Lehigh Preserve Institutional Repository

Closing The Carbon Gap: The UK's Progress In Climate Change Mitigation And Increasing Need For Strategic Policy Lenzo, Courtney 2018

Find more at https://preserve.lib.lehigh.edu/

This document is brought to you for free and open access by Lehigh Preserve. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator of Lehigh Preserve. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Perspectives on Business and Economics, Vol. 36, 2018

CLOSING THE CARBON GAP: THE UK’S PROGRESS IN CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION AND INCREASING NEED FOR STRATEGIC POLICY Courtney Lenzo

The UK has reduced emissions substantially, aiming for an 80% decrease in emissions by 2050. However, a changing generation portfolio, growing electricity demand, and wavering political support are forcing the country away from its desired emissions trajectory. By focusing on renewables and , efficiency in sectors such as building and transportation, and balance of electricity supply inconsistencies, the UK can meet its ambitious targets.

Introduction generation capacity to meet rising demand, and implementing a mixture of technologies, As evidence builds that climate change from pumped hydroelectrical poses a threat to human safety and quality of to smart grids, to balance the fluctuations in life, many countries have begun addressing supply brought on by renewables. Upgrading this problem. Wealthy EU countries, in regulations and government programs to focus particular the UK, have spearheaded programs on these targets should provide the necessary and treaties that attempt to mitigate or adapt support to close the gap. to climate change. The numerous climate change programs the UK has tried, with The UK as a Global Leader in varying success, can serve as a learning tool Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions for countries that have been slower to act and help the UK hone environmental policy going Although other countries have also forward. lowered greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in The UK is a world leader in reducing carbon the past decade, the UK became a leader by emissions, yet there is a growing gap between reducing them to a comparatively low level. the UK’s legislated goals and its projected GHG emissions, the de facto measure of emissions due to a combination of technical climate-related pollution, are often simplified and political challenges. The UK needs to as carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, as this gas concentrate on improving efficiency in sectors dominates GHG footprints (US Environmental beyond electricity generation, using electricity Protection Agency, “Greenhouse…”). Since rather than less efficient fuels to power these 1990, when GHG emissions from all sectors sectors, increasing renewable and nuclear weighed in at 799 equivalent metric tons of 13 Figure 1

CO2 Emissions per Dollar of GDP for Selected Nations 1.5

1.2 $ of GDP)

1 PPP 0.9

0.6 Emissions (kg per 201 2

CO 0.3

0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Note: The World Bank has adjusted GDP dollars in this data set using purchasing power parity (PPP) in 2011 values to control for differences between countries and inflation. Source: World Bank.

CO2 (MtCO2e), the country has lowered GHG climate change policies, such as participation emissions by more than 40% to 466 MtCO2e in in the Kyoto Protocol or Paris Agreement. 2016 (“Provisional…”). Although ratified by an overwhelming number Figure 1 shows the UK’s relative success of nations, these international agreements fall through CO2 emissions, adjusted for economic short of obligating the entire globe to binding output, compared to countries of varying emissions goals (United Nations). The EU goes wealth and size. Some countries, such as China, a step further, with binding short-term targets have greatly reduced emissions but remain and a broad goal of reducing emissions by 80% large polluters. Others, like France, are the to 95% by 2050 from 1990 levels (European lowest emitters but have improved minimally. Parliament). The UK resembles France far more than China Some ambitious EU countries, notably in its emission history, but in cutting 0.192 kg Germany and the UK, have set even more

CO2 per dollar of GDP versus France’s 0.096 demanding 2020 targets than those required by reduction, the UK is also improving faster than the EU. Figure 2 displays various EU countries’ many of its fellow low emitters. Overall, the 1990 emissions levels, their EU 2020 targets, UK emerges as a leader when considering both their 2014 GHG emissions, and, for the UK and emissions reductions and absolute emissions Germany, their tighter national 2020 targets. relative to GDP. The UK and Germany, with more The UK’s climate change goals are stringent 2020 goals, appear most successful at ambitious. Most countries have minimal lowering emissions. These two countries have 14 Figure 2 2020 Targets, and 1990 and 2014 Absolute Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Select EU Countries 1990 EU 2020 Targets 2014 National 2020 Targets 1400

