Connect with us

Published

on

The chancellor today skirted round contentious topics like onshore wind and home insulation in his budget, but did promise cash for nuclear power, carbon capture and energy bills.

The underlying commitment to net zero and clean energy were generally welcomed.

But campaigners have accused Jeremy Hunt of prioritising risky, “fanciful” technologies – such as machines that suck up carbon dioxide and bury it underground – over proven, but politically difficult, climate policies like boosting onshore renewables.

There is also widespread concern the budget does little to compete with the hundreds of billions unveiled by the US and EU to stimulate green growth investment, risking the UK falling behind in the “green industrial revolution”.

Nuclear reaction

A key announcement was that nuclear is to be classed as “environmentally sustainable”, subject to consultation, in a bid to pull in investment in the same way enjoyed by renewable energy.

Nuclear is costly and lengthy to build but provides reliable power without the pollution.

More on Budget

Government climate advisers say some nuclear power is vital to the UK’s clean energy future.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

£20bn allocated to Carbon Capture Storage

But the chancellor was criticised for rehashing old pledges.

He gleefully announced Great British Nuclear, an agency designed to revive the nuclear industry – but this has been promised before.

“The chancellor’s words on nuclear give a positive message, but it’s more like a ‘greatest hits’ compilation from the past, rather than anything new,” said Professor Adrian Bull, BNFL chair in Nuclear Energy and Society at the Dalton Nuclear Institute at Manchester University.

The government also announced a competition for mini reactors known as “small modular reactors (SMRs)”, which are not yet widely available.

If this young technology is “demonstrated to be viable” the government will “co-fund this exciting new technology”, the chancellor said.

This too resembles a previous announcement. In 2015 then-chancellor George Osborne launched a competition to identify the best design and get one built in the 2020s – a target yet to be hit.

Chris Stark, chief executive of the government’s climate advisors the Climate Change Committee (CCC), said nuclear seems to “have been announced and re-announced so many times”.

“SMRs [sic] would be useful if they are delivered as quickly as promised. Whether they will be though…” he wrote on Twitter.

Carbon capture, utilisation and storage

Another leap of faith, on top of the push for SMRs, is the push on carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS).

It is an expensive technology, still in its infancy.

But the UK cannot afford to bypass CCUS, climate advisers said last week, because it is not cutting emissions enough.

Today the government pledged £20bn towards the technology in order to “increase resilience to future energy price shocks” – suggesting it would primarily be used to allow the UK to burn more gas, rather than to capture emissions from factories, for example.

Dr Steve Smith from Oxford University’s Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment said the funding was “good news” but needs extra policy decisions from government to become viable.

Some campaigners warn the UK is using it as an excuse not to cut emissions.

“Locking in reliance on gas power will increase our vulnerability to future energy price shocks, while adding in the additional costs, risks and uncertainty of trying to capture emissions from gas power plants,” said Alethea Warrington, senior campaigner at climate charity Possible.

“Including carbon capture will add even more costs, while being unproven to actually work and putting our climate, as well as our finances, at risk.”

Meanwhile Greenpeace called the £20bn over 20 years “frankly pathetic compared to the green growth investments being made in the US, EU and China”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Tom Heap investigates hydrogen’s role in the future of heating UK homes.

Capital expensing – and can the UK rival the US and EU’s mega green growth packages?

Sam Hall, director of the Conservative Environment Network, said today’s measures do bring the country closer to net zero.

He welcomed the announcement of full capital expensing for the next three years, saying it would help attract more investment in renewables and the supply chain. This should please the offshore wind sector.

“But with the USA and EU offering enormous green subsidies, the UK needs to up its game” to remain an attractive place to invest in wind and solar, as well as the next generation of clean industries like sustainable aviation fuel and green hydrogen, added Mr Hall.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Experts are warning of the risk to rivers following the driest February for 30 years.

But the government will be talking more about net zero before the end of the month – the deadline by which it has to respond to a legal ruling on its net zero strategy.

The courts found the government’s net zero strategy was unlawful because it failed to outline how climate policies would meet legally binding carbon budgets – forcing ministers to rework their plans.

‘Zero mention of renewables’

Many were disappointed that the chancellor steered clear of lifting a de facto ban on onshore wind.

Antony Froggatt, of thinktank Chatham House’s Environment and Society Programme, said: “In the UK Budget there is zero mention of renewables and only £105m set aside for community supported energy efficiency compared to £235m funding for potholes.”

Onshore wind is politically contentious, with recent governments changing their minds on it.

Meanwhile, the EU and US are “rolling up their sleeves and supporting the domestic production of electric vehicles, solar panels and wind turbines, that will bring jobs now and make a difference in the 2020s”, said Mr Froggatt.

He warned the chancellor to “be careful the UK isn’t left at the starting line of this new and more competitive low carbon race.”

Friends of the Earth criticised the “glaring gap” in the budget on onshore wind and home insulation.

Energy bill help a ‘sticking plaster’ compared with home insulation

Good news amid the cost of living crisis came in the form of a decision to extend the energy price guarantee, which caps average household bills at £2,500, for a further three months to June.

