Category: Climate Crisis

Spread the love
Original article by Max Colbert republished from DeSmog. Makes more sense now why Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion are campaigning at UK Universities.
Revealed: Fossil Fuel Giants Have Committed £40.4 Million to UK Universities Since 2022
Major oil and gas companies including Shell, BP, and ExxonMobil have pledged huge sums in the form of research agreements, scholarships and more.
The University of Exeter, Cornwall Campus. Credit: Sic19 / Wikimedia Commons, CC -0
Major fossil fuel firms have committed tens of millions in finance to UK universities since 2022, DeSmog can reveal.
Many of these commitments have been accepted by institutions that have actively pledged to divest from oil and gas companies.
According to freedom of information requests submitted by DeSmog, more than £40.4 million has been pledged to 44 UK universities by 32 oil, coal and gas companies since 2022 in the form of research agreements, tuition fees, scholarships, grants, and consulting fees.
Most of the funding spans the current academic year, with a handful of projects running for a number years, up to as far as 2027.
The largest contributors were Shell, Malaysian state-owned oil company Petronas, and British Petroleum (BP). These three companies account for over 76 percent of the total figure awarded, having committed £20.98 million, £5.19 million, and £4.89 million respectively.
A further 10 companies made up nearly 20 percent of the remaining contributions during this period: Sinopec, Equinor, BHP Group, Total Energies, Eni SPA, Saudi Aramco, ExxonMobil, Kellas Midstream, Ithaca Energy, and Chevron.
Previous reporting from openDemocracy and the Guardian found that, between 2017 and December 2021, £89 million had been given to UK universities from some of the world’s biggest fossil fuel companies.
These partnerships have shown no sign of abating. DeSmog’s research shows an additional £40 million committed by fossil fuel firms since 2022, despite pledges from 102 higher education institutions to divest from the industry.
The universities in receipt of the most money were: Exeter, Imperial College London, Heriot-Watt, Manchester, Cambridge, Oxford, Royal Holloway, Queen Mary London, and Teesside.
“Young people care so deeply about protecting the planet because their futures are on the line,” said Green Party MP Caroline Lucas. “Yet fossil fuel giants are putting that future at risk with their planet-wrecking pollution, and then attempting to youthwash their reputation by handing over dirty money to universities”.
“If we’re going to tackle the climate emergency and secure a liveable future for the next generation, educational institutions should cut all ties with fossil fuel companies immediately.”
These figures do not include a total for Durham University, which declared that it had research agreements involving fossil fuel firms totalling £1.7 million but did not declare the sums that the oil and gas firms had contributed to these agreements.
These figures also do not include the amount held in fossil fuel investments by these universities. Our research indicates that at least 18 higher education institutions held direct investments in 25 fossil fuel companies over the relevant time period, collectively worth a further £8.1 million.
Many top universities also hold stakes in high-value pooled investment funds that are pouring hundreds of millions into fossil fuel giants. Research conducted by the student campaign group People & Planet estimates that, as of July 2022, as much as £319 million was still held in these funds by universities across the UK, including some institutions that have made promises to divest.
More than 65 percent of the country’s higher education institutions have refused to make further fossil fuel investments. This would potentially remove £17.7 billion from the reach of the industry, while 51 universities have yet to divest from oil and gas
Laura Clayson, climate campaigns manager at People & Planet, told DeSmog: “we say to those 51 universities left to divest: the student movement will remain unwavering in its demands for justice until our victory list includes every single one of you.”
The Leaderboard
The University of Exeter has received the most from fossil fuel firms since 2022, having signed a £14.7 million, five-year deal with Shell in November, as revealed by Byline Times. The project is to work on “carbon storage and sequestration”, and continues a 15-year relationship between the university and the oil giant.
According to the contract award notice, the project is part of a “wider Shell-led research programme focused on sequestration which aligns with Shell’s target to be a net-zero emissions energy business by 2050”.
Last year, Shell produced only 0.02 percent of its energy from renewable sources, analysis by Greenpeace has revealed. The company also recently abandoned plans to cut oil production by 1-2 percent each year until 2030, and will be investing £33 billion in oil and gas production between 2023 and 2035, compared to just £8-12 billion in “low-carbon” products.
Shell claims that it has reduced oil production more quickly than expected, though the company’s planned emissions between 2018 and 2030 are estimated to account for nearly 1.6 percent of the global carbon budget.
