Our thinking

Politics versus facts on Net Zero

2 May, 2025

We’ll take as fact that decisive action on climate is needed and assume that if you’re reading this, you probably agree. What is interesting – and increasing unhelpful – it how politicized it is becoming. Yes, getting to net zero will be expensive and difficult. But that doesn’t change the science.  

For the latest example of this, here in the UK we had unlikely climate anti-hero Tony Blair, enter the stage this week with a call for a switch up in climate policy, saying that any strategy that relies on phasing out fossil fuels in the short term or limiting consumption is “doomed to fail”. While the Tony Blair Institute issued a subsequent statement saying they “support the government’s 2050 net zero targets” (and we’d also stress that the report itself doesn’t say we should abandon net zero targets, rather that an urgent rethink of how we get there is needed), his statements inevitably got thrown into the political fury raging around net zero. Sceptics in the Reform and Conservative parties were quick to portray this as a fundamental challenge to the idea that we need to be cutting emissions, and fast.  

The political noise matters. To take one example, we also saw this week that the seemingly uncontroversial heat-pump is now deemed too contentious for the BBC to endorse, with the broadcaster telling Evan Davis to stop hosting his podcast “Happy Heat Pump”. Why? A spokesperson told the Daily Mail that “anyone working for the BBC who does an external public speaking or writing engagement should not compromise the impartiality or integrity of the BBC or its content, or suggest that any part of the BBC endorses a third-party organisation, product, service or campaign”. But as Davis observed, it’s hard to shake the impression that the BBC considers heat pumps too hot a subject for a presenter on its payroll to handle.  

As we’ve said before, the climate doesn’t care if net zero is expensive. It’s not checking government balance sheets, it’s responding to what we put into the atmosphere. And headline-grabbing statements that create a lot of heat, and not much light, obscure the hard truths that should be informing the debate. We need to cut carbon, fast, through reducing consumption and through investment in technology and innovation. The longer we wait, the harder it gets. When considering how to heat your home, maybe ask an expert, not a politician.

By Anna Heis