1200 e) 2 O 1000

800

600

400

Greenhouse Gas Emissions (MtC 200

0 a k y d UK Spain France Polan d Greece Irelan Finlan d Sloveni Romania Denmar German Netherlands Source: United Nations.

seen the largest reductions both in absolute also decommissioned nearly all nuclear power numbers and compared to 1990 levels. The plants prematurely in response to the 2011 UK’s upfront goals and precursive dedication Fukushima accident in Japan. In contrast, to climate change efforts are closely connected nuclear power remains important in the UK to emissions reductions to date. (Renn and Marshall). Germany provides an interesting On the surface the UK and Germany comparison when trying to understand the have similar emissions histories—both set relationship between self-established goals and ambitious short-term goals, reduced , the UK’s emissions reductions. Both countries and became two of the lowest GHG emitters owe much of their reductions to reducing coal- in the world. However, given their distinct approaches, multiple paths are apparently powered electricity. Beyond coal, Germany and feasible. Even so, both cases suggest that clear the UK vary greatly in how they have improved. goals and a commitment to low emissions are Like the UK, Germany relied on reductions prerequisites. from the power sector but through a uniquely decentralized energy generation structure with Successful UK Climate Change Policy high municipal and residential ownership. This and Ongoing Challenges model depends on local banking institutions to finance the small-scale renewables that The Climate Change Act of 2008 is abound in Germany. The UK has far less small- integral to the UK’s progressive climate change scale generation (Chilvers et al.). Germany policy. This act legally committed the UK 15 to reducing carbon emissions by 80% of the (European Commission). The UK supplements 1990 levels by 2050 (Committee on Climate the ETS by removing surplus allowances from Change, “Carbon…”) and set budgets for five- the market and forcing the price of carbon to year periods in the interim to ensure the UK stay above a specified level, thereby enhancing could meet its goal. The act also established incentives to reduce emissions (Ares and the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) to Delebarre). Because the ETS is a substantial monitor the UK’s progress. The CCC holds piece of UK climate change policy, Brexit could power as a reliable, data-driven source on have consequences on emissions progress cost-effective routes to reducing emissions. unless the UK can maintain participation in The CCC proposed the carbon budgets for the program or successfully replace it with a ratification by Parliament, and the agency national version. provides expertise on developing issues, such Many UK programs rely on positive as Brexit’s impact on UK climate change incentives and aim to reduce risk. Consider goals (UK Parliament). Annually, they report the power sector where the government progress and quantify the expected impact of encourages large-scale investment in policies on emissions and the economy. For renewables through Contracts for Difference. example, the CCC estimates the quantity of These contracts guarantee low carbon

