Offshore wind farms (OWF) are now in operation and increasingly under construction as scalable, sustainable energy sources. In fact OWFs are currently the cheapest form of new energy projects in Europe. The levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for OWF has fallen drastically due to decades of innovation facilitated by both taxpayer and private sector funding. This emerging industry is experiencing massive worldwide growth with the potential to accelerate the decarbonization of regional and the global economy as well as bring a reliable source of green hydrogen into commercial use, all with minimal disruption to ecosystems and impacts on biodiversity. This paper provides a historical perspective of wind energy harnessing and shows that wind turbines are the oldest, largest and one of the smartest machines. We also highlight the potential of offshore wind energy to provide new solutions to (a) meet clean energy demand for a growing world population, (b) improve energy security of nations through other downstream technologies such as production and storage of dispatchable fuel (such as green hydrogen battery storage) and (c) through supply complementarity improve resilience of nuclear power plants in high-seismic-activity areas. Offshore wind industry can also become a gold standard for future industries, and the paper provides insights into the new green economics and jobs and factories for the future. We show that environment-friendly regulation is driving innovations even further to enhance sustainability of OWF. Examples include material recycling, landfill ban on blade disposal and ecofriendly low-noise offshore construction to protect biodiversity.

Net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, the UK’s current target, requires bridging a dramatic energy transition and eliminating all other net sources of emissions while ensuring a just transition. Key components like renewable electricity generation and electric vehicles are well developed, but many issues remain. Public support for a green economy may wane if the economic costs are too high or seen as unfair. Therefore, although renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuels, it is essential to maintain employment, real per capita growth and reduced inequality. Decarbonizing the UK economy requires an integrated sequential approach and need not be delayed while dealing with the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, energy crisis and resulting inflation.

The policy area addressing the climate crisis in the UK, ‘Net Zero’, will affect many aspects of people’s everyday life. Given that policy builds from where we are now, which for some (post austerity, and mid cost of living crisis) means in financial crisis, there is work to be done in enabling a socially inclusive Net Zero. In this article, we modify the Bristol Social Exclusion Matrix’s four forms of participation for social inclusion, drawing on the existing literature on the social risks of environmental policy, to articulate the risks of social exclusion in transition to Net Zero. This enables us to develop a ‘person-centred’ approach to understanding the risks of Net Zero, articulating the risks of exclusion, and who is likely to be affected by them. We conclude by outlining a framework for an inclusive transition, and commenting on the policy and research implications of our thinking.

The scale and scope of the climate crisis and its drastically worsening impacts means that even as a ‘climate due diligence’ obligation is increasingly taking shape as a dimension of human rights due diligence, there is also growing evidence of the limitations of this emerging norm. This article provides four critiques of climate due diligence based on its insufficiency, its conceptual ambiguity, its operational limitations, and its structural limitations. It argues that these critiques could be addressed by regulatory reform that draw clear ‘red lines’ based on the need to prevent the development of any new fossil fuel and address the ‘corporate capture’ of regulatory institutions by the fossil fuel industry. Additionally, it calls for reparations to ensure effective access to a remedy for existing and potential future climate-related human rights impacts that business has caused or contributed to.

The negotiation of the free trade agreement (FTA) between Australia and the United Kingdom promised to integrate trade and climate policies. As a leader of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) conference in Glasgow, the UK seemed well-placed to exert pressure on Australia, a country that was yet to embrace a target of net zero emissions by 2050. This article asks whether the FTA achieves this aim. It explains the link between trade liberalisation and climate change, referring to the scale and composition of economic activity and drawing upon examples from energy, agriculture, building and transportation sectors, as well as strategic factors. It provides an original analytical framework to assess the FTA's contributions to climate change goals, pointing to: (1) provisions to strengthen climate commitments, including net zero targets; (2) provisions to facilitate trade and investment in climate-related areas; and (3) provisions relating to enforcement and cooperation. It compares selected initiatives of other FTAs, including the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), the European Union–Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), the UK–New Zealand FTA and the Singapore–Australia Green Economy Agreement. It reviews the FTA's negotiating process and its aftermath, including complaints about public participation. The article's conclusion that the FTA makes minimal contribution to climate change mitigation has implications for the broader quest for mutually supportive trade and climate policies, and, now that a net zero target has been legislated by the newly elected Australian Parliament, for the FTA's future implementation.

In recent years, the target of reaching “net zero” emissions by 2050 has come to the forefront of global climate politics. Net zero would see carbon emissions matched by carbon removals and should allow the planet to avoid dangerous climate change. But the recent prominence of this goal should not distract from the fact that there are many possible versions of net zero. Each of them will have different climate justice implications, and some of them could have very negative consequences for the world's poor. This article demonstrates the many ambiguities of net zero, and argues in favor of a net zero strategy in which those who can reasonably bear the burden adopt early and aggressive mitigation policies. We also argue for a net zero strategy in which countries place the lion's share of their faith in known emissions reduction approaches, rather than being heavily reliant on as-yet-unproven “negative emissions techniques.” Our overarching goal is to put net zero in its place, by providing a clear-sighted view of what net zero will achieve, and where the “net” in net zero needs to be tightened further if the world is to achieve climate justice.

Both the physical and transition-related impacts of climate change pose substantial macroeconomic risks. Yet, markets still lack credible estimates of how climate change will affect debt sustainability, sovereign creditworthiness and the public finances of major economies. We present a taxonomy for tracing the physical and transition impacts of climate change through to impacts on sovereign risk. We then apply the taxonomy to the UK’s potential transition to net zero. Meeting internationally agreed climate targets will require an unprecedented structural transformation of the global economy over the next two or three decades. The changing landscape of risks warrants new risk management and hedging strategies to contain climate risk and minimise the impact of asset stranding and asset devaluation. Yet, conditional on action being taken early, the opportunities from managing a net zero transition would substantially outweigh the costs.