The study – commissioned by thinktank the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) – found for every £1 of value generated by the net zero economy, an additional £1.89 was created in the wider economy.
It report was published as the government increases efforts to meet a legally binding goal to cut greenhouse gas emissions to zero overall (that’s net zero) by 2050.
Some Conservative and Reform MPs have criticised net zero, electric cars and renewables, suggesting efforts to curb climate change are to blame for higher energy bills and the deindustrialisation of Britain.
But the report, with analysis from CBI Economics and the Data City, suggests the UK’s net zero economy is a significant driver of growth, innovation, and productivity.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:07
What’s inside Labour’s net zero plan?
Where is the growth happening?
Renewables, electric vehicles, low carbon heating, recycling and green finance are all part of the net zero sector.
Small and medium businesses with fewer than 250 employees are the main drivers of growth, and salaries are 15% higher than the UK average (£43,100, compared with £37,430).
Regions beyond London and the South East are where the net zero economy is growing significantly, the report found, boosting some of the country’s most deprived areas.
The West Midlands, Yorkshire and the Humber, and southwest England were the largest contributors, each more than 5% of the national total, while Scotland’s net zero economy has grown by 21.3% since 2022 – now worth £9.1bn.
Image: RWE’s Gwynt y Mor, off the coast of North Wales, is the world’s fifth largest offshore wind farm. Pic: Ben Birchall/PA
Tyne and Teesside was also highlighted as a hotspot thanks to a £1bn Nissan electric vehicle project, which includes a gigafactory for next-gen batteries. It is creating 6,200 jobs.
London and the South East are still leading the way, with £16.2bn and £13.1bn of green investment respectively.
Overall, the sector attracted £23bn of public, private and foreign direct investment – and each full-time job generated £105,000 in economic value, well above the UK average, the report found.
What are the Conservatives and Reform’s views on net zero?
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch has described herself as a “net zero sceptic” and her voting record shows she has largely opposed efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
She has also voted against banning fracking and called net zero targets “arbitrary”, saying they would “bankrupt” the UK.
The Conservatives’ manifesto from the 2024 election, when Rishi Sunak was leader, said the party was committed to a “pragmatic and proportionate” approach to net zero by 2050.
It said the party would invest £6bn in energy efficiency over three years to make one million homes warmer.
Reform has said it would impose taxes on the renewable energy sector and wants to scrap “net stupid zero” targets.
The party blames net zero policies for higher energy bills and deindustrialisation in the UK and believe green initiatives will make “zero difference to climate change”.
Deputy leader Richard Tice called renewable energy a “massive con” and promised Reform would recover subsidies paid to wind and solar companies.
‘You can’t have growth without green’
Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said the findings showed “net zero is essential to growth, a strong economy, and money in working people’s pockets”.
Making Britain “a clean energy superpower” will provide “energy security, good jobs, and investment in our communities”, he added.
Louise Hellem, chief economist at the CBI, said “there are huge emerging markets for green technologies that the UK must capitalise on”.
“It is clear, you can’t have growth without green,” she said.
The long-awaited Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, or CLARITY Act, is moving closer to law, with a Senate markup expected in January, says White House artificial intelligence and crypto czar David Sacks.
Sacks posted to X on Thursday that Senate Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott and Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman had confirmed that the bipartisan crypto bill will be shaped up by the Senate next month.
”We are closer than ever to passing the landmark crypto market structure legislation that President Trump has called for. We look forward to finishing the job in January!”
The CLARITY Act would define crypto securities and commodities and clarify the roles of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and other financial regulators.
Backers of the bill say it will reduce regulatory uncertainty for crypto firms by establishing clearer compliance pathways and encourage innovation while strengthening investor protections.
Movement of the CLARITY Act has been slower than expected, with Senator Cynthia Lummis having predicted in September that the CLARITY Act would get to President Donald Trump’s desk for his signature before the end of 2025.
The delays have largely been attributed to the record 43-day US government shutdown across October and November. However, US regulators met with executives from Coinbase, Ripple, Circle and others during that time to ensure the momentum of the bill didn’t stall.
Sacks’ post had confirmed earlier reports that the Senate markup would be pushed into the new year.
The House passed the CLARITY Act in July, and the Senate markup will debate and potentially amend the bill before it’s sent to the full chamber for a vote.
Scott will have to tackle passing the bill with a supermajority of votes to avoid it being forever stalled and essentially abandoned.
If the Senate passes it with amendments, the bill will return to the House for final approval before reaching Trump’s desk.
