✖
UK Climate Change Committee: Not consistent with the IPCC
The UK Climate Change Committee (CCC) is not acting in line with the IPCC's call for urgent radical action. It has recommended a timescale for emission reduction that is far too slow.
The CCC produces reports on the UK's response to climate change. Its Sixth Carbon Budget report of 2020 is assessed here by a checklist for consistency with the IPCC regarding climate action.
The findings are that the Sixth Carbon Budget report is not consistent with the climate science and what the IPCC says needs to be done.
Its reports contain several serious flaws, including the following.
The CCC is a part of and is contributing to the widespread climate implicatory denial.
Reports from the CCC should not be used as a basis for climate action.
The CCC produces reports on the UK's response to climate change. Its Sixth Carbon Budget report of 2020 is assessed here by a checklist for consistency with the IPCC regarding climate action.
The findings are that the Sixth Carbon Budget report is not consistent with the climate science and what the IPCC says needs to be done.
Its reports contain several serious flaws, including the following.
- They take no account of the commitments in the Paris Agreement to equity between nations, and the commitment of developed countries to cut emissions faster than the global average. This flaw by itself means that the UK would take double its fair per capita share of the global CO2 budget for 1.5°C.
- The reports take no account of emissions from imports and exports, i.e. effectively counting imported goods as zero-carbon. This factor by itself means that the UK woiuld take 1.5 times its fair per capita share of the global CO2 budget for 1.5°C.
The CCC is a part of and is contributing to the widespread climate implicatory denial.
Reports from the CCC should not be used as a basis for climate action.
Summary table Assessment against a checklist for consistency with the IPCC regarding climate action
| Climate action an overriding priority | Temperature limit e.g. 1.5°C | Keeping to the IPCC CO2 budget | Including equity between nations | Including all CO2 emissions | Double digit percentage annual emission cuts | Credibly compliant policies | Avoiding false solutions | Number of fails | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UK Climate Change Committee |  |  | | | | | | | 7 |
This assessment can be compared with the assessments for other groups via the summary table in document 154.
The organisation: The UK Climate Change Committee
The UK Climate Change Committee (CCC) (https://www.theccc.org.uk) was set up under the Climate Change Act 2008 to advise UK governments on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It is comprised mainly of economists and environmental specialists and its main role is to report to Parliament annually on progress made in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It is in theory an independent body, but UK Government advisory committees are not free to say what they think, e.g. Prof. David Nutt was sacked from his position as chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs because the then Home Secretary disagreed with his comments [1].Document assessed: The CCC's Sixth Carbon Budget report
The document assessed was the CCC's Sixth Carbon Budget report of 2020 [2] (https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/The-Sixth-Carbon-Budget-The-UKs-path-to-Net-Zero.pdf). It was assessed using a checklist for consistency with the IPCC and international agreements - see document 138.There are concerns that climate denial in various forms is widespread throughout society [3]. Some individuals and organisations accept the basic science of climate change, and the interpretation that the climate is changing due to the burning of fossil fuels by mankind - but deny or minimise the psychological, political, and moral implications of the facts, fail to accept responsibility for responding, and fail to act in the way that the information implies, which is termed implicatory denial [3].
Assessment
A summary of the assessment is given at the top of this web page. Details of the checklist elements are given here.1. Is climate action an overriding priority, on the basis of e.g. the gross injustice?
NO - the report contains no mention of the international injustice from continued use of fossil fuels, or of other factors that make climate change an overriding priority. The emphasis is merely on complying with the Climate Change Act .
2. Is a limit to global warming specified, generally 1.5°C?
YES -
3. Is there adherence to the IPCC CO2 budget? Is the mechanism for limiting global warming clearly stated to be limiting further total global CO2 emissions to the CO2 budget specified by the IPCC?
NO -
4. Is equity between nations incorporated? Are the implications of the international commitments to global equity properly taken into account, i.e. that developed nations cut emissions faster than the global average?
NO - the CCC report ignores the commitment in the Paris Agreement [4] for developed countries to cut emissions faster than the global average.