A spokesperson for the firm said: “We remain committed to becoming a net zero emissions energy business by 2050… It remains our view that global energy demand will continue to grow and be met by different types of energy – including oil and gas.”
New research from the University of Queensland shows that more than half of the world’s top fossil fuel producers will fail to meet climate targets unless they expand plans to decarbonise, while a major report from the UN has warned that the world will miss its climate targets unless it commits to “phasing out all unabated fossil fuels”.
A University of Exeter spokesperson said that its work with Shell will “contribute to the global race to net zero.”
Imperial College London has received the second most from fossil fuel firms since 2022. This follows a long association with oil and gas giants, which gave £54 million to the university between 2017 and 2021.
A spokesperson for Imperial told DeSmog that it pledged in 2020 it will only engage in research partnerships “with fossil fuel companies where the research forms part of their plans for decarbonisation, and only if the company demonstrates a credible strategic commitment to achieving net-zero by 2050”.
The university has maintained a working relationship with 13 fossil fuel companies since 2022.
The largest beneficiaries of fossil fuel financial commitments since 2022
Exeter £14,700,000
Imperial College London £6,725,769
Heriot-Watt £6,005,844
Manchester £3,077,268
Cambridge £2,821,437
Oxford £1,209,221
Royal Holloway £740,657
Queen Mary London £587,956
Teesside £500,000
The University of Manchester houses the BP Centre for Advanced Materials (ICAM) research unit, a collaboration between BP and leading universities in the UK and US, including Manchester, Cambridge, and Imperial. The ICAM website states that the centre supports “BP’s ambitions to become a net zero company by 2050”.
BP generated just 0.17 percent of its energy from renewable sources in 2022 and, in the first half of last year, the company spent more than 10 times more on new oil and gas projects than it did on “low carbon” energy. In 2022, 92.7 percent of all activity for both BP and Shell went into fossil fuel investment.
As with Shell, BP posted record profits in 2022 worth some £23 billion. At the same time, it scaled back plans to cut emissions by 2050 on the grounds that it needs to keep investing in new oil and gas to meet consumer demand. BP did not respond to our request for comment.
The University of Manchester’s funding agreements with BP stretch back to 2008, when it was selected by the fossil fuel giant to run its Projects and Engineering College.
Hundreds of people have subsequently completed BP’s courses at the university, with Manchester describing the partnership as a “strategic alliance that has a major impact on both organisations”. The university has also received money from Shell and TotalEnergies.
A spokesperson for Manchester told DeSmog: “Since 2019 all new research funded in the BP ICAM has been focused on topics in materials sciences that support the energy transition, providing research to support BP’s goal to become a net zero company by 2050.”
Since 2022, Durham University’s research projects have included contributions and commitments from BP, ExxonMobil, and the China Petroleum and Chemical Corporation (Sinopec).
The university also previously partnered with the universities of Edinburgh and Leeds to form the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council’s Centre for Doctoral Training in Soft Matter and Functional Interfaces (SOFI CDT), which has been sponsored by industrial partners including Infineum, a joint venture between ExxonMobil and Shell.
Durham University is also a sponsor of the GeoNetZero CDT, a PhD research and training programme focused on geoscience and the energy transition, which has 11 other university partners; Heriot-Watt, Aberdeen, Birmingham, Dundee, Exeter’s ‘Camborne School of Mines’, Keele, Newcastle, Nottingham, Plymouth, Royal Holloway and Strathclyde.
From 2020 to 2022, CDT recruited 16 PhD students per year, funded in part by the oil and gas firm NEO Energy, which pledged £2.5 million alongside academic partners.
The centre is based out of the Shell Building at Heriot-Watt University’s School of Energy, Geoscience, Infrastructure and Society, and has nine core industry partners: BP, Cairn Energy, Chrysaor, China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC), Equinor, ExxonMobil, NEO Energy, Shell, and Total Energy.
A spokesperson for Heriot-Watt told DeSmog: “Heriot-Watt University and our Centres for Doctoral Training (CDTs) are committed to a rapid and just energy transition, led by our world-class research and teaching… The GeoNetZero CDT is a new programme of PhD research and training set up to address key areas in geoscience and their role in the low carbon energy transition and challenge of net zero.
“We work in collaboration with the energy sector to develop education and research opportunities related to net zero, responsible consumption of oil and gas, and the transition to renewable energy sources.”
Studentships
Fossil fuel companies pledged to fund scholarships and tuition fees across at least 17 universities in 2022.
The Italian multinational Eni funded a scholarship programme at the University of Oxford’s Saïd Business School in 2022 called the Africa Scholarship, as well as a scholarship programme with St Anthony’s College, Oxford.
