Latest news with #climate targets
Irish Times
12 hours ago
- Business
- Irish Times
Most farmers could earn more money by planting trees - why don't they?
To meet its climate targets and avoid billions in EU fines , the State must radically expand tree cover . But despite offering substantial incentives to farmers who forest their lands, planting has hit its lowest level since 1946. Trees are one of the best tools available for drawing down carbon and a key part of the Government's plan to cut emissions in half by the end of this decade. To meet its climate goal, it aims to plant 8,000 hectares of trees a year by the end of this decade. And to fulfil a separate European goal of restoring degraded lands, much of that will need to be native broadleaf forest. Farmers, who possess 70 per cent of the land in the Republic, are vital to achieving these aims. To enlist their help, the State offers grants and premiums to those who forest their fields. Payments are lucrative enough that, over the long term, most farmers could make more money by planting trees, according to Prof Cathal O'Donoghue, an economist at the University of Galway. And yet, while premiums have only grown more substantial over the past two decades, farmers have planted fewer trees. A new premium scheme launched in 2023 was meant to reverse the decline, but in 2024, the State added just 1,573 hectares of new forest, the lowest number in nearly 80 years. READ MORE In its recent report, the Climate Change Advisory Council and Fiscal Advisory Council warned that the State could owe between €8 billion and €26 billion to its European partners if it does not meet its 2030 climate goals. Those billions, they said, would be better spent now on slashing emissions, including by supporting forestry. The Department of Agriculture says it 'offers a wide range of generous incentives to encourage people to plant trees,' but farmers don't appear persuaded. While the State is on track to plant more hectares this year than last, according to a spokesperson, it is still falling short of its forestry targets. 'It's clear already that farmers can, in the west of Ireland, make two or three times their current income by converting to forestry, and they're still not doing it,' says Ray Ó Foghlú, project lead at Hometree, a charity working with farmers to restore native forest. 'At the same time, I do believe there's probably a tipping point financially,' he says. Given the looming EU fines, he says, 'I think there is maybe an argument here to pay farmers more'. The Government provides grants that cover the full cost of planting as well as annual premiums, paid out over 20 years, ranging from €746 per hectare for spruce-dominated forest to more than €1,100 per hectare for broadleaf forest. Any new forest, whether grown for timber or not, accrues to the national climate goal. Today, forests span 11 per cent of the State Despite the incentives, there are material obstacles to planting forest. Many farmers are deterred by the lengthy and complicated application process. And rigid restrictions on where trees can and cannot be planted have ruled out 'huge amounts of land,' according to Forest Industries Ireland . Farmers also risk seeing their trees decimated by pests and disease. Ash dieback, caused by an invasive fungus, has afflicted some 16,000 hectares of forest over the past decade. A crisis to which the Government was slow to respond, critics say. And more extreme weather, fuelled by climate change, poses a growing risk . In January, record winds from Storm Éowyn destroyed more than 23,000 hectares of forest. Under the grant scheme, farmland that is converted to forest cannot, in most cases, be converted back. Even if a farmer sells his land, or passes it on to his children, forest must be maintained in perpetuity, with harvested trees continually replanted. Speaking to The Irish Times , farmers in Galway viewed this restriction as a big deterrent. 'When you have planted your land with forestry, you have no more options left. It's in forestry for good,' says Paul Finnegan, a consultant based near Ballinasloe who works with farmers to secure forestry grants. In Ireland there is a huge tie to the land. The fact that you have land is worth more than the land itself — Farmer in UCD study While premiums end after 20 years, forests continue to provide a valuable public service beyond that, he notes. Trees continue to filter groundwater and draw down carbon. Broadleafs such as oak and willow provide a home to dozens of kids of birds, hundreds of insects, and thousands of lichens, mosses, and fungi. Even farmers who plant spruce for timber are required to install some broadleafs alongside and to supply open space for wildlife. 'The farmer provides this public good, which is now a permanent feature of his forest, without any reward going forward,' Finnegan says. [ I bought the cheapest land I could find in Ireland. Now I'm planting a forest bigger than St Stephen's Green Opens in new window ] Beyond the bureaucratic hurdles, farmers say there is a pervasive stigma around forestry. Few say they would plant productive fields, and most say they would only forest land that was 'good for nothing else.' For a 2013 study, researchers at University College Dublin (UCD) interviewed dozens of farmers in Roscommon , Sligo , and Westmeath , finding that few showed any serious interest in planting even after being told about the grants and premiums. The report found a widespread scepticism of forestry rooted in the nation's long history of tenant farming and famine. 