. Second, the new industrial revolution is building the green transition infrastructure and technology – which is already creating huge numbers of jobs in the UK and boosting our exports. This green low carbon transition is at the heart of the CCA. Third, the UK is deeply respected around the world for our leadership when it comes to tackling climate change – something Kemi Badenoch is willing to throw away for the chance of getting a few votes back from Reform. In short this is cheap political gimmick which makes the Conservative Party look out of touch with British people who want action on climate change and a strong modern economy.”
Prof Jon Gluyas, Ørsted/Ikon Chair in Geoenergy, Carbon Capture & Storage at Durham University and founder of the UK National Geothermal Centre, said:
“The Climate Change Act of 2008 is as critical to the future of the UK as was the Clean Air Act of 1956. The 1956 act improved air quality massively and has been matched by legislation in other countries, notably and quite recently by China. The climate change act has its flaws and has been exploited by work-around practises which are not climate friendly but as a piece of world-leading legislation has ushered in a massive reduction in the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions associated with electricity generation in country and buffered the UK to an extent against that volatility of oil and gas prices and general hostages to fortune of importing fossil fuels. The notion that we can drill our way into energy security cannot be satisfied by onshore shale gas fracking or offshore exploration in a spent petroleum province. If the nation really wants home energy then all we need to do is to exploit the untapped geothermal resource beneath our feet. It can deliver heat for our homes and power for intended data centres that is clean and sustainable. It can help resell our oil-workers, deliver more skilled jobs and growth for the economy. It is energy for all and forever – well at least for 5 billion years!”
Declared interests
The nature of this story means everyone quoted above could be perceived to have a stake in it. As such, our policy is not to ask for interests to be declared – instead, they are implicit in each person’s affiliation.