CO2 a program can remove from UK output and generators a consistent “strike price” when the cost to both government and consumers. selling electricity to the grid rather than These publications also suggest key actions variable market prices. A government-owned which, with government support, could yield company pays or receives the difference large reductions. These suggestions often between these prices, making renewables a highlight funding for research and efficiency stable, secure investment for companies (UK improvements (Committee on Climate Government). Similarly, the former Feed-in Change, “2017…”). Backed by extensive data, Tariffs program supported small generators of the CCC is an influential voice on UK climate solar, hydro, anaerobic, micro-heat, and wind change policy. through monthly payments based CCC recommendations often lead to on the technology and quantity of energy the government approving subsidies, funded (Ofgem). This class of policy incentives aims competitions, carbon trading programs, and to make renewables generation economically various other policies. UK climate change viable for companies and households. programs aim to correct environmental With so many positive incentives, the externalities. In other words, the government UK’s environmental programs are costly. tries to associate environmental degradation The government tries to maximize value, but with costs polluters pay immediately and there are limits on spending. Two prematurely directly so that protecting the environment closed power sector programs exemplify makes economic sense. This concept this conflict. In 2015, a carbon capture and appears in countless ways, from payments to storage competition with a £1 billion funding households generating to a promise was abandoned. The competition vehicle emissions cap with enforceable fines. was in progress for more than four years, Some aspects of UK climate change when the Treasury decided it could not afford strategy are EU-wide. Most notable is the the offered £1 billion (Carrington). The EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), Renewables Obligation program also ended arguably the most effective cap-and-trade before its promised deadline. This program system worldwide. The ETS sets a limit on required generators to source a percentage of total emissions and allocates allowances to energy from renewables, either by generating companies. Companies can keep allowances their own or buying Renewables Obligation to cover their own emissions or sell to others Certificates from an accredited generator. with excess emissions. Companies emitting Generators who failed to meet their quota more than allowed face steep fines. Over time, were charged a fee proportional to their unmet the cap is lowered, decreasing total emissions obligation. After nearly 15 years, the UK ended 16 the program early to eliminate the operating reduction advised by the CCC. cost (Ofgem). As these examples show, the UK Although on track to meet and even has had varying success balancing costs and outperform budgets through 2022, by the environmental goals. 2028–2032 period, projected emissions exceed Considering the cost to the UK of meeting the budget. The gap is small, but the targets environmental goals, it is natural to wonder should be comfortably achievable. Meanwhile, what compels the country to meet these targets. the cost-efficient pathway is even lower than Unlike the EU emissions targets, which carry the budgets themselves. Considering the CCC’s fines, the “legally binding” UK carbon budgets desired trajectory, the minor deviation becomes lack overt consequences. Nevertheless, the ever larger and concerning policy gap political and economic implications could be highlighted in Figure 3. To close this swelling substantial. Failure to meet the targets may gap and adhere to goals beyond 2022, policy prompt political backlash and impede outside and market changes are needed in the UK. investment by disrupting the UK’s image as a powerful, innovative nation on climate change Technical Challenges Decelerating mitigation. UK Emissions Reductions Consider the early 2010s, when Parliament wavered over approving the The changing makeup of the energy fourth carbon budget. Seven global electricity sector and a push to substitute electricity for technology firms responded by writing the higher carbon sources in other sectors, topped Energy Secretary to note that “the UK was with the political climate and Brexit-related in danger of undermining its reputation as changes to policy, are the main causes of the a country with low political risk for energy slowdown in reductions. investments” (Lockwood). This same period of Since the Climate Change Act of 2008, political uncertainty increased interest rates emissions due to electricity generation have on energy project investment by 15% (Harper). dropped dramatically. The energy sector is When the UK environmental technology responsible for 50% of emissions reductions market appears uncertain, borrowing to fund between 1990 and 2016, even though it investment becomes more expensive, raising accounted for only 30% of the 1990 GHG the effective price of reducing emissions. emissions (“Provisional…”). Renewables and The UK depends on a green image to limit other technologies provided attainable, cost- uncertainty and win investors. If the image effective means of decreasing carbon output, is tarnished, outside funding will decrease, making this outside decrease possible. Coal so reducing emissions will require additional played a key role. The switch from coal to government funding. To maintain private greener electricity accounts for 75% of UK investment and keep the cost of climate emissions reductions since 2012. Limiting coal change mitigation low for taxpayers, the UK has allowed the UK to quickly lower emissions; must continue meeting its carbon budgets. but now, even eliminating coal completely would provide less than two years’ worth of the The Developing Landscape emissions reductions needed to stay on target of UK Climate Change Mitigation (Committee on Climate Change, “2017…”). Electricity generation has a new composition: Despite recent advances, progress has (45%); limited coal (10%); nuclear slowed. A gap is widening between the UK’s (21%); and growing renewable generation, trajectory and its ambitious five-year budgets. including onshore and offshore wind (12%), Figure 3 shows legislated carbon budgets, past (9%), hydro (2%), and solar (2%) emissions, and anticipated emissions over the (Committee on Climate Change, “2017…”). next 15 years. The two projections indicate The new makeup means decreasing coal the range of emissions that could be expected dependence is no longer enough. given the policies either in place or strongly A key component in the UK’s electricity expected to be implemented. It also shows a portfolio is nuclear power. Nuclear power can cost-effective route to the 2050 goal of 80% produce an invariable electricity supply with 17 Figure 3 Past and Projected UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions Compared to Legislated Carbon Budget 700

