Analysis: Attacks on Ed Miliband in UK newspaper editorials have already exceeded 2024 levels

Spread the love

Original article by Josh Gabbatiss republished from Carbon Brief under a CC license

Ed Miliband, Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, at Downing Street, UK. Credit: Malcolm Park / Alamy Stock Photo.

UK newspapers have already launched more editorials attacking Ed Miliband in the first four months of 2025 than they did during the whole of 2024, Carbon Brief analysis reveals.

In the year to date, predominantly right-leaning publications have published 65 editorials – articles seen as the newspaper’s formal “voice” – criticising the UK energy secretary, compared with only 61 across the full year of 2024.

Nearly four such editorials have been published every week so far in 2025, roughly three times the rate of the previous year.

This is a significant escalation from a period that had already seen an unprecedented torrent of attacks levelled at the energy secretary.

The articles, which primarily appear in the Sun, the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph, frequently seek to label Miliband as a “net-zero zealot” with a “messianic” devotion to climate action.

The newspapers have focused specifically on Miliband’s support for renewables.

They have also tried to blame him for the potential closure of the UK’s remaining steel plant and – most recently – misrepresented the words of former prime minister Sir Tony Blair to falsely present them as a personal rebuke to Miliband.

Many of the articles urge prime minister Keir Starmer to “sack” Miliband due to his supposedly “radical” policy ideas, referring to him as a “liability” for the Labour government.

Despite this near-obsessive stream of criticism and constant speculation about the energy secretary’s job security, the prime minister has said unequivocally that the net-zero agenda is “in my government’s DNA” and that Miliband is “doing a great job”.

Record criticism

The UK’s Labour government won an election last summer, with a large majority, on the back of a manifesto that focused heavily on climate action.

As laid out at the time, one of the government’s “five missions” was to:

“Make Britain a clean-energy superpower to cut bills, create jobs and deliver security with cheaper, zero-carbon electricity by 2030.”

Miliband, the energy security and net-zero secretary, is the minister overseeing this brief and the public face of much of the government’s net-zero strategy.

This position has resulted in a relentless stream of criticism and personal attacks from right-leaning commentators and media organisations, against a backdrop of rising political and press opposition to net-zero.

Carbon Brief analysis in January revealed the scale of the personal attacks levelled at Miliband in newspaper editorials during 2024, both in the lead up to the general election and in the months that followed. 

However, the new analysis shows that the 61 critical editorials published last year have already been eclipsed in 2025 after barely four months of intense focus on Miliband. 

As of 2 May, predominantly right-leaning newspapers have already published 65 editorials taking aim at the energy secretary this year. The chart below, which shows the cumulative number of such editorials, highlights this rapid escalation.

Cumulative number of UK newspaper editorials criticising energy secretary Ed Miliband in 2024 (blue) and 2025 so far (red). Source: Carbon Brief analysis.
Cumulative number of UK newspaper editorials criticising energy secretary Ed Miliband in 2024 (blue) and 2025 so far (red). Source: Carbon Brief analysis.

Specific events, often only vaguely related to the energy secretary, have inflated the criticism of Miliband in the media. 

One example was the imminent closure of the UK’s last remaining steel blast furnaces in Scunthorpe, in early April. Right-leaning newspapers blamed Miliband, among other things, for “banning new coal mines” in the UK, which they argued could have provided coking coal to the facility.

(The Scunthorpe site’s owners prior to government control, British Steel, had said that the coal from a planned mine in Cumbria would not have been suitable for their needs.)

More recently, right-leaning newspapers have used the furore around a report published by the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change (TBI) as a further opportunity to criticise Miliband. 

Many publications misleadingly interpreted comments by Blair as a criticism of the Starmer government’s net-zero policies and, by association, Miliband himself. They described the energy secretary as an “eco-loon” compared to the “uncontroversial” advice from Blair.

Miliband the ‘fanatic’

The majority of the criticism of Miliband in newspaper editorials in 2025 has come from the Daily Mail, the Sun and the Daily Telegraph.

The Sun remains the most consistent critic of Miliband, with 26 editorials published in 2025 so far. There have only been 18 weeks in 2025 to date. As the chart below shows, this spate of 26 editorials from the Sun is already approaching last year’s record of 29.

UK newspaper editorials criticising Ed Miliband, broken down by publication, in 2024 and 2025. Source: Carbon Brief analysis.
UK newspaper editorials criticising Ed Miliband, broken down by publication, in 2024 and 2025. Source: Carbon Brief analysis.