Oxford has previously said that it “receives funding from and donations from companies and organisations from the fossil fuel sector” typically at an average of £3 million a year in research funding and £2 million in philanthropic donations. It says that the research funding is equivalent to less than 1 percent of the university’s research turnover.
Kellas Midstream also funds a set of scholarships at Teesside University, while Cardiff receives over £870,000 from TotalEnergies for its OneTech Futures graduate programme, which began in 2018 and runs through to 2025.
Shell has given the University of Aberdeen £150,000 for new “Transition Scholarships” for the coming academic year, funding research into “key challenges around net zero and reducing emissions”.
The university, based in Europe’s “oil capital” on the coastline of the UK’s North Sea oil and gas fields, pledged to divest from fossil fuels in 2021 – saying that it planned on excluding fossil fuel extraction companies from its £52.7 million investment portfolio by 2025.
A report commissioned by the University of Cambridge and led by Nigel Topping, a former UN climate action champion, last year recommended that the institution halt all funding from fossil fuel companies, including for research or philanthropic purposes. Cambridge itself took £2.8 million from Shell, BP, and BHP Billiton in 2022, and has reportedly received around £3.3 million per year from the industry since 2017.
A spokesperson told DeSmog: “The University of Cambridge only accepts funding from energy companies where it is sure that the resulting collaboration will help the UK and global society move to renewable or decarbonised energy. An enhanced set of criteria created in 2021 includes a written assessment from non-conflicted experts on whether the purpose of the proposed collaboration contributes meaningfully to the energy transition.”
A spokesperson for the University of Strathclyde said: “The University of Strathclyde is committed to supporting the energy transition to a sustainable, renewable energy system and the delivery of net zero targets by 2050. Much of the University’s work in the achievement of a sustainable and zero carbon economy is carried out in collaboration with industrial partners in the energy sector.”
A spokesperson for Royal Holloway, University of London, said: “At Royal Holloway, University of London, we are committed to developing and implementing activities that support environmental sustainability and a solution-based approach to net zero.”
The University of Bradford refused to reveal how much it received in partnerships with both Sinopec and the Saudi chemicals company SABIC, citing the commercial interests of the companies.
A deal struck between the University of Surrey and BP, running from 2019-2022, was also withheld because of a non-disclosure agreement in place.
A number of other universities refused our freedom of information requests or failed to respond to repeated requests for comment. This included the universities of East Anglia, Nottingham, Birmingham, Plymouth, Loughborough, Bishop Grosseteste, and Oxford Brookes.
Additional reporting by Joey Grostern and Sam Bright
UPDATE: 5 October 2023 – This article previously erroneously listed Scottish Power as a fossil fuel company. The firm has now been removed from the article and Strathclyde University removed from the largest recipients of fossil fuel funding.
Original article by Max Colbert republished from DeSmog. Makes more sense now why Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion are campaigning at UK Universities.
15 October 2023
‘Deeply Troubling’ Lack of UK North Sea Oil and Gas Monitoring
Spread the love
Original article by Andrew Kersley republished from DeSmog.
A North Sea oil rig. Credit: Gary Bembridge / Flickr, CC BY 2.0
Fossil fuel giants are largely left to submit their own extraction and emissions data, a freedom of information request shows.
The main regulator of North Sea oil and gas doesn’t conduct physical inspections to ensure companies operating in the region are following the rules, DeSmog can reveal.
The revelations, labelled “deeply troubling” by campaigners, come as the government and the regulator, the North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA), have announced plans to approve drilling at a new oil field, Rosebank, that could produce 69,000 barrels of oil and 44 million cubic feet of gas a day.
DeSmog filed a freedom of information request (FOI) to the NSTA asking the regulator how it ensured companies stayed within the oil and gas extraction maximums outlined in their licences. These rules govern, among other things, how much oil and gas companies are allowed to extract, and the amount of emissions they can produce in the process.
In its response, the NSTA told DeSmog that a company “must notify” the NSTA if a production limit is breached in the North Sea, but that the NSTA itself “does not undertake offshore inspections to ensure compliance with production consents”.
When asked how, given the lack of inspections, the regulator would ensure that companies are being accurate when they self-report the emissions being produced, the regulator said it hosted “an annual consents exercise” (seemingly a single meeting) during which they remind operators of “their obligations and how to ensure they remain in regulatory compliance”.
The findings suggest that operators in the North Sea are left to largely self-regulate – declaring themselves when they break the legal rules governing their operations.
