We use cookies where necessary to allow us to understand how people interact with our website and content, so that we can continue to improve our service.
We only ever receive anonymous information, and cannot track you across other websites.
View our privacy policy
In a new report from the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU), the costs to UK households of not reducing emissions to net zero are calculated: this is intended to challenge criticisms of the costs of net zero policies by making clear that not taking action has greater economic consequences.
The report argues that climate impacts are costly to the UK economy, and delays to the rollout of renewable energy and insulation schemes also mean households incur costs they needn’t be incurring: these are the costs of not zero
If the UK had not delayed in deploying renewables, insulation, rooftop solar panels, heat pumps and electric vehicles, some households could have saved around £1,750 on bills in 2022. Plus, homes are facing more than £400 extra in food bills this year because of the impact of climate change and oil and gas prices on the farming and food system. This amounts to a potential £2,150 added to household bills.
The Labour Climate & Environment Forum tested video clips of senior Labour figures, including Kier Starmer, talking about climate change. In findings that suggest there is space/an opportunity for a much clearer and bolder offer to voters on climate change, the authors report that:
Of people who saw Keir Starmer talking about climate, 53% said they intended to vote Labour compared to 47% who saw Starmer talking about a different issue and 45% who saw no video at all. Those who saw Starmer talking on climate were more likely to think that Labour is the best party on the economy by an increase in five and twelve percentage points compared with the no-climate video and no video respectively.
According to a poll commissioned by the British Red Cross, four in five people (81%) don’t know where to get information on floods from, and one-in-seven people were aware of what actions to take in response to a flood. This is despite nearly 2 million people across the UK currently live in areas at significant risk of flooding – a number that could double by the 2050s.
Polling by Omnisis around the time of COP27 in Egypt found that 53% of people in the UK did not think the event would do anything to speed up international action on climate change. Only 29% felt that it would speed up action.
In the wake of uncertainty about whether new Prime Minister Rishi Sunak would attend in person, discussion in the Conservative leadership election of rowing back on net zero commitments, and perhaps reflecting the dominance of protest coverage at COP26 (which challenged the legitimacy of COP negotiations), cynicism about the value of UN conferences seems to have increased from the relatively optimistic perspectives captured during COP26 in Glasgow.
According to polling by Omnisis, less than a quarter of the UK public (24%) think Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is showing leadership on climate change, in the context of hesitation around attendance at COP27.
This stands in contrast with the desire held by most Britons for the UK to show climate leadership and be one of the most ambitious countries in the world on climate change.
The same survey found broad support for the government funding climate action in less wealthy nations overseas.
When asked “Does the UK have a responsibility to fund climate action in poorer nations now suffering from climate-related extreme weather disasters?”, 49% said yes, while 31% said no. 29% say they did not know.
This aligns with data from our Climate Barometer tracker, which shows high levels of support for wealthy nations providing compensation to poorer countries for damages caused by the climate crisis.
In a poll of 34 countries, Britons are the most supportive of government subsidies for renewables, with 65% in favour. However, higher taxes on gas and oil were nowhere near as popular, likely reflecting ongoing concerns about the cost of living, and an illustration of the nuanced views that the public holds on phasing out oil and gas.
Formed by a group including some prominent previous Extinction Rebellion activists/spokespeople, the Climate Majority project responds to longstanding calls from public engagement strategists for campaigners to do more to explicitly get beyond the ‘bubble’ of supporters.
Emphasising the ‘hidden majority’ across society who care about climate change – a perspective backed up by a range of research in the past five years including Britain Talks Climate – the Climate Majority project represents a pivot from the strategy of Extinction Rebellion which argued that a critical mass of 3.5% of the population was required to rise up and create systemic change.
According to research on the media coverage of European heatwaves in 2019, the images appearing in news media about heatwaves and extreme heat generally depict people having “fun in the sun”, across the UK, France, Germany, and the Netherlands. People were depicted having fun in or near water, and enjoying the weather. When images did show the dangers of heat extremes, people were generally absent.
The authors highlight this is a problematic way of showing heatwaves, because it removes the human element of extreme heat risk, and marginalises the experiences of those who are particularly vulnerable.
YouGov’s biannual tracker of support for various forms of energy generation shows that wind and solar have had the highest support since 2019, with nuclear overtaking solar in recent years. Coal and gas receive consistently low support over time.
Methodology Note: These percentages are lower than other surveys that measure support for different forms of energy generation individually. This survey requires that people choose one out of all options, rather than asking people outright whether they support any particular energy generation source.
In a study of over 12,000 people across 32 countries, feelings of climate anxiety was linked to:
Higher exposure to information about climate impacts, was related to greater climate anxiety, but experiencing climate impacts was not. The study found that previous experience of flooding didn’t have a strong relationship to climate anxiety. The researchers suggested that:
“(T)here are important nuances in how people interpret their extreme weather experiences including politically-motivated biased cognition, and the fact that climate change is only one of several interpretive lenses with which people can choose to make sense of their experiences”.