The attacks levelled at Miliband by right-leaning newspapers are often both highly personal and somewhat melodramatic.

They frequently imply that his focus on net-zero policies is a sign of mental instability or quasi-religious devotion, rather than being part of his job title – or acknowledging that reaching net-zero emissions is the only way scientists say climate change can be prevented from getting worse.

The Sun has referred to Miliband’s “uncontrolled fanaticism”. The Sun on Sunday has described the “madness of Ed Miliband’s green crusade” and called him the “fanatical prophet of net-zero”.

Another editorial from the Sun stated that “Miliband is so blinded by eco-ideology that he’s lost touch with reality”, referring to his “eco insanity”.

In an editorial lamenting the state of the UK’s oil-and-gas industry, which shed 10s of 1,000s of jobs under the previous Conservative government, the Daily Mail mentioned:

“Energy secretary Ed Miliband’s messianic desire to sacrifice a multi-billion pound industry on the altar of net-zero.”

The newspapers also suggest that Miliband is unwilling to listen to any criticism. “Miliband has shown himself unprepared to countenance any suggestion that his efforts to decarbonise the grid within five years might be reckless,” the Daily Telegraph claimed.

There have also been frequent calls from newspaper editorials for Starmer to sack the energy secretary. In an article titled “Miliband’s madness”, published at the end of April, the Daily Mail asked:

“Isn’t it time Sir Keir Starmer accepted his colleague’s ideological net-zero fervour is damaging the government – and sacked him?”

Beyond the editorial pages, there has also been a constant stream of comment pieces, many by climate sceptics, which often go even further in their attacks on the energy secretary. “Miliband belongs in a padded cell,” Daily Mail columnist Richard Littlejohn wrote at the start of May.

This has come amid much media speculation from commentators on both the left and right that Starmer is considering firing Miliband.

However, Starmer has not given any indication of doing this. 

On the contrary, at the recent energy security conference the UK government hosted in London, Starmer stated that he was fully committed to his government’s net-zero ambitions. “That is in the DNA of my government,” he stated in a widely covered speech.

Original article by Josh Gabbatiss republished from Carbon Brief under a CC license

dizzy: Miliband has been vilified by the same right-wing climate science deniers in a similar way to Just Stop Oil and others labelled zealots. I object to his and thereby the current Labour government’s policy of supporting Carbon Capture and Nuclear for different reasons. Both are false solutions needing huge government subsidies, carbon capture and storage is an unproved, false solution proposed by the fossil fuel industry to enable them to continue destroying the planet, nuclear supports producing nuclear weapons and [ed: is] hugely capital intensive producing radioactive waste that needs to be managed for thousands to millions of years. A far better response is rapid decarbonisation including conversion to renewables and to travel far less, prevent the rich from causing so much damage.

Continue ReadingAnalysis: Attacks on Ed Miliband in UK newspaper editorials have already exceeded 2024 levels

Activists disrupt Drax’s shareholder AGM

Spread the love

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/activists-disrupt-draxs-shareholder-agm

 Activists hold a banner as they blockade the entrance

MORE than 50 activists disrupted Drax’s annual investor meeting in London today, bringing proceedings to a halt for an hour.

The firm operates a wood-burning power plant in Yorkshire, which has received some £6 billion in green subsidies, while operating as Britain’s largest carbon emitter.

Despite a BBC investigation finding that it has burned wood from rare forests in Canada, the firm is set to continue to receive taxpayer money until at least 2031. 

Activists blocked the entrance to the venue, preventing shareholders from entering, and dropped a large banner reading “Drax Kills.”

Inside, activists physically disrupted proceedings, rushing to the stage shouting “Drax kills,” before the meeting was forced to close.

Axe Drax spokesperson Sam Johnson said: We’ve seen over the last year repeated desperate attempts from Drax to silence dissent — from spending millions working with the police to shut down peaceful protest, to silencing whistleblowers. “

Article continues at https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/activists-disrupt-draxs-shareholder-agm

Continue ReadingActivists disrupt Drax’s shareholder AGM

Climate Crisis Deniers Explain Why They Like U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright

Spread the love

Original article by Geoff Dembicki republished from DeSmog

U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright speaks to ARC by video. Credit: Marc Fawcett-Atkinson

In exclusive interviews, they called the Trump administration official “terrific,” “very smart,” and someone who “gets it.”

In mid-February, U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright described the global effort to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions in dark and conspiratorial terms.

