LONDON — Since Labour swept into office last year, Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has traveled the country enthusing over the government’s dream of a humming, futuristic net-zero economy. The good news, according to polling released Wednesday, is that his vision still has the backing of the public. The bad news is that support is slipping — and voters aren’t convinced Miliband is the guy to deliver it. For Miliband’s political opponents, this validates their wider attacks on him as an out-of-touch climate warrior, flogging a net-zero dream voters have rejected. At Reform’s party conference Friday, party chair David Bull referenced “mad Ed swivel-eyed Milliband.” Not to be outdone, the Conservatives have vowed to squeeze every molecule of oil and gas from beneath the North Sea, deadly heatwaves be damned. But it also shines a light on a confusing feature of British politics: a misalignment between the stories politicians want to tell about efforts to stop climate change, and stuff the public actually care about. At Reform’s party conference Friday, the party chair David Bull referenced “mad Ed swivel-eyed Milliband.” | Leon Neal/Getty Images The polling, conducted by progressive think tank More in Common and the Climate Outreach NGO, found the number of people who think reaching net-zero emissions will be good for the U.K. vastly outnumber those who think it will have a negative effect — 48 percent versus 16 percent. More people feel that the shift to clean energy has been fair than unfair. In Scotland, more are proud of the offshore wind industry (63 percent) than the oil and gas industry (54 percent). “Those who seek to divide communities with climate disinformation will not win because they do not represent the interests or values of the British people,” Miliband said in a statement shared with the media. Despite this, voters are hesitant about the personal impact of a country rushing to go green. Seventy-four percent of people think the U.K.’s commitment to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 will eventually cost them money personally. The gap between those who think it will be beneficial for the U.K. versus harmful has shrunk by 20 points in only a year. This is frequently interpreted as a sign that a personal desire to help fix the climate is butting up against the hard realities of net zero, which requires changes like fitting millions of heat pumps and EV chargers and overhauling the energy grid. Further polling released by The Times Tuesday backs up the sense voters are growing more divided on climate change. It shows support for net zero collapsing among Reform and Conservative voters, while overall the issue has slipped from voters’ list of top concerns. But analysts from Climate Outreach said part of the problem isn’t the message but the messengers. “Politicians are not well trusted to speak about climate,” the NGO said in an analysis shared with POLITICO. In fact, elected leaders were the least trusted carriers of the climate message — beneath also-lowly ranked protesters and energy company executives. TRUST ISSUES Voter wariness about pro-climate messages isn’t a feature of green politics in particular, said Emma James, a researcher at Climate Outreach, but a symptom of broader public cynicism about government. “They don’t trust that politicians are there for people like them. Some audience segments feel that the system is rigged against them,” she said. It’s not net zero the public aren’t buying, it’s the ability of this government — or any government — to deliver it. Voters believe the NHS remains broken. National projects like high-speed rail lines and nuclear power stations keep being delayed at higher and higher costs. This creates a problem for Miliband. At a time of deep voter skepticism, his Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) is pursuing precisely that kind of major national project — involving upfront costs, disruption and complex trade-offs, with the promise of huge savings to private and public purses down the line. It will, Miliband argues, generate new jobs. Under Rishi Sunak, the Conservatives went in search of their own set of climate salespeople. | Carl Court/Getty Images “We will win this fight by showing the visible benefits of the clean energy transition,” insisted one Labour official, granted anonymity to discuss the government’s internal deliberations. The story of failure, however, is pervasive and self-reinforcing, said Richard Johnson, a political scientist at Queen Mary University of London. “Policy delivery has to be tied in with a compelling political narrative and the political leadership that can tell that story and interpret what people are seeing in front of their eyes,” he said. “I wonder now if there is such a high level of cynicism … that even if you did tell a compelling narrative around policy delivery, that people would not believe it.” Johnson lays the blame with Miliband’s boss, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, “who has been in a way almost catastrophically unable to put together a compelling narrative for his government. Or, quite frankly, even his own leadership.” Downing Street says it is focused on driving economic growth across the country. This is not isolated to Labour. Under Rishi Sunak, the Conservatives went in search of their own set of climate salespeople — before deciding that there was more political capital in ditching pro-climate policies. Climate Outreach said Miliband could turn this problem into an “opportunity,” as long as he laid off the grand projet and focused on the visible, local benefits of climate policies. And there is some evidence that Labour gets it, seen in the government’s move to chip in for the energy bills of people living in sight of unpopular new electricity pylons. The more conservative or skeptical parts of the British electorate still had deep enthusiasm for messages about protecting the environment, the pollsters said. But most important, the NGO argued, was bringing other voices into the frame. While politicians are viewed very dimly indeed, experts and scientists are seen as credible messengers, the polling shows. So too are those seen to understand what life is like for normal British people. Farmers were among the messengers who cut through most with traditionalists and those described by the pollsters as “patriots.” Jeremy Clarkson, DESNZ needs you.

