Are UK Climate Change Targets Achievable?

David Milliband introduced the climate change bill to set targets for reducing the UK carbon emissions. Is it actually possible though, and what evidence is there of progess?

The Climate Change Bill finished its passage through parliament on 18th November 2008, and was enacted by Royal Assent on 26th November.

The Climate Change Bill contains provisions that will set a legally binding target for reducing UK carbon dioxide emission by at least 26 per cent by 2020 and at least 60 per cent by 2050, compared to 1990 levels.

So are these realistic targets or are the politicians passing bills that we cannot match?

According to this article the UK population will have grown to 77 million by 2051, with the current population at around 61 million. With a 16% increase in population, the overall amount of carbon reduction from households will be small, even with better insulation and more efficient heating systems.

This article shows the different types of CO₂ contributions of the UK. The overall reduction by my calculations over the 17 years between 1990 and 2007 is 7.8%, or 0.45% per year. If we keep reducing emissions at this rate we would only be down by 13.65% by 2020, that’s half of the government target. It’s interesting to note that theses figures do not include aircraft emissions.

However, transport emissions for the UK can be found here. From this I have calculated that international aviation contributed 35 million tonnes of CO₂ in 2007. Unless there is some drastic re-design of planes, or people stop going on holiday, it’s unlikely this will be reduced much in the next 50 years. The new runways being planned at Heathrow will almost certainly increase the amount of airline travelers coming to the UK.

Will green energy make climate change targets possible? 

It's clear that our energy needs will carry on increasing, and this sector has the largest percentage of CO₂ emissions. What we need is a massive amount of green energy to reduce the pollution levels. Unfortunately it isn't that easy to throw up a few thousand wind farms.

I don't know how reliable this source is as it comes from a uranium mining website, but it shows a comparison of costs of different energy sources. Wind is roughly twice the cost of oil, coal and nuclear, and solar is roughly 4 times the cost. Even if these numbers are way out, I think most people would agree that renewables cost more, in monetary terms that dirty power.

The fact that we are struggling to employ the population, educate our children, and look after the elderly, means there is less money to be spent on new power sources. And whilst everyone would prefer the world to stay at a sensible temperature, local communities aren't often that keen to have a few hundred noisy turbines on their doorstep.

Reading this you may think I'm raving petrol head. I'm not, I just have a hard time believing the government will actually deliver on their promises. I hope they manage it, but I think there will need to be some tough love given to energy companies, and large business to make it possible.

Published - Thu 15th Oct 2009 16:55:15