'In Ireland there is a huge tie to the land. The fact that you have land is worth more than the land itself,' one farmer told researchers. 'To put your land in forestry is a sin.' A follow-up study, based on a survey of more than 1,000 farmers across the State, concluded that most are not making decisions about forestry based primarily on financial calculus. 'They want to farm. They want to produce food. They consider it a shame to be planting trees on land used for food production,' said co-author Áine Ní Dhubháin, professor of forestry at UCD. In a 2022 report, Prof O'Donoghue laid out several recommendations for expanding forest cover: Government should streamline licensing, loosen restrictions on where trees can be planted, and reconsider its ban on turning forest back into farmland. It should also look to establish a new agency dedicated to expanding forest cover, he said, and make yearly premiums generous enough to overcome resistance to planting. Each tree is like a calf or a chicken to me — Westmeath farmer Payments, Prof O'Donoghue says, should not just compensate farmers for loss of income from raising livestock, but for loss of a way of life. Given the rising cost of carbon and the urgent need to slash emissions, he adds, there is a sound economic case for raising premiums. Echoing this point, Dr Martha O'Hagan Luff, a finance professor at Trinity College Dublin, writes that the Government must subsidise forestry 'to a level that reflects its value as a public good'. Meanwhile, beyond supplying a financial incentive, UCD researchers say, the Government should highlight how cultivating trees can serve the community – and farmers themselves. In 2021, dairy farmer Gerard Deegan, of Westmeath, converted his land to a mix of pasture and forest. He now grows around 60 varieties of tree on around 40 hectares, from spruce and pine to oak and sycamore. 'I wanted a diverse forest, something that would be here for nature,' he says in an online tour of his farm. 'Each tree is like a calf or a chicken to me.' How has forestry in Ireland changed? At one time, trees covered more than 80 per cent of Ireland, but over the centuries forests were supplanted by farms or harvested for their wood. Early in the 20th century, tree cover had been reduced to just 1 per cent. Keen to shore up the supply of timber, the new Irish State began installing Douglas fir, Scots pine and Sitka spruce on marginal public lands. By the end of the 1980s, the Government had nearly exhausted available areas. To further expand tree cover, it would need to spur planting on private land, and so in 1989, it began paying premiums for forestry. Today, forests span 11 per cent of the State, with roughly half of wooded areas covered in spruce.
Sky News
3 days ago
- Business
- Sky News
Could your summer holiday be greener? Government invests £63m into more sustainable types of jet fuel
The government is investing £63m in new types of jet fuel that it hopes will make your summer holiday a little more eco-friendly - though not everyone is convinced. The cash will be shared by 17 British companies developing different types of "sustainable aviation fuel" (SAF), made from materials including forest cuttings, household rubbish, sugar beet or hydrogen gas. Ministers said the funds could support 1,400 jobs, add £5bn to the economy and help the British industry get ahead as global demand for SAF soars in order to meet stricter climate targets. But campaigners question how sustainable these fuels really are, saying the real answer is to deter "frequent flying". They warn the materials needed for sustainable fuels are hard to come by and too expensive to ever scale up. Industry says it needs this cash injection precisely in order to lower costs and grow, and global demand is booming. 1:55 As of January, flights taking off from the UK must use 2% SAF in their fuel, under new government rules. This will gradually rise to 10% in 2030 and 22% in 2040. But there have been alarm bells warning not enough SAF will be available to meet those targets. The government says sustainable fuels cut emissions of greenhouse gases by 70% on average compared with kerosene over the course of its life, which includes producing it and burning it. Aviation minister Mike Kane said: "We're not just backing brilliant British innovation, we're creating thousands of high-skilled jobs and positioning the UK at the forefront of the global sustainable aviation market." He said the move would "kickstart economic growth, secure energy independence, and make Britain a clean energy superpower". But campaigners say at best the fuels will reduce aviation emissions "by a tiny fraction of the amount needed", and are being used to justify "irresponsible levels" of airport expansion. James Sutton, co-director of climate charity Possible, told Sky News they were not anti-investment, but that the SAF plans would not bring down emissions at the pace and scale necessary. He said: "We need to cut those emissions immediately if we have any hope of hitting our climate goals, not just sit and hope for the best in a few decades time. "The technology and investment required for SAF to displace kerosene entirely is simply not there yet, but policies aimed at reducing demand for flights and taxing frequent flyers, which will therefore cut emissions, are possible now. "So that is what we need to focus on first and foremost." The biggest winner in this round of funding was Stockton-on-Tees based Alfanar Energy, which will get £8m for converting waste wood from sawmills and forestry into SAF.