Representatives of the Bitcoin Policy Institute (BPI), a nonprofit Bitcoin advocacy organization, warned that US lawmakers have not included a de minimis tax exemption for Bitcoin transactions below a certain threshold.
“De Minimis tax legislation may be limited to only stablecoins, leaving everyday Bitcoin transactions without an exemption,” Conner Brown, BPI’s head of strategy, said on X, adding that the decision to exclude Bitcoin (BTC) is a “severe mistake.”
In July, Wyoming Senator Cynthia Lummis introduced a bill proposing a de minimis tax exemption for crypto transactions of $300 or less, with a $5,000 annual limit on tax-free transactions and sales.
The bill proposal also included tax exemptions for digital assets used for charitable donations and tax deferment for crypto earned through mining proof-of-work (PoW) protocols or staking to secure blockchain networks.
Allowing a tax exemption for small Bitcoin transactions would increase its use as a medium of exchange rather than just as a store of value asset, allowing a new financial system built on a Bitcoin standard, BTC advocates say.
The discussion around de minimis tax exemptions has also raised questions about whether such relief should apply to stablecoins, which are designed to maintain a stable value.
“Why would you even need a De Minimis tax exemption for stablecoins,” Marty Bent, founder of media company Truth for The Commoner (TFTC), wrote on X. “They don’t change in value. This is nonsensical.”
Cointelegraph reached out to BPI about the proposed legislation, but had not received a response at time of publication.
Bitcoin is gaining value, but it isn’t being used as peer-to-peer electronic cash
The Bitcoin white paper, authored by its pseudonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto in 2019, describes Bitcoin as a “peer-to-peer electronic cash system.”
However, relatively high transaction fees, average block times of about 10 minutes, and capital gains taxes on Bitcoin stifle BTC’s use as a payment method for goods and services.
The Bitcoin Lightning Network is a second-layer protocol designed for BTC payments, which works by locking a specific amount of BTC in a payment channel between two or more people.
Users connected through a payment channel can conduct multiple transactions offchain, with only the final net balance recorded on the Bitcoin ledger for settlement once the channel is closed.
This makes Bitcoin transactions faster and cheaper, as the users in the payment channel do not have to wait for new blocks to be mined or pay a network fee for each transaction between parties in the channel.
A US court is once again being asked to weigh in on maximal extractable value practices after a judge allowed new evidence to be added to a class-action lawsuit tied to a memecoin platform.
The judge granted a motion to amend and refile to include new evidence a class-action lawsuit against memecoin launch platform Pump.fun, the maximal extractable value (MEV) infrastructure company Jito Labs, the Solana Foundation, which is the nonprofit organization behind the Solana ecosystem, and others.
The motion said over 5,000 pieces of evidence in the form of internal chat logs were submitted by a “confidential informant” in September that were previously unavailable. The filing said:
“Plaintiffs assert that the logs contain contemporaneous discussions among Pump.fun, Solana Labs, Jito Labs, and others concerning the alleged scheme, and that they materially clarify the enterprise’s management, coordination, and communications.”
The first page of the motion to amend the case to include new evidence, which was granted. Source: Burwick Law
Maximal extractable value is a technique that involves reordering transactions within a block to maximize profit for MEV arbitrageurs and validators.
The plaintiffs allege that Pump.fun used MEV techniques to give insiders preferential access to new tokens at a low value, which were then pumped and dumped onto retail participants, who were used as exit liquidity by insiders.
Cointelegraph reached out to Burwick Law, the legal firm representing the plaintiffs, as well as Pump.fun, Jito Labs and the Solana Foundation, but did not receive any responses by the time of publication.
The allegations in the original lawsuit filing. Source: Burwick Law
The lawsuit could set a precedent for MEV cases in the United States, as the ethics of the practice continue to be debated within the crypto industry and legal bodies struggle to define proper regulations about the highly technical subject.
Anton and James Peraire-Bueno, the brothers accused of using a MEV trading bot to make millions of dollars in profit, went to trial in November in the US.
Prosecutors argued that the brothers tricked victims out of their funds, but defense attorneys said that they were executing a legitimate trading strategy and did not do anything illegal.
The jury struggled to reach a verdict in the case, and several jurors requested additional information to clarify the complexities surrounding the technical specifics of blockchain technology.
The case ended in a mistrial after the jury was deadlocked and failed to reach a verdict, highlighting the complexity of adjudicating legal disputes surrounding the application of nascent financial technology.