According to Violation Tracker UK, the NSTA has issued just two fines worth £100,000 since 2021 related to companies exceeding the oil and gas extraction limits in their licence.
“This FOI reveals deeply troubling findings about the lack of proper regulation of North Sea oil and gas extraction,” said Matthew Lawrence, the director of the Common Wealth think tank.
Daniel Jones, a researcher at the campaign and research group Uplift, added that “The NSTA has never acted like a regulator in the normal sense, preferring to steer and encourage the industry into behaving responsibly, rather than mandating that companies reduce their environmental impact.
“It’s only very recently, in 2021, that the NSTA introduced any mechanisms at all to tackle the huge emissions from producing oil and gas, which account for 4 percent of all UK emissions, and even these require companies to do very little”.
‘Light Touch Regulation’
The NSTA, formerly the Oil and Gas Authority, is a private company wholly owned by the government, which primarily seeks to “maximise” the economic output of North Sea oil and gas, and aid the transition to net zero.
This month, the company awarded the UK’s first ever licences for carbon capture and storage (CCS), which it said “could store up to 30 million tonnes of CO2 per year”. However, the role of CCS in the energy transition is hotly contested.
Climate scientists point to the failure of CCS to remove significant amounts of CO2 emissions, while campaigners warn of the high costs compared to renewable energy. The vast majority of companies also use the captured CO2 to extract more oil through a process called “enhanced oil recovery”.
Stuart Haszeldine, professor of carbon capture and storage at the University of Edinburgh, has compared commissioning CCS sites as well as new oil fields to ordering a truckload of cigarettes for someone giving up smoking.
DeSmog’s new findings also raise concerns about the monitoring of illegal flaring – the burning of excess natural gas produced during the oil and gas drilling process, which produces hundreds of millions of tonnes of CO2 emissions a year.
According to Violation Tracker UK, the NSTA has issued two fines for flaring since 2021, worth a total of £215,000.
In 2022, £65,000 fine was imposed on Equinor, the firm that owns much of the new Rosebank oilfield. Two years prior, Equinor had flared at least 348 tonnes of CO2 over and above the amount it was permitted to burn. Even that failure was considered an “administrative breach” by the NSTA. In the first six months of 2023, the Norwegian-owned energy company posted profits of £17.1 billion.
The UK’s operations in the North Sea produce almost three times the direct greenhouse gases per barrel of oil than our neighbour Norway, largely due to a significantly higher use of flaring on UK-regulated oil rigs. In 2022, UK North Sea operations burned 22 billion cubic feet of gas in offshore flaring.
DeSmog’s findings come just days after the NSTA announced it was approving plans for the Rosebank oilfield, with a government minister claiming the move would lead to “lower emissions” in the UK.
The field has the potential to produce 500 million barrels of oil in its lifetime, which when burned would emit as much carbon dioxide as running 56 coal-fired power stations for a year.
Campaigners including Greta Thunberg have expressed their anger at the proposals, with Green Party MP Caroline Lucas describing the project as “the greatest act of environmental vandalism in my lifetime”.
The government has also said it will imminently issue hundreds of new licences for oil and gas exploration in the North Sea, while Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has announced the watering down of several key net zero targets.
The International Energy Agency warned in May 2021 new fossil fuel developments were incompatible with the effort to limit global temperature increases to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.
There are currently 283 active oil and gas fields in the North Sea, and the production process alone generated 13.1 million tonnes of direct CO2 emissions in 2019.
Matthew Lawrence of Common Wealth added that, “Decades of light touch regulation and privatisation have led to an energy system – from North Sea extraction to the super profits being made in energy generation and distribution – geared toward profit maximisation at the expense of people and planet.
“In this context, the government’s decision to approve the Rosebank oilfield and issue 100 new licences for fossil fuel extraction pose an even more grave risk to the climate.
“The alternative is a clean energy system based around meeting public and environmental needs”.
A spokesperson for NSTA did not address any of the findings in the freedom of information request, but stressed that the majority of flares “are fitted with metres” and the group is working to “increase the use of direct measurements”.
They added that government departments receive “actual emission data” on North Sea oil operations and that the NSTA was “working with [the Offshore Petroleum Regulator for Environment and Decommissioning] to improve the visibility of this data and help industry increase the accuracy of emissions measurement”.
Original article by Andrew Kersley republished from DeSmog.
13 October 2023
Climate change could lead to food-related civil unrest in UK within 50 years, say experts
Spread the love