In a collaboration between Reset Narratives, On Road Media & Rubber Republic, a wide range of climate/cost of living messages were tested in a three-stage process involving more than 10,000 members of the UK public, gauging how compelling people found the different messages, and whether they shifted respondents’ perspectives and policy preferences.
The report contains three recommended stories for linking the climate and cost-of-living crises, rather than pitting them against each other:
The UK’s potential
Now is the time for our islands, with their huge potential for wind, wave and solar power, to show the world how to tackle the cost of living crisis and the climate crisis at the same time. Both of them have the same root cause: expensive oil and gas. And both have the same solution – affordable, clean energy that’s become more and more effective and popular over the last few years.
Our children’s future
We all want our children to be secure and comfortable this winter, and in the future. But reliance on oil and gas is driving up our bills, making it harder to provide for our children today, while worsening climate change and threatening their future. The only way to be free of unpredictable energy prices permanently is to move away from expensive gas and oil and towards cheaper and cleaner renewables.
Stability and freedom
We need to be set free from unstable energy prices for good by turning to affordable, clean power and the certainty it can give us. The only way to be free of unpredictable energy prices permanently is to move away from expensive gas and oil and towards cheaper and cleaner renewables.
A unique project working with football fans has found substantial reductions in meat consumption amongst the participants who took part.
The Manchester Is Green project, led by Hubbub, used a ‘gamifying’ approach to meat reduction with Man United and Man City fans. This encouraged participants to make ‘tactical substitutions’ in their diet, instead of meat, along with other measures.
Three months after the challenge, amongst the 72 participants:
The project suggests there is huge potential for people to shift their diet related behaviours within a short time frame, and shows how sport and identity may play an important role in this.
9 in 10 fans who took part felt that football clubs and players should be inspiring fans to take on more planet-friendly behaviours – linking with other research about the importance of climate leadership.
In a wide-ranging and in-depth analysis of how the UK public views low-carbon lifestyle changes, in the context of reaching net zero, the CAST centre (Climate Change & Social Transformations) reported on a set of ‘deliberative’ workshops (discussion groups) with members of the public.
The workshops covered four topics: ‘how we heat our homes’, ‘the food we eat’, ‘the products we buy’ and ‘how we travel’.
In contrast to the snap polling that is commissioned in the wake of policy announcements, this approach to understanding public opinion provides participants with the chance to discuss, reflect on and consider the nuances of behavioural changes in the context of net zero.
Summaries for each of the four topics above are presented in the report. In contrast to media commentary and political strategy positioning climate behaviours as part of the ‘culture wars’, one overall conclusion was that personal choices and freedoms are important, but people are willing to engage in low-carbon lifestyles in a way that is proportionate to their own circusmstances:
“Personal choice and freedoms are important aspects underpinning public preferences. In many cases people preferred options that made environmental choices easier rather than restricting choice. Strong negative reactions were only noticeable for strategies which were perceived to take away choice completely, such as meat-free diets, no access to individual car ownership, or living in smaller homes. While these more ‘radical’ strategies do not enjoy high public acceptance, people are willing to consider the principles that underpin them, especially if supported by other actors. For example, most participants were unwilling to consider becoming vegetarian or vegan, but were willing to consider how they could reduce their meat intake. Similarly, living car free was not considered acceptable or feasible by most participants, however they did want to reduce their dependence on cars generally and were open to other modes of transport.”
Through focus group research with Established Liberals (an audience segment who lean Conservative and care about environmental issues), More in Common explored how to engage these ‘green pragmatists’ on climate change:
When it comes to climate and the environment, Established Liberals aren’t the kind of people to attend Extinction Rebellion protests nor do they see net zero transition as an opportunity to upend or transform the economy. However, they do consistently rate the environment in their top three issues facing the country. Offering the best climate policies in the next election manifestos will be key to winning this group’s vote.
Grounded in an analysis of the online discourse around the sweltering summer of 2022 in the UK, ACT Climate Labs issued guidance for anticipating and responding to misinformation around extreme weather, as well as engaging the ‘Persuadable’ 60% of the population who are neither highly engaged nor antagonistic towards climate action.
Echoing earlier work by Climate Outreach around flood risks and communication, ACT Climate Labs recommend not focusing too much on climate during a heatwave (this can be off-putting or appear judgmental/spoiling people’s positive experiences of warmer weather) but using the period of increased climate salience that follows extreme weather to engage audiences then.
Understanding support for the frequent flyer levy
A generally popular policy proposal – which seems to have fairness hardwired into it – there is nonetheless confusion around who would be affected by a frequent flyer levy, pointing to a need for clearer communication.