It had been due to rise to £3,000 in April and the cost of scrapping the planned 20% increase will amount to around £3bn.

However, the chancellor stopped short of new commitments on home insulation, which advocates say would bring down household bills permanently.

In his autumn statement Hunt did pledge £6.6bn during this parliament for energy efficiency, and a further £6bn from 2025. But energy groups say £6bn a year is needed to upgrade leaky homes and promote heat pumps.

Insulation rates were over 90% higher in the 2000 and 2010s to 2013, at which point the Cameron administration “cut the green crap”, according to thinktank ECIU.

Jo-Jo Hubbard, CEO of network optimisation specialist Electron, called the energy bill support a “sticking plaster” that is “about to wash off.”

Upgrade the grid!

Instead the government should upgrade Britain’s outdated electricity network, added Ms Hubbard, one of many in the industry warning of the problems it is creating.

At the moment consumers are paying for wind to be switched off when the grid can’t handle the capacity. New power capacity is also waiting to be connected, said Ms Hubbard.

Have your say on the budget with Sky News
Image:
Have your say on the budget with Sky News

Watch the Daily Climate Show at 3.30pm Monday to Friday, and The Climate Show with Tom Heap on Saturday and Sunday at 3.30pm and 7.30pm.

All on Sky News, on the Sky News website and app, on YouTube and Twitter.

The show investigates how global warming is changing our landscape and highlights solutions to the crisis.

Continue Reading

Business

Trump trade war escalation sparks global market sell-off

Published

on

By

Trump trade war escalation sparks global market sell-off

Donald Trump’s trade war escalation has sparked a global sell-off, with US stock markets seeing the biggest declines in a hit to values estimated above $2trn.

Tech and retail shares were among those worst hit when Wall Street opened for business, following on from a flight from risk across both Asia and Europe earlier in the day.

Analysis by the investment platform AJ Bell put the value of the peak losses among major indices at $2.2trn (£1.7trn).

The tech-focused Nasdaq Composite was down 5.8%, the S&P 500 by 4.3% and the Dow Jones Industrial Average by just under 4% at the height of the declines. It left all three on course for their worst one-day losses since at least September 2022 though the sell-off later eased back slightly.

Trump latest: UK considers tariff retaliation

Analysts said the focus in the US was largely on the impact that the expanded tariff regime will have on the domestic economy but also effects on global sales given widespread anger abroad among the more than 180 nations and territories hit by reciprocal tariffs on Mr Trump‘s self-styled “liberation day”.

They are set to take effect next week, with tariffs on all car, steel and aluminium imports already in effect.

Price rises are a certainty in the world’s largest economy as the president’s additional tariffs kick in, with those charges expected to be passed on down supply chains to the end user.

The White House believes its tariffs regime will force employers to build factories and hire workers in the US to escape the charges.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

The latest numbers on tariffs

Economists warn the additional costs will add upward pressure to US inflation and potentially choke demand and hiring, ricking a slide towards recession.

Apple was among the biggest losers in cash terms in Thursday’s trading as its shares fell by almost 9%, leaving it on track for its worst daily performance since the start of the COVID pandemic.

Concerns among shareholders were said to include the prospects for US price hikes when its products are shipped to the US from Asia.

Other losers included Tesla, down by almost 6% and Nvidia down by more than 6%.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

PM: It’s ‘a new era’ for trade and economy

Many retail stocks including those for Target and Footlocker lost more than 10% of their respective market values.

The European Union is expected to retaliate in a bid to put pressure on the US to back down.

The prospect of a tit-for-tat trade war saw the CAC 40 in France and German DAX fall by more than 3.4% and 3% respectively.

The FTSE 100, which is internationally focused, was 1.6% lower by the close – a three-month low.

Financial stocks were worst hit with Asia-focused Standard Chartered bank enduring the worst fall in percentage terms of 13%, followed closely by its larger rival HSBC.

Among the stocks seeing big declines were those for big energy as oil Brent crude costs fell back by 6% to $70 due to expectations a trade war will hurt demand.

The more domestically relevant FTSE 250 was 2.2% lower.

A weakening dollar saw the pound briefly hit a six-month high against the US currency at $1.32.

There was a rush for safe haven gold earlier in the day as a new record high was struck though it was later trading down.

Sean Sun, portfolio manager at Thornburg Investment Management, said of the state of play: “Markets may actually be underreacting, especially if these rates turn out to be final, given the potential knock-on effects to global consumption and trade.”

He warned there was a big risk of escalation ahead through countermeasures against the US.

Read more:
Trump tariff saga far from over
‘Liberation Day’ explained
What Sky correspondents make of Trump’s tariffs

Sandra Ebner, senior economist at Union Investment, said: “We assume that the tariffs will not remain in place in the
announced range, but will instead be a starting point for further negotiations.

“Trump has set a maximum demand from which the level of tariffs should decrease”.

She added: “Since the measures would not affect all regions and sectors equally, there will be winners and losers as in 2018 – although the losers are more likely to be in the EU than in North America.

“To protect companies in Europe from the effects of tariffs, the EU should not respond with high counter-tariffs. In any case, their impact in the US is not likely to be significant. It would be more efficient to provide targeted support to EU companies in the form of investment and stimulus.”