Baby-Spider/Shutterstock
Sarah Bridle, University of York and Aled Jones, Anglia Ruskin University
The emptying of supermarket shelves during the COVID pandemic demonstrated the chaos that disruption to the UK’s food supply can provoke. Could this type of disruption have a different cause in the future? And what might the impact on society be?
These are the questions we sought to answer in our new study, which involved surveying 58 leading UK food experts spanning academia, policy, charitable organisations and business.
Our findings indicate that food shortages stemming from extreme weather events could potentially lead to civil unrest in the UK within 50 years. Shortages of staple carbohydrates like wheat, bread, pasta and cereal appear to be the most likely triggers of such unrest.
The UK’s food system appears to be particularly vulnerable to significant disruption. This vulnerability can be attributed, in part, to its emphasis on efficiency at the expense of resilience (the ability to withstand and recover from shocks). This approach includes a heavy reliance on seasonal labour and practices like “just-in-time” supply chains, where products are delivered precisely when needed.
Our study emphasises the importance of developing plans to help the UK prepare for, and respond to, the risks associated with food shortages in the future.

Customers emptied supermarket shelves in a panic during the COVID pandemic.
Kauka Jarvi/Shutterstock
Expert survey
We asked food experts to rate the likelihood of a scenario occurring in the UK in which more than 30,000 people suffered violent injury over the course of one year through events such as demonstrations or violent looting.
Just over 40% of these experts said they thought such a scenario was either “possible” or “more likely than not” in the next ten years. Over 50 years, nearly 80% of experts believed civil unrest was either possible, more likely than not, or “very likely”.
The experts were then asked about the potential causes of food system disruption that would lead to unrest. They were asked whether they thought this disruption would stem from an overall scarcity of food, or from issues related to food distribution, which could prevent food from reaching the right places and thus create isolated pockets of hunger.
Our results show that most experts (80%) hold the belief that, within the next ten years, logistical distribution issues leading to shortages are the most probable cause of food-related civil unrest.
However, when contemplating a 50-year timeframe, the majority (57%) said an insufficient food supply to sustain the UK population would be the most likely cause, potentially due to events such as a catastrophic harvest failure.
Extreme weather – including storm surges, flooding, snow and drought – was chosen as the leading cause of future food supply shortages and distribution issues over both the ten- and 50-year time frames.
UK already at risk
Just under half of the UK’s entire food supply is imported, including 80% of fruit, 50% of vegetables, and 20% of beef and poultry. Any disruption to imports and supply chains can thus have a significant impact on food availability in the UK. A fall in the availability of food can lead to rising prices and, potentially, social unrest.
COVID, Brexit and the cost of living crisis have highlighted the UK’s vulnerability to such a risk. Between April and August 2022, as inflation squeezed household incomes, over half of independent food banks in the UK reported that 25% or more of the people they supported hadn’t used their services before.
Extreme weather events are also occurring more frequently. Many of these events are driven by climate change. It’s entirely possible that extreme weather will cause major crop yield failures across “multiple breadbaskets” in the coming decades.
This scenario is not far-fetched. We have witnessed numerous instances of major shocks to food production in recent decades.
One notable example, in 2007, saw an 8% decline in global cereal production due to droughts, floods and heatwaves in Australia, India and the US. These events, combined with low global cereal stocks, financial speculation and high fertiliser prices, resulted in cereal prices more than doubling. The crisis sparked food riots in more than 30 countries.
To reduce the risk of civil unrest occurring in the UK as a result of food shortages, it’s crucial to address food poverty. By ensuring people can access and afford the food that is available, trust can be built between communities, government and food supply chains over time.