600 e) 2 500

400

300

tal GHG Emissions (MtC O 200 To

100

0 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Legislated Carbon Budgets Existing Policies Existing & Planned Policies Emissions to Date CCC’s Cost-effective Path Note: Existing Policies: based on central estimates of economic growth and fossil fuel prices, including only policies that were in place by 2016. Existing & Planned Policies: existing policies plus policies “where decisions on policy design are sufficiently advanced to allow robust estimates of impact” (“Provisional…”). Sources: Committee on Climate Change, “2017…”; Committee on Climate Change, “Carbon…”; “Provisional…”.

relatively low carbon emissions, helping make Consequently, the cost of subsidizing the UK’s energy sector dependable and robust. each ton of reduced emissions through onshore But by 2025, half of the nuclear capacity will wind in 2016 was nearly double the 2009 be decommissioned while only a sixth of the cost (Renewable Energy Foundation). Even capacity will be replaced by new plants by 2030 considering the US EPA’s maximum estimate (World Nuclear Association), leaving the UK of the impact to society of each emitted ton with a diminished capacity for low carbon power of CO2, the cost of subsidizing emissions via generation. Government action is necessary to onshore wind would be 50% more than the encourage replacement of this capacity with cost to society of not reducing those emissions more nuclear or renewable generation. (US Environmental Protection Agency, “The Beyond the capacity needed to replace Social…”). Other renewable technologies decommissioned nuclear power, additional are even more expensive; therefore, desired generation will be required to meet the reductions likely cannot come from electricity increasing demand from other sectors. With generation alone. Decoupling carbon from coal nearly eliminated, natural gas is the growth in other sectors, such as transportation, dirtiest of common electricity sources. Because buildings, and industry, may be more effective. natural gas emits fewer tons of CO2 per unit, The UK’s next steps involve efficiency, switching to renewables today reduces fewer from superior insulation that conserves emissions per unit of electricity. heat to efficiency requirements for new cars 18 (Committee on Climate Change, “2017…”). Objectives for the UK Going Forward Next steps also likely involve raising electricity demand. Electricity can be produced with Combating climate change in the UK is limited emissions, so employing electricity more challenging today compared to a decade rather than oil in technologies, such as electric ago, when the 2008 Climate Change Act was vehicles or heat pumps, can lower emissions enacted. Coal-powered generation no longer even while increasing electricity demand. presents an easy target, governmental support Combining the impacts of changes in efficiency of environmental measures has waned, and and demand, the CCC estimates electricity electricity demand is predicted to increase demand will rise by 7% between 2016 and while generation capacity decreases. The CCC 2030. If supplied by renewables, the transition presented a reasonable path to continued would reduce emissions by 62% (Committee reductions while accounting for these on Climate Change, “2017…”). pressures. The following advised objectives incorporate the CCC’s suggestions together Political Challenges Compounding with the opinions of other experts. Deceleration in UK Emissions Reductions Improve Beyond the Power Sector and Raise Low Carbon Generation The technical challenges of climate Capacity change in the UK are compounded by waning political support. Political disinterest was In the past decade, the ETS has fostered particularly evident from 2010 to 2015, when reductions in the UK by raising the cost of the government needed to approve the fourth emitting carbon. With Brexit looming, the UK carbon budget for 2023–2027. With extensive may want to negotiate continued participation research to justify their suggestion, the CCC in the international program or implement a proposes each target 12 years before the national version of the ETS. Without a cap- budget’s period. However, before the budgets and-trade system to encourage emissions become law, Parliament must approve them reductions economy-wide, the UK may (Committee on Climate Change, “Carbon…”). encounter heightened difficulty in reducing During this process, the fourth budget met emissions through the more specific areas, substantial resistance from conservative discussed as follows. lawmakers. They raised concerns for a variety Efficiency improvements, primarily in of reasons: the UK was recovering from a buildings, transport, and industry sectors, financial crisis, lawmakers were satisfied by could play an integral role in the UK’s plan the 2008 Climate Change Act, and the fourth going forward. Specific, targeted policies, for budget was the first to extend beyond the example, the “insulation of all practicable lofts UK’s obligations to the