The recent visit by former President Donald Trump to Beijing, while primarily focused on trade and geopolitical tensions, inadvertently highlighted a stark reality: the limits of bilateral negotiations on the climate crisis. This, paradoxically, has reaffirmed the United Kingdom's position as a necessary transatlantic leader in the push for decarbonisation. As a climate correspondent, I must stress that the physics of our planet does not care for political posturing. It only responds to atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, which continue to rise.
During Trump’s meetings, climate change was largely sidelined, a predictable outcome given his history of climate scepticism. The joint statement from the talks made no mention of emissions targets or renewable energy commitments. This is a missed opportunity of catastrophic proportions. The United States and China combined emit roughly 40% of the world's carbon dioxide. Any serious effort to stabilise the climate must involve both nations. Yet, the current trajectory suggests that global emissions will not peak until at least 2030, locking in decades of further warming.
This vacuum of leadership is not going unnoticed. The United Kingdom, through its hosting of COP26 and its legally binding net-zero target for 2050, has stepped into the role of a mediating power. But this is not a role the UK can fill alone. The reality is that the biosphere is collapsing faster than predicted. The latest IPCC report, which I have analysed in detail, shows that we are on track for a 2.7°C warming by 2100. That is not a number to be filed away. It means the death of coral reefs, the drowning of coastal cities, and the displacement of hundreds of millions of people.
The UK's strategy thus far has been to lead by example, pushing for domestic emissions reductions while brokering international agreements. However, this approach relies heavily on technological solutions: carbon capture, green hydrogen, and advanced nuclear reactors. Yet, these technologies are not yet ready at scale. The energy transition is moving too slowly. We are still adding more fossil fuel capacity than renewable capacity each year. The financial flows are still skewed. For every dollar invested in renewable energy, three dollars are spent on fossil fuel subsidies. This is not a policy problem. It is a physics problem. The longer we delay, the more severe the climate fallout.
The Trump visit serves as a stark reminder that the US political system, even with a change in administration, remains a wildcard. The current president, Joe Biden, has set ambitious targets but faces a divided Congress. The Inflation Reduction Act is a historic piece of legislation for clean energy, but its implementation is sluggish. China, meanwhile, is building new coal plants at a rate that dwarfs the rest of the world combined. These are not ideological statements. These are observable facts.
So where does this leave the UK? It must continue to be the bridge. It must use its diplomatic leverage to push for stronger commitments from both Washington and Beijing. But it must also prepare for the worst. Adaptation spending is woefully underfunded. The Thames Barrier, for instance, will need upgrades sooner than planned. Our coastal communities are already seeing erosion. The science is clear: we have locked in some warming, and we must now deal with the consequences.
The phrase 'calm urgency' has been used to describe my reporting. I use it because it is the only sane response to the data. We cannot afford panic. Panic leads to bad decisions. But we cannot afford complacency either. The Trump China meeting is just another data point in a long line of diplomatic failures on climate. The UK's response must be to redouble efforts. Not with grand speeches, but with concrete policy. Carbon pricing must rise. Energy efficiency must be mandated. And the public must be told the truth: that our lifestyle must change, not just in small ways, but fundamentally.
In the coming months, I will be tracking the UK's progress on its emissions targets. The numbers are unforgiving. The clock is ticking. And the only thing that will matter in the end is the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.
