UK ministers OK legally binding targets in climate change bill
Ministers at the UK House of Commons last week approved, by a clear majority, a climate change bill that would commit that country to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80% from 1990 levels by 2050. If the bill passes scrutiny by the parliament’s upper house and receives Royal Assent—as is expected later this month—the UK would be the first country in the world to make emissions reduction targets legally binding.
After two years in the making, 463 ministers of parliament (MPs) voted for and three voted against Climate Change Bill [HL] 2007-08 on its third reading on Oct. 28.
As well as establishing rigorous targets, the bill requires that the government publishes five yearly “carbon budgets” capping emissions from this year. To make it easier for future governments to meet the target, it also enables them to set up new carbon trading schemes.
Additionally, it would mandate that large and midsize companies disclose their carbon emissions from 2012—though it does not define exactly how big a company has to be. A consultation will also begin on whether smaller businesses should face the same reporting requirements, the Financial Times reported.
The bill would also force the government to take into account the aviation and shipping industries in emissions targets once a method of measuring international emissions has been decided.
The Telegraph reported that in all of six hours of debate, “only two MPs questioned the need for such a Bill, which had swept through its second reading with only five opposed.”
One minister, Peter Lilley, refuted the argument that the bill was necessary to combat global warming by pointing out that the streets outside were blanketed with snow—the first October snowfall in London in more than 70 years. Lilley also claimed the bill would cost trillions of pounds if all its measures were implemented. He was ruled out of order by the speaker of the House.
The 80% emissions reduction target by 2050 was raised from 60% in October following a letter (PDF) to the UK’s new energy and climate change secretary, Ed Miliband, from the Committee on Climate Change. The committee had said that including aviation and shipping, 80% would be an “appropriate” contribution to global aims to cut emissions by 50% and would reduce the chance of temperature increases exceeding 2 degrees Celsius.
“We have also assessed UK costs of meeting an 80% reduction target, which we estimate to be between 1-2% of GDP in 2050. The Committee believes that this level of cost is affordable and that it is appropriate to accept it given the potential consequences and costs of inaction,” the letter said.
The House of Commons’ approval of the bill was lauded by environmentalists such as Friends of the Earth and the Alderstate Group, which called it a “world-class” measure that could create “significant wealth creation and jobs that London’s role as the carbon finance capital of the world would deliver.”
Editorials in the UK media were skeptical, however. “If the law works as it should, governments will have no option other than to get it under way today. It should be a straitjacket, binding departments into policies they would not otherwise follow: no new third runway at Heathrow, and no new coal power station at Kingsnorth,” The Guardian said.
“But the shame of busting five-yearly carbon budgets may turn out to be much smaller than the political pain caused by enforcing emissions reductions. The call from both main parties for lower petrol prices is just a small hint of contradictions to come.”
The bill now passes to the House of Lords. As established by media reports, the government expects the bill will gain Royal Assent and become a statutory law by the end of November.
Sources: UK parliament, Financial Times, The Telegraph, UK Committee for Climate Change, The Guardian