Irish Times
16-07-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
Political opposition hinders electricity projects
Political opposition continues to hinder projects designed to guarantee electricity supplies and aid the Republic in hitting climate targets, TDs and senators heard on Wednesday. Noel Cunniffe, chief executive of industry group, Wind Energy Ireland, told the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy, that Eirgrid's north-south interconnector, which has cleared all planning hurdles, continued to face opposition. 'There is a general consensus that investment in national grid projects is good, but when it comes to local level, that gets challenged,' he said. Mr Cunniffe pointed out that both Dáil deputies and councillors tended to oppose electricity projects at local level. READ MORE Justin Moran, the organisation's director of external affairs, argued that 'opposition to grid projects is not a victimless crime'. He was responding to committee members who raised this week's news that families cannot move into new homes in Portlaoise, Co Laois, because their estate does not have electricity connections. [ Electricity squeeze hits grid projects Opens in new window ] Mr Moran pointed out that while EirGrid received permission for plans to boost the national electricity grid supplying Laois and Kilkenny in 2014, continued opposition meant that work was only under way now. Nicholas Tarrant, managing director, ESB Networks, said 'there are places on the network where there is limited capacity, and we are working on that'. They include Portlaoise, other similar towns along with areas such as Dublin north and west, according to the State company boss. Regulators are weighing proposals to allow ESB Networks to spend €11.6 billion up to 2030 on boosting the systems that supply electricity to homes and businesses.
Finextra
16-07-2025
- Business
- Finextra
Can reducing fossil fuel subsidies advance global climate goals?
0 This content has been selected, created and edited by the Finextra editorial team based upon its relevance and interest to our community. Research from ZEW Manheim found that worldwide climate targets can be met by reducing subsidies for fossil fuels. The Paris Agreement aims to limit global warming to below 2°C to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Targets range from achieving net zero by 2035 to 2070 depending on the country, with most settling in the middle at 2050. The UK is aiming to become net zero by 2045 and pledged to reduce emissions by 69% by 2030. What are fossil fuel subsidies? Many governments have direct and indirect subsidies in fossil fuels – the former being direct payments, and the latter allowing significant tax breaks to allocated businesses and institutions. In 2022, fossil fuels received $7 trillion in subsidies. Countries with the largest subsidies in fossil fuels are producers of oil, such as Saudi Arabia, Libya, Kazakhstan, Iran, and Algeria. Countries such as Venezuela, Finland, Australia, and Ireland also have large subsidies in fossil fuel industries, according to 2021 research from Our World in Data. Governments fund subsidies as a privileged form of financial aid, to support sectors of a nation's economy with the ultimate goal of maximising profit and protecting domestic jobs. Other forms of government subsidies are individual subsidies, like student loans and unemployment benefits. In the US, subsidies have historically supported the agricultural, financial, oil, and utility industries – the motivations behind this can be political and economic. Some socioeconomic theories suggest certain industries require protection from global competition to ensure profitability. There have been arguments against government subsidies that inspire a free economy vs. mixed economy debate; defenders of the free market argue that the free economy cannot exist with government intervention, whereas those who are pro-subsidies state that protecting certain industries allows people to thrive and jobs to remain intact. 'Many governments still help to keep fossil fuels cheap for consumers. For example, explicit subsidies are used to cover part of the supply cost, or external health costs associated with the use of fossil fuels are not included in prices because of implicit subsidies,' stated Professor Sebastian Rausch, head of the ZEW Research Unit 'Environmental and Climate Economics'. How can reducing fossil fuel subsidies lead to achieving climate goals? US subsidies in fossil fuels amounted to $757 billion in 2022, $3 billion in explicit subsidies, and $754 billion in implicit subsidies. Subsidies exceeded the federal government's tax revenues from natural gas and petroleum by $2.1 billion in 2022. Under former President Joe Biden, the US pledged to phase out from fossil fuel investments abroad by 2040. However, since then, the new US administration has pulled out of the Paris Climate Agreement and instated anti-ESG laws, allowing climate-killing fossil fuels to continue to thrive. According to the IMF, reducing fossil fuel subsidies can promote economic growth by limiting uneven division of resources, reduce pollution and climate change, and encourage better social spending by reductions in taxes. The research from ZEW revealed that a third of all countries could meet their climate goals by reducing subsidies in coal, oil, and natural gas – which could lower carbon emissions enough to meet climate targets without additional policies. The argument against fossil fuel subsidies is not a new one; discussions at 2021 and 2022 UN climate change conferences have been pushed for policies to retract tax privileges from oil and gas industries. A report from the University of Cambridge published in May outlined that to reach the goals of the Paris Agreement, three climate actions are essential. Reducing emissions by moving energy production away from fossil fuels that generate greenhouse gas emissions; Reduction of energy use in sectors to ensure greenhouse gas removal; and Optimising land management through solar radiation modification. The removal of both