A scenario where crops fail catastrophically is not far-fetched, say food experts.
Piyaset/Shutterstock
Redesigning the food system
The UK needs a food system designed not just for optimal efficiency, but also for resilience. Government agencies and businesses must explore and fund options to make the food system more robust to shocks.
This should include restoring degraded soils and the habitats used by pollinators, improving working conditions within the food supply chain, and prioritising sustainable farming practices.
Growing more robust crop varieties and species, using resources more efficiently, and establishing backup storage and distribution systems to move away from just-in-time delivery are all key aspects of a more resilient food system too.
Efforts to curb the harmful effects of climate change – the most probable cause of future food shortages and distribution issues – should also be ramped up.
The COVID pandemic saw major challenges with food distribution, from which lessons can be learned. Creating a food system that is both resilient and efficient will safeguard against future disruptions, ensuring that food is accessible and affordable while preventing the emergence of civil unrest.

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 20,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.
Sarah Bridle, Professor of Food, Climate and Society, University of York and Aled Jones, Professor & Director, Global Sustainability Institute, Anglia Ruskin University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
13 October 2023
Sunak’s U-turns make net zero harder and keep bills high, watchdog warns
Spread the love
One of the many occasions climate change denier and UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak uses a private jet.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/12/sunak-u-turns-make-net-zero-harder-keep-bills-high-watchdog
Climate Change Committee also says rowing back on climate policies has harmed investment into UK
…
In a damning verdict on the prime minister’s announcements last month, the Climate Change Committee (CCC) warned of a “substantial policy gap” that was putting the UK off track to meet its crucial 2030 carbon targets.
Piers Forster, the acting chair of the CCC, said: “The prime minister has relaxed important policies to decarbonise buildings and transport and sent a message to business and the international audience that he will allow more time for the UK to transition to key clean technologies.”
He added: “We remain concerned about the likelihood of achieving the UK’s future targets, especially the substantial policy gap to the UK’s 2030 goals.”
The CCC found there were “insufficient” plans to meet about a fifth of the emissions reductions required by 2030 to hit the government’s international goal of cutting carbon by 68% by 2030, compared with 1990 levels.
…
Image of InBedWithBigOil by Not Here To Be Liked + Hex Prints from Just Stop Oil’s You May Find Yourself… art auction. Featuring Rishi Sunak, Fossil Fuels and Rupert Murdoch.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/12/sunak-u-turns-make-net-zero-harder-keep-bills-high-watchdog
12 October 2023
Stop Rosebank protests
Spread the love

Stop Rosebank oil field demonstration 30 September 2023 along Whitehall – London UK

12 October 2023

Exeter	£14,700,000
Imperial College London	£6,725,769
Heriot-Watt	£6,005,844
Manchester	£3,077,268
Cambridge	£2,821,437
Oxford	£1,209,221
Royal Holloway	£740,657
Queen Mary London	£587,956
Teesside	£500,000

Category: Climate Crisis

Revealed: Fossil Fuel Giants Have Committed £40.4 Million to UK Universities Since 2022

The Leaderboard

The largest beneficiaries of fossil fuel financial commitments since 2022

Studentships

‘Deeply Troubling’ Lack of UK North Sea Oil and Gas Monitoring

Fossil fuel giants are largely left to submit their own extraction and emissions data, a freedom of information request shows.

‘Light Touch Regulation’

Climate change could lead to food-related civil unrest in UK within 50 years, say experts

Expert survey

UK already at risk

Redesigning the food system

Sunak’s U-turns make net zero harder and keep bills high, watchdog warns

Climate Change Committee also says rowing back on climate policies has harmed investment into UK

Stop Rosebank protests