EU, making it the first by 2022” or a “32% improvement in efficiency commitment stricter than those of neighboring of conventional cars by 2030” advised by countries (Lockwood). Additionally, the cost the CCC (Committee on Climate Change, to eliminate emissions was rising as coal “2017…”), would drive these changes. The generation dropped. These circumstances benefits are clear: higher efficiency means less prompted Parliament to dispute the CCC’s energy and correspondingly fewer emissions recommendations for more than two years to fulfill needs. Although investment is before finally approving the budget. Sound required, efficiency is one of the most cost- supporting evidence for the CCC’s proposal effective avenues to lower emissions. Policies ultimately convinced Parliament to approve that support individuals improving efficiency the fourth carbon budget, but the politics in their homes and vehicles or that raise surrounding climate change remain lackluster efficiency standards in new buildings and in comparison to the enthusiastic commitment transport would be a valuable step. Even so, of 2008. Parliament’s discordance on climate efficiency represents only a fraction of the change will likely continue impeding progress changes needed to meet targets. toward the UK’s emission targets. Changing the composition of energy 19 sources in sectors such as building, transport, study demonstrated that in the best cases, and industry may also prove important on average wind farms produce 25% of their with the power sector holding less potential maximum energy capacity. This efficiency also for reductions. Changes will likely include decreases with age to as low as 10% after 16 using biomethane in the gas grid, increasing years (Hughes). Inadequate electricity supply the proportion of electric vehicles, and causes power outages, which are aggravating transitioning home heating from gas to heat and dangerous in cold months, so balancing pumps. These changes would raise electrical fluctuations in electricity supply is essential. demand and emissions reductions only realized Effective balancing of fluctuations is also if the new electricity were generated through critical to keeping costs down, as Germany’s low carbon methods. experience shows. The country rapidly The UK will likely find renewable increased renewables to provide nearly 27% of technologies and nuclear power the most electricity in 2014, decreasing CO2 emissions effective additional low carbon generation while lowering the cost of generating and sources. Onshore and offshore wind generation; transmitting electricity. Yet the direct cost of medium-scale to small-scale hydropower, electricity for German households rose due particularly in some areas of ; to surcharges resulting from the fluctuation and small-scale are especially of renewables (Pollitt and Anaya). Renewables promising technologies. The CCC has already would need to be complemented efficiently to advised the government to expand contracts ensure adequate electricity and minimize costs for renewables so supply can meet demand to customers. from sectors transitioning toward electricity The UK may find a varied generation (Committee on Climate Change, “2017…”). portfolio effective. Diverse renewable Simultaneously, nuclear power can technologies and a nuclear baseline could be provide a stable baseload. To maintain a nuclear part of a balancing portfolio as well as natural base, the UK would need to invest in nuclear gas and batteries that can meet fluctuations projects promptly to enable new plants to be with a rapid release of electricity to the grid. operational before aging plants are retired. Despite a higher carbon footprint, natural gas Nuclear is the lowest emitter among reliable could complement renewable generation’s sources, emitting far less CO2 per unit of quick, unexpected dips. Natural gas plants electricity generated than either coal or natural can respond quickly to these variations. They gas (Allen) and making it a reasonable choice can be started and reach full load capacity in to supplement renewables and the various as little as ten minutes. In contrast, lower- sources needed to balance renewables. The emitting nuclear plants require up to two days Scottish government and some environmental to reach full capacity (Atlinta Energy). Quick organizations argue that nuclear generation adjustment to intermittent renewable output carries inherent safety risks and that the UK is crucial; consequently, a moderate capacity of should focus support on cleaner technologies, natural gas would be useful. such as offshore wind (Mason and Goodley). Intermittent renewables can be smoothed Even so, nuclear power will likely prove further by batteries, such as hydro-batteries, worthwhile because, unlike renewables, it can that store energy in high supply/low demand provide consistent electricity. times and quickly regenerate the energy at low Secure Power with Nuclear, Natural supply/ times. ’s Gas, Batteries, and Flexible Demand Cruachan , a pumped storage hydropower