Continue Reading

Business

British businesses issue warning over ‘deeply troubling’ Trump tariffs

Published

on

By

British businesses issue warning over 'deeply troubling' Trump tariffs

British companies and business groups have expressed alarm over President Donald Trump’s 10% tariff on UK goods entering the US – but cautioned against retaliatory measures.

It comes as Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds launched a consultation with firms on taxes the UK could implement in response to the new levies.

Money blog: Pension top-up deadline days away

A 400-page list of 8,000 US goods that could be targeted by UK tariffs has been published, including items like whiskey and jeans.

On so-called “Liberation Day”, Mr Trump announced UK goods entering the US will be subject to a 10% tax while cars will be slapped with a 25% levy.

The government’s handling of tariff negotiations with the US to date has been praised by representative and industry bodies as being “cool” and “calm” – and they urged ministers to continue that approach by not retaliating.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

The latest numbers on tariffs

Business lobby group the CBI (Confederation of British Industry) said: “Retaliation will only add to supply chain disruption, slow down investment, and stoke volatility in prices”.

Industry body the British Retail Consortium (BRC) also cautioned: “Retaliatory tariffs should only be a last resort”.

‘Deeply troubling’

While a major category of exports, in the form of services – like finance and information technology (IT) – has been exempted from the tariffs, the impact on UK business is expected to be significant.

Mr Trump’s announcement was described as “deeply troubling for businesses” by the CBI’s chief executive Rain Newton-Smith.

Read more:
US tariffs spark global market sell-off

Do Trump’s numbers add up?
Island home only to penguins hit by tariffs

The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) also said the tariffs were “a major blow” to small and medium companies (SMEs), as 59% of small UK exporters sell to the US. It called for emergency government aid to help those affected.

“Tariffs will cause untold damage to small businesses trying to trade their way into profit while the domestic economy remains flat,” the FSB’s policy chair Tina McKenzie said. “The fallout will stifle growth” and “hurt opportunities”, she added.

Companies will need to adapt and overcome, the British Export Association said, but added: “Unfortunately adaptation will come at a cost that not all businesses will be able to bear.”

Watch dealer and component seller Darren Townend told Sky News the 10% hit would be “painful” as “people will buy less”.

“I am a fan of Trump, but this is nuts,” he said. “I expect some bad months ahead.”

Industry body Make UK said the 25% tariffs on cars, steel and aluminium would in particular be devastating for UK manufacturing.

Cars hard hit

Carmakers are among the biggest losers from the world trade order reshuffle.

Auto industry body the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) said the taxes were “deeply disappointing and potentially damaging measure”.

“These tariff costs cannot be absorbed by manufacturers”, SMMT chief executive Mike Hawes said. “UK producers may have to review output in the face of constrained demand”.

The new taxes on cars took effect on Thursday morning, while the measures impacting car parts are due to come in on 3 May.

Continue Reading

Business

Trump trade war: The blunt calculation that should have spared UK from reciprocal tariffs

Published

on

By

Trump trade war: The blunt calculation that should have spared UK from reciprocal tariffs

Economists immediately started scratching their heads when Donald Trump raised his tariffs placard in the Rose Garden on Wednesday. 

On that list he detailed the rate the US believes it is being charged by each country, along with its response: A reciprocal tariff at half that rate.

So, take China for example. Donald Trump said his team had run the numbers and the world’s second-largest economy was implementing an effective tariff of 67% on US imports. The US is responding with 34%.

Trump latest: UK considers tariff retaliation

How did he come up with that 67%? This is where things get a bit murky. The US claims it studied its trading relationship with individual countries, examining non-tariff barriers as well as tariff barriers. That includes, for example, regulations that make it difficult for US exporters.

However, the actual methodology appears to be far cruder. Instead of responding to individual countries’ trade barriers, Trump is attacking those enjoying large trade surpluses with the US.

A formula released by the US trade representative laid this bare. It took the US’s trade deficit in goods with each country and divided that by imports from that country. That figure was then divided by two.

More on Donald Trump

So, in the case of China, which has a trade surplus of $295bn on total US exports of $438bn, that gives a ratio of 68%. The US divided that by two, giving a reciprocal tariff of 34%.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

PM will ‘fight’ for deal with US

This is a blunt measure which targets big importers to the US, irrespective of the trade barriers they have erected. This is all part of Donald Trump’s efforts to shrink the country’s deficit – although it’s US consumers who will end up paying the price.

But what about the small number of countries where the US has a trade surplus? Shouldn’t they actually be benefiting from all of this?

Read more:
Trump tariff saga far from over
‘Liberation Day’ explained
What Sky correspondents make of Trump’s tariffs

That includes the UK, with whom the US has a surplus (by its own calculations) of $12bn. By its own reciprocal tariff formula, the UK should be benefitting from a “negative tariff” of 9%.

Instead, it has been hit by a 10% baseline tariff. Number 10 may be breathing a sigh of relief – the US could, after all, have gone after us for our 20% VAT rate on imports, which it takes issue with – but, by Trump’s own measure, we haven’t got off as lightly as we should have.

Continue Reading

Trending