“Net zero 2050 is a sinister goal,” he told the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC), an international gathering of conservatives convened by Canadian podcaster, author, and anti-climate powerbroker Jordan Peterson. “It’s certainly been a powerful tool used to grow government power [and], top-down control, and shrink human freedom.”

Then in March, Wright did a speech at the 43rd annual CERAWeek where he attacked the Biden administration’s climate policies as a “quasi-religious” agenda “that imposed endless sacrifices on our citizens.”

Those views put Wright, formerly a CEO with the fracking company Liberty Energy, far outside the Paris Agreement consensus among many world leaders and heads of major corporations that climate change is an urgent issue that requires fundamental changes to our global energy system.

But Wright’s reactionary statements are winning him praise from fossil fuel advocates who acknowledge that human-caused climate change is real but deny that it presents existential threats to civilization – what watchdog nonprofits such as the Center for Countering Digital Hate refers to as “the new denial.” 

In exclusive interviews with DeSmog and Canada’s National Observer conducted during the ARC conference, three prominent figures who deny there is a climate emergency explained why they’re excited that Wright holds one of the most consequential cabinet posts in the Trump administration, with one referring to the U.S. energy secretary as “a good friend.”

Bjorn Lomborg speaks about his most recent book during a press briefing at ARC. Credit: Marc Fawcett-Atkinson

Bjorn Lomborg

One particularly influential climate crisis denier is Bjorn Lomborg, a Danish political scientist who for decades has been trying to convince policymakers and the public that there are more important global challenges to address than climate change. This is the subject of his most recent book, Best Things First, which Lomborg was promoting at ARC. Last year, Peterson personally presented a copy of the book to Elon Musk.

“We’ll have to wait and see if he actually reads it,” Lomborg said of Musk in an interview with DeSmog and Canada’s National Observer at the conference.

Lomborg, who is an advisor to ARC, said during a keynote speech that efforts to transition off fossil fuels are a “green fantasy.” Lomborg acknowledges that climate change is real but claims, contrary to decades of scientific and economic evidence, that it will be relatively easy and painless for humankind to adapt.

Those arguments have resonated with Wright, who during a 2020 podcast referred to Lomborg’s previous book False Alarm as “fantastic,” and earlier this year described him as a “friend” on LinkedIn.  

Asked what he thinks about Trump’s pick for energy secretary, Lomborg replied: “Look, Chris Wright is a great guy and he’s very smart. And I’m very happy that we can get a more sense-based approach to how we do energy.”

Part of that, according to Lomborg, is acknowledging — despite low-carbon investment surpassing $2 trillion in 2024 — that a transformative global shift to green energy isn’t happening anytime soon. “We’re not there yet,” he said. “And that, I think, is what Chris Wright can help us to do, which is to say, ‘let’s be realistic now and let’s find smarter ways to have greener energy sources in the future.’”

Scott Tinker does a speech at ARC. Credit: Marc Fawcett-Atkinson

Scott Tinker

During his 13-minute presentation at ARC, Scott Tinker outlined his view that energy has to be affordable, reliable, and clean, criteria that in his view disadvantages renewable energy. “If you want 100 percent clean you don’t get much of these other things,” he told the conference. “There are trade-offs in the real world.”

Tinker runs an organization called Switch Energy Alliance that creates videos about energy and climate change for classrooms, museums, and professional training sessions. The organization says that it wants an “energy-educated future that is objective, nonpartisan, and sensible.”

But Tinker tends to promote the benefits of fossil fuels while downplaying the urgency of addressing global temperature rise. During a podcast interview in March, Tinker said it was “a very strange form of economic colonialism” to argue against developing world countries burning fossil fuels “because we’ll wreck the climate.” We shouldn’t fear a bit of atmospheric warming, Tinker added, urging listeners to instead consider “all the positive things” countries gain from oil, gas, and coal.

Wright has used similar language, telling a gathering of African leaders in March that it would be “a paternalistic post-colonial attitude” for the U.S. to stand in the way of their fossil fuel resources.

The similarities between Wright’s and Tinker’s views aren’t a coincidence. Tinker told DeSmog in an interview at ARC that he and the U.S. energy secretary have known each other for years. “Chris is a good friend,” Tinker said. “We’ve bounced a lot back and forth.”

One other area they seem to agree on is rejecting carbon dioxide’s legal status as a pollutant in the U.S., which helps provide the basis for the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate emissions. That’s been a long-time goal of climate denial organizations such as the CO2 Coalition and Heartland Institute.