station, is one such battery. Built The significant flaw in renewable into a hollowed mountain, it pumps water from generation is that the technologies are the lake at its base to a reservoir partway up the sporadic and unreliable. Weather causes mountain when excess electricity is available. frequent, substantial fluctuations in the When electricity supply is insufficient to meet quantity of renewably generated energy. demand, water from the elevated reservoir Consider the efficiency of onshore wind: a 2012 is then released, flowing through generators 20 within minutes. The overall process generates Conclusion minimal emissions (Scottish Power). Similar batteries could be implemented where possible The UK has made significant environ- to provide swift response to dips in renewable mental strides, setting ambitious goals, generation or peaks in demand. In short, a reducing emissions drastically, and becoming combination of natural gas and batteries can a leader in the arena of climate change promptly accommodate deviations. mitigation. Part of this success can be attributed Further stabilization can be found in to the effectiveness of the CCC, a data-driven organization that gives the government updates flexible demand. Flexible demand is effective on climate change concerns and suggests because actions, such as running a washer, programs and regulations to help keep the UK charging batteries overnight, and heating on track toward an 80% decrease in emissions a home, do not need to occur immediately. by 2050. Various programs, many of which With smarter homes and electrical grids, these focus on correcting externalities, like the EU activities could occur automatically when ETS, or reducing uncertainty to encourage electricity demand is low or when supply is in investment, such as Contracts for Difference excess. A is a long-term method of and Feed-in Tariffs, have also helped the UK to matching supply and demand because it does effectively encourage emissions reductions. not require modifications, such as changes Despite the success, the country’s climate in capacity, and it produces fewer emissions change efforts face mounting challenges. than natural gas, the predominant method of With coal successfully reduced, more difficult balancing fluctuations today. Incorporating methods of reducing emissions are necessary. this flexibility on the consumer side of the Many nuclear power plants are scheduled to be electricity market would accommodate a decommissioned over the next decade without higher percentage of renewables in the UK’s adequate replacements planned, leaving the generating portfolio. country with a lower capacity for low carbon Unfortunately, converting to a smart generation. Simultaneously, the UK will need grid is an enormous infrastructure change to meet growing demand, growth partially that calls for investment now. The UK’s caused by sectors beyond power moving toward electrical infrastructure was built primarily electricity. Meanwhile, government support during the 1950s and 1960s during a rapid of strong climate change policy has wavered expansion of electricity. It is aging and over the past five years. Through these rising operating near full capacity (Jenkins et al., concerns, it is important that the UK continue p. 415). Upgrading the will meeting self-set targets to keep uncertainty be necessary whether through conventional low and encourage outside investment. To successfully lower emissions amid expansion or modification to a smart grid, these challenges, prompt decisive policy with and researchers estimated in 2012 that the the following objectives would be helpful. In UK could save £19 billion in the long run by sectors beyond power, efficiency improvements choosing a smart grid (Easton and Byars). and movement toward electrical power are The UK began progressing toward a smart key first steps. The consequent rising demand grid with a requirement that smart meters, a could be met primarily by nuclear power and necessary first step to overhauling the grid, a composite of renewables, including onshore replace conventional meters by 2020. However, and offshore wind, solar, and hydro generation. concerns about privacy and inaccurate billing Finally, to balance the inconsistencies caused pushback until the government introduced by a higher ratio of renewables, the downgraded the requirement to a suggestion UK could look to natural gas power to address (Meadows and Brodbeck). Stricter smart meter demand when renewables lull for hours to quality standards may be needed to address days, innovative batteries to provide extremely citizens’ concerns before the government can fast response to fluctuations, and a smart grid strengthen policies supporting investment in to offset discrepancies from the consumer side the smart grid. of the market in the long term. 21 The UK can meet its ambitious emission cannot wait five or ten years—it requires targets. However, maintaining its position as governmental action today. a world leader in combating climate change

