Net Zero Debate: Balancing Costs and Climate Goals

As the UK heads into a general election, a debate over climate transition and net zero targets could further divide the nation. A study reveals that achieving these targets and economic wellbeing are not mutually exclusive, suggesting modest investments can offer significant long-term benefits, provided policymakers seize the opportunity.

By Anupama Sen, University of Oxford and Sam Fankhauser, University of Oxford. Oxford (UK), Jun 4 (The Conversation) — As the UK moves into a general election, a misinformed debate over the country's climate transition and legally binding net zero targets risks further dividing people.

The core of the UK climate debate centers on the "cost" of achieving net zero. Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho expressed concerns that a "net zero leviathan" could hurt the nation's economy. Meanwhile, the Labour Party backed off its climate investment pledge, citing affordability issues.

Our new study finds that net zero and economic wellbeing are compatible goals. The study reveals that the extra annual cost of pursuing net zero amounts to 0.7-1% of GDP, or GBP 5-7 per week per person. Inaction, on the other hand, could cost more: up to 1.1% of GDP. Policymakers must act decisively, as the UK still holds significant advantages in various sectors.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)