implicit and explicit fossil fuel subsidies is essential. The report states: 'many countries continue to heavily subsidise fossil fuels, both explicitly (by undercharging supply costs) and implicitly (by failing to account for the non-market costs associated with local externalities of fossil fuel use).' The figure below outlines the differences between explicit and implicit subsidies based on 2022 data from the IMF, and what approaches are being taken to reduce them. Source: Our World in Data Reducing all direct fossil fuel subsidies would not successfully tamp down on global emissions, however identifying hidden costs of fossil fuels in energy prices could cut down global emissions by 32%, whilst improving welfare in nations. Tim Kalmey, researcher at ZEW and also co-author of the ZEW study, commented: 'Phasing out explicit subsidies, such as tax exemptions on kerosene or gas price ceilings, would only have a limited effect on CO2 emissions. It is crucial that also the local externalities of fossil fuels, i.e. the harmful effects on health caused by local air pollution, are factored in. We estimate that this would reduce global CO2 emissions by 32%.' Only reducing explicit fossil fuels will not fulfil the climate goals outlined by the Paris Agreement, but eliminating implicit fossil fuel subsidies will allow one-third of countries to overachieve their climate targets. With effective energy pricing, the cost of achieving climate goals can be lowered for all countries, and adding effective energy pricing on top of carbon pricing to meet the Paris Agreement goals will increase welfare by 120%. By retracting government intervention in gas and oil industries, not only will it protect the planet, but the welfare of individual nations that will take part. This new data is key for policymakers, who can use it to make real progress towards mitigating climate change.
The Guardian
14-07-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
UK's clean electricity growing too slowly to meet climate targets
Britain is expected to fall short of the progress needed to meet its climate targets over the next decade because it is not growing its supply of clean electricity fast enough, according to the government's energy system operator. The latest 10-year forecast of Britain's carbon emissions by the government-owned body has revealed that by 2035 the UK will be producing almost a third more carbon emissions than in scenarios where it is on track to meet its legally binding climate targets by 2050. It is the second official warning in the last month that the government's climate targets are at risk of being derailed after the Committee on Climate Change reported that two-fifths of the emissions reductions needed to meet the UK's interim climate target by the end of the decade still have significant risks or insufficient plans to deliver them. The latest forecast report, published by the National Energy System Operator (Neso), represents the operator's current view of the next 10 years based on the UK's existing project pipelines and policies to highlight 'the difference between where we are heading compared [with] where we need to get to'. It suggests that the UK will produce 274m tonnes of carbon (MtCO2) by 2035, well above the 185–204MtCO2 range shown in the same year for the Neso scenarios in which the UK meets the government's net zero target by 2050. Fintan Slye, the chief executive of Neso, said the energy system's climate progress 'isn't enough' and the UK would 'need to go further and faster, accelerating the rollout of clean energy technologies' to bring about a clean and affordable energy system in the long-term. 'The choices made today will shape the success of each wave of Britain's transition. That means speeding up the adoption of energy efficiency measures, empowering households and businesses to make informed choices on things like demand flexibility, buying an electric car and switching to low-carbon heating,' Slye said. The system operator, which was acquired by the government from energy company National Grid last year, said halving the UK's emissions to about 200MtCO2 would 'only be possible by accelerating the mainstream use of low-carbon technologies', from the UK's industrial bases through to homes and transport. However, the Neso's own data shows that the UK's growing clean electricity supplies are on track to fall short of the progress needed to reach net zero. The UK is expected to reach 148GW of renewable electricity by 2035, according to the 10 year forecast, but it would need between 170GW and 190GW by this time in scenarios where the UK meets its 2050 climate goals. Sign up to Down to Earth The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential after newsletter promotion The findings are likely to pile pressure on the government's plans to boost investment in renewables and more energy efficient homes as its climate plans face growing scrutiny over its climate agenda. Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, accused politicians who reject net zero policies of betraying future generations in a 'state of the climate' address to the House of Commons. The intervention is expected to counter the anti-climate rhetoric of the Conservative party which has vowed to abandon the 2050 net zero target, and Reform UK which pledged to scrap all net zero policies and subsidies for renewable energy. A government spokesperson said: 'This report sets out the need to accelerate the country's progress to clean power – which is exactly what we are doing by sprinting to clean power by 2030 and delivering the most significant investment in history in clean, homegrown energy that we control.' 'Our actions over the last year have already laid strong foundations for achieving this mission – by approving projects that could power 2m homes, attracting over £40bn in private sector investment, setting up the publicly owned Great British Energy, launching a new golden age of nuclear power, and introducing plans to upgrade millions of homes to cut bills for homeowners and renters,' the spokesperson added.