“We shouldn’t confuse [CO2] with being a pollutant,” Tinker said.

Robert Bryce speaks at ARC. Credit: ARC / YouTube

Robert Bryce

For years Robert Bryce has been on a mission to convince the world that renewable energy can never replace or out-compete coal, gas, and oil. Previously a senior fellow with the Manhattan Institute— a think tank with a long history of accepting fossil fuel money and questioning the scientific consensus on climate change — Bryce now attacks climate solutions as an author, speaker, and filmmaker.

During his speech at ARC, he claimed that “we are inundated with climate catastrophism,” and argued without evidence that the primary motivation for environmentalists to be opposed to fossil fuels is because their organizations have “enormous” budgets, saying “it’s a big business.”

Bryce is a long-time proponent of nuclear energy, something he shares in common with Wright, who stepped down as a member of the board of directors at the nuclear company Oklo after he was confirmed as energy secretary in February.

“Chris gets it,” Bryce said in an interview with DeSmog. “Chris knows what the score is. He’s a natural gas guy, a hydrocarbon guy. He’s promoting nuclear power. Hopefully this administration, now that they’re actually talking about nuclear, can actually move the ball forward, it’s overdue.”

Bryce and Wright also seem to share opposition to carbon capture and storage, a technology widely favored by oil and gas producers, which tout it as key to reducing emissions from their operations despite it being widely used to pull more oil from the ground. Under Wright, the U.S. Department of Energy is considering cutting billions of dollars’ worth of funding for projects utilizing the technology.

“There is only one reason why any of these hydrocarbon companies are doing carbon capture,” Bryce said. “Subsidies, that’s it.”

“It will never work at scale,” he added. “Once you get that CO2 super-compressed and you’re pushing it down underground, there are very few places where you can actually sequester it. So it’s a lot of money wasted.”

This special investigation between Canada’s National Observer and DeSmog was produced in collaboration with the I-SEA and TRACE Foundation.

Original article by Geoff Dembicki republished from DeSmog

Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
Continue ReadingClimate Crisis Deniers Explain Why They Like U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright

Canada Fossil Fuel Subsidies Hit $30 Billion Amid Pipeline Push, Study Reveals

Spread the love

Original article by Taylor Noakes republished from DeSmog.

Shame Oil Bros on cardboard sign
Federal subsidies to the oil and gas sector totalled $74.6 billion over five years, Environmental Defence found. Credit: David Niddrie / Flickr (CC BY NC 2.0)

Amid trade war talk of expanding Canadian energy infrastructure, a new report reveals that direct Canadian subsidies to the fossil fuel and petrochemical sectors reached nearly $30 billion in 2024.

For comparison’s sake, Canada spent between $38 billion and $39 billion on defense in 2024. 
 
 “Oil and gas companies – emboldened by their influence over President Trump – are exploiting the current economic uncertainty to call on governments to double down on fossil fuels,” Julia Levin, associate director of national climate with nonprofit group Environmental Defence, which put out the report, said in a statement.

Levin notes that oil and gas companies have been vocal in their demand that politicians work to expand pipelines and related projects, and seek new export markets for Canadian fossil fuels. Meanwhile, Canadian taxpayers, who fund the companies’ subsidies, face the expensive consequences of climate change and related disasters.

In recent weeks, the chief executives of Canada’s major oil and gas companies — including Suncor, Cenovus, Enbridge, and Imperial — signed an open letter to the leaders of four of Canada’s major political parties. In it, they demand federal party leaders to eliminate regulations, emissions caps, tanker bans on the West Coast, and carbon levees on major emitters.

The open letter was endorsed by prominent Canadian conservatives, including Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith recently repeated many of the same industry talking points in defending her taxpayer-funded trip to attend a controversial PragerU fundraiser where she shared a stage with far-right influencer Ben Shapiro.  
 
 Last month, Liberal leader Mark Carney indicated his interest in building new east-west pipelines, ostensibly to reduce dependence on foreign imports and develop new trade opportunities. 

“This push ignores the fact that fossil fuels come at a high price — not just at the pump, but through rising costs of groceries, worsening health outcomes, damage to property and huge government handouts,” said Levin in the statement. 

“It also ignores the rapid energy transition towards renewable energy that is happening globally.”