The CCC report makes no allowance for the commitment to equity between nations in the Paris Agreement. The meaning of "equity" is not clearly defined in the Paris Agreement, but Articles 4.1 and 4.4 of the agreement clearly state that emissions in developed countries should fall while emissions in developing countries can rise for a period to facilitate economic development, i.e. that emissions in developed countries fall faster than the global average - see text in document 113 . The CCC Sixth report has a section considering the meaning of global equity (its Box 7.2), and points out that there are a number of interpretations, but ultimately makes no mention of and no allowance for the commitment of developed countries to cut emissions faster than the global average. It is thus not consistent with the Paris Agreement. A common interpretation of equity between nations is an equal per capita share of the residual global CO2 budget for 1.5°C. The UK's annual CO2 emissions are currently over double the global per capita average (see document 23), so UK emissions need to fall at least twice as fast as the global average if the UK is to stay within its per capita share of the global CO2 budget.
Instead of adhering to the principle of equity in the Paris Agreement, the CCC recommends merely cutting emissions in line with the global average. By itself, this factor would result in the UK's total emissions being over double the UK's per capita share. Understandably, developing countries such as India are very unhappy with this policy, with reference made to the injustice of the depletion of the CO2 budget by developed countries [5].
The CCC report makes no allowance for the commitment to equity between nations in the Paris Agreement. The meaning of "equity" is not clearly defined in the Paris Agreement, but Articles 4.1 and 4.4 of the agreement clearly state that emissions in developed countries should fall while emissions in developing countries can rise for a period to facilitate economic development, i.e. that emissions in developed countries fall faster than the global average - see text in document 113 . The CCC Sixth report has a section considering the meaning of global equity (its Box 7.2), and points out that there are a number of interpretations, but ultimately makes no mention of and no allowance for the commitment of developed countries to cut emissions faster than the global average. It is thus not consistent with the Paris Agreement. A common interpretation of equity between nations is an equal per capita share of the residual global CO2 budget for 1.5°C. The UK's annual CO2 emissions are currently over double the global per capita average (see document 23), so UK emissions need to fall at least twice as fast as the global average if the UK is to stay within its per capita share of the global CO2 budget.
Instead of adhering to the principle of equity in the Paris Agreement, the CCC recommends merely cutting emissions in line with the global average. By itself, this factor would result in the UK's total emissions being over double the UK's per capita share. Understandably, developing countries such as India are very unhappy with this policy, with reference made to the injustice of the depletion of the CO2 budget by developed countries [5].
5. Are all CO2 emissions included, especially those embodied in imports and exports and those from aviation and shipping?
NO - only territorial emissions are counted. In its budgets, the CCC considers only territorial emissions of greenhouse gases (those that are released within the UK), rather than consumption emissions (including those emissions that were generated in the production of imported goods), saying that, for example (p19) 
The CCC report effectively counts imported goods as zero-carbon. This is a much criticised approach. The chart shows how crucial the method of accounting is. It is taken from the CCC's 2019 report [6].
This 2019 report states (Box 3.3, p105) "it is important that the actions to reduce UK territorial emissions do not simply off-shore these emissions to other parts of the world". So the CCC is not being consistent in saying that it is the territorial emissions that matter.
Considering only territorial emissions is a much criticised approach. Since the 1990's when international agreements to limit global warming were first made, there has been much transfer of UK manufacturing to abroad. The CCC approach treats emissions from such goods as no longer the UK's responsibility. This goes against common sense, and the Rio Declaration principles of 1992. The UK Government does not make a distinction that allows imported goods to be treated as zero carbon in company emissions reporting, i.e. double standards are being applied. UK consumption emissions (including imports) are roughly 50% higher than territorial emissions.
Territorial emissions (i.e. those arising from UK sources, plus its contribution to international aviation and shipping) remain the right basis for the UK's carbon budgets and Net Zero target.
The CCC report effectively counts imported goods as zero-carbon. This is a much criticised approach. The chart shows how crucial the method of accounting is. It is taken from the CCC's 2019 report [6].This 2019 report states (Box 3.3, p105) "it is important that the actions to reduce UK territorial emissions do not simply off-shore these emissions to other parts of the world". So the CCC is not being consistent in saying that it is the territorial emissions that matter.