References

Allen, Stephen. “Carbon Footprint of Electricity Mason, Rowena, and Simon Goodley. “Hinkley Point C Generation.” Parliamentary Office of Science and Nuclear Power Station Gets Government Green Technology. Postnote Update. No. 383, June 2011. Light.” Guardian. September 15, 2016. Ares, Elena, and Jeanne Delebarre. “The Carbon Price Meadows, Sam, and Sam Brodbeck. “Smart Meter Roll- Floor.” UK House of Commons. Briefing Paper. Out: Is Getting One Still Compulsory?” Telegraph. November 23, 2016. July 8, 2017. Atlinta Energy. “A Brief Introduction to Gas-fired Ofgem. “Environmental Programmes.” 2017. Electricity.” October 22, 2014. Pollitt, Michael G., and Karim L. Anaya. “Can Current Carrington, Damin. “UK Cancels Pioneering £1bn Carbon Electricity Markets Cope with High Shares of Capture and Storage Competition.” Guardian. Renewables? A Comparison of Approaches in November 25, 2105. Germany, the UK and the State of New York.” Chilvers, Jason, Timothy J. Foxon, Stuart Galloway, Energy Journal. Vol. 37, No. 1, 2016. Geoffrey P. Hammond, David Infield, Matthew “Provisional UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions National Leach, Peter J.G. Pearson, Neil Strachan, Goran Statistics 2016.” Department for Business Energy, Strbac, and Murray Thomson. “Realising Transition and Industrial Strategy. March 30, 2017. Pathways for a More Electric, Low-Carbon Energy Renewable Energy Foundation. “The Increasing Cost of System in the United Kingdom: Challenges, Insights CO2 Emissions Reductions in the United Kingdom.” and Opportunities.” Sage Journals. March 26, 2017. September 29, 2016. Committee on Climate Change. “2017 Meeting Carbon Renn, Ortwin, and Jonathan Paul Marshall. “Coal, Nuclear Budgets: Closing the Policy Gap.” Report to and Renewable Energy Policies in Germany: From Parliament. June 29, 2017. the 1950s to the “Energiewende.” Energy Policy. Committee on Climate Change. “Carbon Budgets: How We Vol. 99, 2016, pp. 224–32. Monitor Emissions Targets.” Scottish Power. Cruachan Power Station. 2017. Easton, Bill, and Jenny Byars. “Great Britain: Unlocking UK Government. “Electricity Market Reform.” gov.UK. the Potential of Smart Grid.” Ernst & Young. 2012. 2017. European Commission. “Climate Action.” 2017. UK Parliament. “Climate Change Act of 2008.” UK European Parliament. “A Roadmap for Moving to a Government Legislation. 2008. Competitive Low Carbon Economy in 2050.” Law/ United Nations. “The Paris Agreement.” United Nations Statute. Brussels: European Union, 2011. Framework Convention on Climate Change. Harper, Alastair. “What’s Going Wrong with Politics and October 2017. Energy – And How to Fix It.” NewStatesman. US Environmental Protection Agency. “Greenhouse Gas November 16, 2012. Emissions.” 2016. Hughes, Gordon. “The Performance of Wind Farms in the US Environmental Protection Agency. “The Social Cost of United Kingdom and Denmark.” Renewable Energy Carbon.” August 2016. Foundation. 2012. World Bank. “World Development Indicators: CO2 Jenkins, Nick, Chao Long, and Jianzhong Wu. “An Overview Emissions (kg per 2011 PPP $ of GDP).” October of the Smart Grid in Great Britain.” Engineering. 18, 2017. Vol. 1, No. 4, 2015, pp. 413–21. World Nuclear Association. “Nuclear Power in the United Lockwood, Matthew. “The Political Sustainability of Kingdom.” September 2017. Climate Policy: The Case of the UK Climate Change Act.” Global Environmental Change. Vol. 23, No. 5, 2013.

22