Among Environmental Defence’s principal findings is that the Canadian government spent $29.6 billion on the fossil fuel sector in 2024, which is nearly $6 billion more than what it would cost to build interprovincial grid connection infrastructure. Recent research from the International Institute for Sustainable Development suggests that a national electrical grid could lower electricity costs nationwide, create hundreds of thousands of new clean tech jobs, stabilize electricity costs, improve Canadians’ health, and provide Canada with the energy security currently threatened by the Trump trade war.

The Trans Mountain project has received $21 billion in government financing. Credit: Sally T. Buck / Flickr (CC BC NC ND 2.0)

Canada’s direct subsidies includes approximately $21 billion in financing for the Trans Mountain Pipeline, $7.5 billion from Export Development Canada (which included money for LNG and carbon capture, and financing for Canadian companies and companies and governments seeking to buy Canadian products), and another $700 million for LNG infrastructure.
 
Big Oil regularly promotes LNG and carbon capture as potential solutions for the climate crisis, though these arguments have been thoroughly debunked. LNG advocates in Canada often characterize it as a “bridge fuel” that could be used to help developing nations transition away from coal. Recent research indicates that the world’s two largest coal users — India and China — are in fact transitioning directly to renewable energy systems like solar and wind.

Moreover, LNG is a deadly fossil fuel that also happens to be resource intensive to produce, and often results in large volumes of methane emissions. Methane is estimated to be 80 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. As for carbon capture, recent research from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis poured cold water on Canada’s premier industry-driven carbon capture project — Pathways Alliance — determining that it is not financially viable and is unlikely to provide any environmental benefit. This determination is consistent with expert analyses of other carbon capture projects, both in Canada and globally.

Canada Has Given Away $74.6 Billion in Subsidies 

Environmental Defence estimates Canada spent $2.4 billion on carbon capture projects in 2024, more than in previous years.

The group’s report also determined that federal subsidies to the oil and gas sector over the last five years amounted to $74.6 billion. Their analysis of what constitutes federal fossil fuel funding includes direct grants, tax breaks, loans, and loan guarantees from the government of Canada and some federal agencies (such as Export Development Canada).

Despite oil industry claims that fossil fuel companies are investing in climate solutions (claims that have led the federal government to introduce anti-greenwashing legislation), Environmental Defence found that none of Canada’s four largest industry companies reported investments in climate initiatives or emissions reductions as part of their capital spending.

The report has also reveals that pollution created by oil and gas companies reached an estimated $53 billion in 2024. This includes increased health costs, property damage from extreme weather events, as well as decreased agricultural productivity, a consequence of changing weather patterns.

“The calls for a new oil pipeline pose real risks to Canadian taxpayers,” said Levin in an email to DeSmog, noting not only that global demand for oil is set to peak in the next four years and then significantly decline, but that oil demand is already showing signs of plateauing in major energy markets like China.

“No company is willing to bet its own money on what is guaranteed to quickly become a massive stranded asset,” said Levin. “Instead, oil and gas companies want taxpayers to pay the price for new fossil fuel infrastructure as their wealthy shareholders reap the rewards.”

Levin is particularly critical of the under reported fact that federal subsidies to the fossil fuel sector have deepened Canada’s economic vulnerability.

“The Canadian public is already on the hook for the new Trans Mountain Pipeline — to the tune of somewhere around $30 to $40 billion and rising. And the project has done nothing to reduce our dependence on the United States, with nearly half its oil still flowing south of the border,” she said.

Original article by Taylor Noakes republished from DeSmog.

Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels.
Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels.
Continue ReadingCanada Fossil Fuel Subsidies Hit $30 Billion Amid Pipeline Push, Study Reveals

Anti-Drax protesters disrupt London biomass conference

Spread the love

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/anti-drax-protestors-disrupt-london-biomass-conference

Drax Power Station near Selby

FOUR activists were removed from the Argus Biomass conference today after disrupting the Drax-sponsored event.

Posing as conference attendees, they interrupted a keynote speech by Drax chief sustainability officer Miguel Veiga-Pestana, challenging him on the company’s sustainability record and shouting: “Drax poisons people.”

The wood-burning power plant in Yorkshire, which claims to be sustainable, was recently awarded new government subsidies.

However, a BBC investigation found that Drax had been cutting wood from environmentally important forests in Canada and the firm has been fined by Ofgem for inaccurately reporting data on the sourcing of wood pellets.

Article continues at https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/anti-drax-protestors-disrupt-london-biomass-conference

Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels.
Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels.
Continue ReadingAnti-Drax protesters disrupt London biomass conference