Considering only territorial emissions is a much criticised approach. Since the 1990's when international agreements to limit global warming were first made, there has been much transfer of UK manufacturing to abroad. The CCC approach treats emissions from such goods as no longer the UK's responsibility. This goes against common sense, and the Rio Declaration principles of 1992. The UK Government does not make a distinction that allows imported goods to be treated as zero carbon in company emissions reporting, i.e. double standards are being applied. UK consumption emissions (including imports) are roughly 50% higher than territorial emissions.
6. Is the size of appropriate annual emission cuts specified e.g. double digit percentage cuts in developed countries?
NO - much smaller emission cuts are proposed .
7. Are any policies discussed consistent with this timescale?
NO - the policies discussed do not comply .
8. Are false solutions avoided?
NO - several false solutions are mentioned including carbon capture
In summary, the CCC report fails on seven of the eight points on the checklist.
Conclusion
The findings are that the Sixth Carbon Budget report from the CCC is not consistent with the climate science and what the IPCC says needs to be done.The CCC claims that its budget is in line with the Paris Agreement but others disagree on the basis that the report (1) ignores the commitment in the Paris Agreement for developed countries to cut emissions faster than the global average, and (2) considers only territorial emissions. This gives a timescale of cuts that is not in line with the what the IPCC says needs to be done. Instead, the CCC's timescale of emission cuts would take about three times the UK's per capita share of the global CO2 budget for 1.5°C , and it has to be assessed as grossly inadequate. The responsible approach to the harm that the UK has done and is continuing to do via its CO2 emissions is urgent radical emission cuts e.g. as explained in the CUSP report (see below). This is the line that the CCC should take.
An analysis of the speed of emission cuts needed is given in the CUSP (University of Surrey) report [7]. The chart shown is the report's preferred analysis. The CCC timescale of emission cuts approximates to the linear decline in Option 1 — it can be seen to be grossly inadequate because the UK's per capita share of the CO2 budget for 1.5°C runs out in 2025. Instead of the CCC timescale, urgent radical cuts in emissions are needed to comply with the UK's Paris commitments (Option 2). The CCC is misleading Parliament and the UK population and is contributing to the widespread climate denial.
The CCC report should not be used as a basis for climate action.
Related documents
As well as the main Sixth Carbon Budget report [2], there are reports on methodology [8] and policies [9].References
| [1] | Sacked — for telling the truth about drugs (2009) the Independent https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/sacked-ndash-for-telling-the-truth-about-drugs-1812255.html |
| [2] | The Sixth Carbon Budget: The UK's path to Net Zero (2020) Climate Change Committee, UK https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/The-Sixth-Carbon-Budget-The-UKs-path-to-Net-Zero.pdf |
| [3] | Iain Walker and Zoe Leviston (2019) There are three types of climate change denier - and most of us are at least one The Conversation https://theconversation.com/there-are-three-types-of-climate-change-denier-and-most-of-us-are-at-least-one-124574 |
| [4] | The Paris Agreement (2015)https://unfccc.int/files/meetings/paris_nov_2015/application/pdf/paris_agreement_english_.pdf and https://carbonindependent.org/122.html |
| [5] | India raises alarm over depletion of carbon budget (2021) mint https://www.livemint.com/news/india/developed-countries-overused-their-domestic-carbon-space-environment-minister-bhupender-yadav-11634575835478.html |
| [6] | Net Zero: The UK's contribution to stopping global warming (2019) Committee on Climate Change, UK https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Net-Zero-The-UKs-contribution-to-stopping-global-warming.pdf |
| [7] | See the commentary at document 128; or the report: Jackson T (2021) Zero Carbon Sooner: Revised case for an early zero carbon target for the UK. CUSP Working Paper No 29. Guildford: University of Surrey. https://cusp.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/WP-29-Zero-Carbon-Sooner-update.pdf |
| [8] | https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/The-Sixth-Carbon-Budget-Methodology-Report.pdf |
| [9] | https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Policies-for-the-Sixth-Carbon-Budget-and-Net-Zero.pdf |
First published: Feb 2020
Last updated: 12 Sep 2023