'Fragmented' policies hindering low-CO2 manufacturing
- Other ,
- Food and drink ,
- Engineering and metals ,
- Electronics ,
EEF calls on the government to outline its vision for low-carbon manufacturing in the UK, warning that incoherent policies and a lack of finance are hampering the sector's efforts to cut emissions
In its latest report, Tech for growth, EEF warns that the UK’s position as a leading provider of low-carbon goods and services, and the manufacturing sector’s ability to reduce its environmental impacts, are under threat.
The manufacturing body calls for cross-party agreement on what a low-carbon manufacturing sector should look like, a wholesale review of existing climate change policy and greater government spending on research and development (R&D) on new clean technologies.
At the launch of the report, Gareth Stace, head of climate and environment policy at EEF, commented that the government lacked an overall strategy for the transition to low-carbon manufacturing. “There are pockets of vision, but they don’t necessarily join up,” he said.
“We need the government to set out its vision of manufacturing’s place in the low-carbon economy, focus more on innovation and provide greater regulatory stability to unlock investment in breakthrough technologies.”
In its report, EEF urges the government to outline a portfolio of low-carbon technologies where there are opportunities to innovate and to match OECD spending on R&D – currently the UK government spends 1% of its R&D budget on environment and energy technologies, compared with the OECD average of 3.7%.
To help manufacturers working to tackle their environmental impacts, EEF calls for a review of enhanced capital allowances, to ensure they are supporting investment in low-carbon technologies, and for the government to ensure that the green investment bank backs projects that would be unable to access funding elsewhere.
The report highlights in particular the challenges facing sectors that produce greenhouse gases as a part of their industrial processes, such as paper, steel, cement and glass manufacture. EEF warns that these sectors are reliant on breakthrough technologies to lower their emissions and that without government support they will find it “extremely difficult to remain economically viable”.
It wants the government to help hard-to-treat sectors by setting out a separate long-term decarbonisation strategy, extending the £250 million package of support for energy-intensive industries to 2020, and to lobby the European Commission to explore moving such sectors out of the EU emissions trading scheme and into their own sector-specific regime.
The report came after the UK’s cement-making sector confirmed that without the development of carbon capture and storage (CCS), its ability to cut carbon emissions in future was significantly limited. In its strategy to cutting carbon emissions to 2050, the cement industry confirmed that it had already cut greenhouse gas emissions by 55% on 1990 levels, and that with CCS it could cut them by a further 26% by 2050. Without CCS, however, it would only be able to make another 7% cut in emissions.
Almost one-third of Europe's largest companies have now set net-zero emissions targets, but far less are set to deliver on their ambitions.
The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) has today unveiled the most significant changes to its reporting standards since 2016, setting a new benchmark for corporate sustainability.
Seven of the UK's 17 key industry sectors are still increasing their emissions year-on-year, and most will miss their 2050 net-zero targets without significant government action, new research suggests.
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has published a new 'Green Claims Code' to ensure businesses are not misleading consumers about their environmental credentials.
Half of the world's 40 largest listed oil and gas companies will have to slash their production by at least 50% by the 2030s to align with the goals of the Paris Agreement, new analysis has found.
In June 2021, the UK’s governing Conservative Party lost a by-election in Chesham and Amersham, a seat it had held for 47 years. The principal reasons reported as the cause of this defeat were proposed planning reforms and the promotion of housebuilding on greenfield sites across the south of England.