Is Liverpool on track for net zero by 2030?

This week, Liam Robinson was in London. The leader of Liverpool City Council attended a “high level summit” at the Foreign Office about sustainability with city leaders from across the world. Speaking about the meeting on X, Robinson was keen to highlight Liverpool as the first Accelerator City, a status it was awarded in September last year under UN Climate Change’s Entertainment and Culture for Climate Action alliance.

Robinson signed his message with the hashtag #NetZero, a reference to the fact that, in the ongoing battle against climate change and environmental catastrophe, Liverpool has also committed to achieving net zero by 2030.

Or has it? If you visit the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority website, you’ll find that the city’s net zero target is in fact 2035 — but their action plan says 2040. The five-year plan, that builds upon that action plan, also says 2040, but is for the period of 2023-2028. Meanwhile, the government’s commitment is to net zero in 2050 – meaning that if the council hits their target, Liverpool will be twenty years ahead of the rest of the country.

The term “net zero” has become more contentious since the city first laid out its plans some years ago. What exactly does net zero mean? Carbon neutrality? Greenhouse emissions? Or something else?

And what’s Liverpool’s urgency? Can we achieve our goals? And how are we planning to do so?

This is a topic that inspires great passion, which is why we’ve chosen it as our latest edition of Answers in The Post. To sort through the authorities’ mixed messaging, we spoke with experts, local bodies dedicated to reducing the region’s carbon footprint, council representatives, and the mayor’s office. We spoke about what these targets actually are, whether they are realistic, or if they are even desirable.

But first, your regularly scheduled Post briefing.

Your Post briefing

A weakened Hillsborough law will “fall far short of what was promised” to families, a local politician has warned. Ian Byrne, Labour MP for West Derby has written to prime minister Sir Keir Starmer to say that dropping the requirement for public officials to tell the truth at major inquiries would be a "mistake" and to demand this “duty of candour” obligation is put back in. This follows fears the requirement was dropped from a draft version of the bill. Starmer had also pledged to introduce the law by April, the 36th anniversary of the 1989 disaster, but missed his own deadline. Byrne said a bill that does not oblige institutions to tell the truth "will not command the support of Hillsborough families, nor other victims of state cover-ups". Last week, deputy prime minister Angela Rayner told parliament that the government remained committed to the Hillsborough law and the "focus is on getting the legislation right".

Explosives at the home of a wartime collector have caused hundreds of St Helens homes to be evacuated. Following the death of John Nelson, 64, "explosive ordnance" was found in his house in Chadwick Street, part of a collection of wartime memorabilia that included devices and detonators. Merseyside Police evacuated more than 200 homes in the surrounding streets. Those affected were briefly allowed to collect medicines or changes of clothes, but were moved to alternative accommodation at Chain Lane Community Centre until the police’s bomb disposal unit could deal with the matter. The death of Mr Nelson, who police said lived alone as part of a “reclusive lifestyle", is not being treated as suspicious. Chief Inspector Chris Barnes said he understood the frustrations of those affected, but “public safety is our ultimate priority.”

And Hugo Boss has offered a compromise in its dispute with a local pet supplier website. The designer giant had previously threatened that Boss Pets, the online retail outlet set up by Bootle entrepreneur Ben McDonald, infringed upon its copyright. Now, the German company says Boss Pets must exclude any pet accessories overlapping with their own range of pet accessories. The fashion company also wants to limit Boss Pets’ branding. Francis McEntegart Mr McDonald’s solicitor, had previously accused Hugo Boss of bullying his client but has now said discussions "were moving in the right direction". A spokesperson for Hugo Boss said “as a matter of principle we always seek for a dialogue in favour of an amicable solution for both sides".

In today's Answers in The Post, Laurence digs into whether our net zero targets are realistic.

What is “net zero”?

Net zero means not adding to the overall amount of greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere. Greenhouse gases increase global temperatures by trapping additional energy in the atmosphere. They include methane, mostly produced through farming and landfill, and carbon dioxide (CO2), which is released when oil, gas and coal are burned in homes, factories and to power transport.

Under the Paris climate agreement, nearly 200 countries agreed to limit global temperature rises to 1.5C by 2100. But according to the UN, to help meet international climate targets, the world needs to cut CO2 emissions to net zero by 2050.

In 2019, under Theresa May’s Conservative government, the UK became the first major economy to pass a net zero emissions law. This actually obliges the UK to bring all greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050, not just CO2.

What about Liverpool?

Firstly, as ever, it’s important to differentiate between the specific Liverpool City Council (LCC) and the combined authority of the Liverpool City Region (LCRCA). The LCRCA covers not just the city, but the neighbouring councils of Halton, Knowsley, Sefton, St Helens, and the Wirral.

Although they are required to comply with the government’s grander 2050 goal, these authorities’ plans are specifically working towards net zero carbon, not greenhouse emissions more generally. This might explain why Liverpool’s dates seem more ambitious: it’s quicker and easier to deal with, say, CO2 than it is CO2 in addition to methane, nitrous oxide and other greenhouse gases.

But is the goal 2040, 2038, 2035 or the even more formidable 2030?

In line with the LCRCA’s original target, Halton, Knowsley and St Helens are aiming for net zero carbon in 2040. A spokesperson for LCRCA confirmed that “We’ve set a bold target to reach net zero by 2035—a full 15 years ahead of the national goal.” But councils in Liverpool, Sefton, and on the Wirral have targeted 2030.

Why the different dates?

Quite simply, this may reflect the disparate challenges across the city regions. But there are fears a lack of a coherent goal is indicative of there being no coordinated strategy.  

The Post spoke to Ed Gommon, director of Zero Carbon Liverpool, an organisation dedicated to reducing the city region’s carbon footprint.

“I would have expected the city region to have taken a lead, and then everyone else would have followed,” Gommon says. “[LCRCA] would be like, ‘okay, 2040’ – which was with the original target that they set years ago. And then all the councils would have aligned with that and coordinated plans. But that's not what happened. So if you look across the city region, all the different councils have different targets.

“It's all over the place,” says Gommon. “And there's no need for it to be that confusing. It should be very, very clear.”

We put the concern about lack of leadership to the metro mayor’s office. A spokesperson said, “The Liverpool City Region is one of the most ambitious and proactive areas in the UK when it comes to tackling the climate crisis,” and that their 2035 target is “not just a statement of intent; it’s backed by serious action and investment.”

We also asked Liverpool City Council about the disparities in target dates, but they did not respond to our request for comment in time.

Are these targets realistic?

LCRCA called its original 2040 goal “ambitious” and now says 2035 is “bold”; while LCC admits 2030 is “hugely challenging”. But are they achievable?

“They are 100% not realistic or achievable,” says Gommon. “I’m all for ambitious targets. But there’s ambitious, and then there’s no chance. There’s got to be an element of realism in there.”

There’s also the concern that targets may be so unrealistic that vested bodies don’t even try to meet them. “It gives fuel to climate deniers, because it just looks silly. To be fair, it's not just Liverpool: it's everywhere. It's a UK wide problem. It's a global problem. But Liverpool is probably the worst in terms of having set a very, very silly target.”