Is it time to reframe ‘net zero’?

A growing chorus of voices is questioning the UK’s commitment to reaching net-zero emissions by 2050.

Tony Blair recently opined in the foreword to a report by his eponymous institute that current net-zero policies—particularly reducing energy consumption and fossil fuel development—are doomed to fail. The Labour government was quick to reaffirm its commitment, but 25 years in politics is a long time. What one government promises, future Parliaments may undo. That’s democracy.

The challenge for net zero was brewing well before Donald Trump called for “drill baby drill” in Washington. Now, a global vibe shift in climate politics risks whittling away the UK’s net-zero ambitions, whether through policy neglect or outright rollback.

Opponents of climate policy will make three familiar arguments. But ultimately, they are wrong.

First, they’ll point out that the UK contributes less than one percent of total global greenhouse gas emissions—and those emissions have been declining for years. Achieving net zero here, they’ll argue, will make little difference in the grand scheme. It’s a simple line for voters to grasp, even those who believe climate change needs tackling: if it doesn’t matter much, why bother?

Second, global fossil fuel consumption continues to rise, with little sign of slowing. Renewable energy has grown rapidly—an extraordinary achievement—but it hasn’t bent the curve away from fossil fuels at the speed needed to meet the Paris targets. Renewables are largely chasing ever-growing demand, a trend now accelerated by the rise of energy-hungry AI systems. The opponents’ retort: if others aren’t making sacrifices, why should we?

Third, the rhetoric of ‘climate emergency’ risks becoming culturally divisive. Net zero is increasingly associated not with reasoned policy debate but with scaremongering activists, orange paint on cultural landmarks, and traffic protests. If it hasn’t already, it’s at risk of becoming another front in Britain’s fractious culture wars.

In that climate, political leaders could be tempted to roll back net-zero ambitions, citing the UK’s modest share of emissions, the relentless rise of fossil fuel use elsewhere, and public fatigue with rising costs of living—including high electricity and heating bills.

But this is not a foregone conclusion, and one, to be clear, I don’t agree with.

The atmosphere has no political boundaries. The UK’s pathway to net zero should be framed as an innovation programme first and foremost. With world-leading universities and global industries, the UK is well placed to develop the low and zero-carbon technologies, advanced energy systems, and materials efficiency solutions that will both cut emissions and drive economic growth at home. An ambitious programme of clean technology innovation should become a major UK export sector—even if, for political survival, it’s branded as a strategy for economic leadership and energy security rather than as ‘net zero.’

There are also compelling domestic reasons to press ahead, many of which require no reference to climate change at all. Cities are more liveable with cleaner air. Harnessing Scotland’s offshore wind enhances energy security. Retrofitting old buildings with double glazing preserves their charm while making homes warmer and more comfortable. Energy efficiency saves households money.

Climate denial isn’t the problem it once was. But the case for delay is gaining ground. The vibe shift is real, and it needs to be taken seriously. That doesn’t mean abandoning net zero—it means reframing it. Investment in renewables (and nuclear) is about national energy security. Electrifying urban transport is about clean air. Protecting habitats is about preserving nature we value. Climate tech innovation is about future-proofing our economy.

If net zero is to survive the coming political headwinds, it must be recast not as a sacrifice for the planet, but as a strategy for prosperity, security, and better lives at home and abroad. The question now is whether our leaders are brave enough to tell that story.

Professor Adam Dixon is the Adam Smith Chair at Adam Smith’s Panmure House, which is part of Edinburgh Business School. Adam is also the host of the New Enlightenment podcast, which brings on leading minds to discuss politics, economics, and philosophy. Recent episodes discussing climate change include:

• Disasters, Climate Change & Communication: Rethinking the Narrative
• Survival of the Greenest
• China May Have Already Won the Green Innovation Race