Vast amounts of valuable thermal energy are slipping through the fingers of Europe’s critical industries and institutions every day, as the heat escapes from their operations or remains untapped from natural ambient sources like nearby land, air or water. Today, some businesses and communities are harnessing this heat using innovative heat pump technologies to dramatically cut costs and CO2 emissions. As Europe races to revitalize key industries and accelerate growth, deploying heat pumps at scale is a key strategy for success. Consider this: in 2024 alone, Johnson Controls’ heat pumps cut energy costs for customers by 53 percent and emissions by 60 percent. > in 2024 alone, Johnson Controls’ heat pumps cut energy costs for customers by > 53 percent and emissions by 60 percent. Sound too good to be true? Let’s look at organizations realizing this powerful win-win every day. A hospital in Germany put a heat pump to work to tap heat energy 200 meters below the facility and realized a 30 percent cut in energy costs while producing enough heat to cover 80 percent of the hospital’s demand. The Aalborg hospital in Denmark is close to zeroing out carbon emissions, achieving an 80-90 percent cut while driving energy costs down by 80 percent. And in the UK, Hounslow Council transitioned from gas boilers to air source heat pumps, cutting its energy costs and CO2 emissions by 50 percent across more than 60 schools and public buildings. Natural and waste heat energy resources can be put to work for industry as well. Take, for example, a leading food company in Spain. Installing heat pumps at two of their manufacturing facilities enabled them to save €1.5 million per year and reduce CO2 emissions by nearly 2,000 tons, the equivalent annual emissions of around 400 homes. Nestle’s Biessenhofen plant in Germany also significantly cut energy costs for hot water production while lowering CO2 emissions by 10 percent.   The heat pumps powering these successes? Made by Johnson Controls here in Europe. So, the opportunity at hand is magnified as Europe can lead in cutting-edge energy technologies while putting the machines to work to boost core, centuries-old and critical legacy industries. To put the potential of industry heating needs and excess industrial heat in context, heat accounts for more than 60 percent of energy use in European industries, according to the European Heat Pump Association. Meanwhile, a leading European industrial company estimates that wasted heat in the European Union would just about meet the bloc’s entire energy demands for central heating and hot water. > To put the potential of industry heating needs and excess industrial heat in > context, heat accounts for more than 60 percent of energy use in European > industries, The fact is that untapped heat energy is everywhere. It’s critical that we put it to work now.  A catalyst for a competitive, energy-secure and sustainable Europe   Today EU companies pay 2-3 times more for their electricity than competitors in the United States and China — a disparity that puts a constraint on the competitiveness of European industries, according to analysis by the Draghi Report on the future of Europe’s competitiveness. The report calls for immediate action to lower energy costs and emissions as a combined competition and climate strategy.  With the visionary Clean Industrial Deal, European leaders are moving to do just that. Heat pumps can be front and center in this agenda. Heat pumps quickly bolster the bottom line: they are state-of-the-art, so they ensure the reliability and uptime of critical operations; and they are essential in driving every euro to growth and innovation instead of going out the door in excess energy bills. As leaders turn the Clean Industrial Deal into legislation this year, they can ensure essential industries and organizations prosper by including incentives for heat pumps, while also reforming electricity pricing so the full magnitude of savings can be realized. It is estimated that in Germany in 2024, for example, extraneous taxes on the electric bill represented 30 percent of cost — artificially increasing the cost of electricity and narrowing instead of increasing choices to meet critical energy needs with clean electricity.  Expansive troves of natural and wasted energy represent a huge opportunity for growth and competitiveness. Heat pump technologies are the enablers. They tap into this ‘free energy’ and transform it into the fuel that drives industrial processes, heats spaces, and delivers the higher temperature water and energy that’s essential for processing, pasteurizing, bulking and sterilizing. Natural and waste heat: a natural resource for companies   Seen at scale, our natural and escaping industrial heat are a new natural energy resource to be put to work, and a powerful economic catalyst to strengthen Europe’s competitiveness.   Visualization of the Hamburg Dradenau site where four 15-MW heat pumps will tap into treated wastewater to supply green heat to around 39,000 homes from 2026. Natural and waste energy is all around us. Recovering heat from a city’s wastewater treatment plant represents a powerful example. In Utrecht, the Netherlands, for example, a heat pump extracts residual heat from treated wastewater to provide heat to around 20,000 homes. And from 2026 in Hamburg, Germany, four large-scale heat pumps will extract heat from treated wastewater and feed it into the central district heating network, heating around 39,000 homes. Pharmaceutical companies, chemical facilities, and food and beverage enterprises are among the industries that can tap into energy they generate as a byproduct of the processes that produce the medicines and products we rely on every day.  In our modern data and information technology economy, data centers are among the biggest new sources of excess heat. The International Energy Agency notes that reused heat from data centers could meet around 300 TWh of heating demand by 2030, equivalent to 10 percent of European space heating needs. As artificial intelligence leads to increasingly more computing power in data centers, those numbers will grow significantly. The fact that up to half of the energy consumed by a data center is needed for cooling demonstrates how much heat is available. With heat pumps, we can capture that heat and put it to productive use. A trifecta for competitiveness, energy security and carbon neutrality Heat pump systems are key for Europe’s competitiveness, its energy security and tackling climate change. Tapping into the vast energy resources that are available everywhere and right now, heat pumps have the potential to become one of the continent’s next biggest industrial success stories. Let’s seize the moment for a future of economic strength and security, environmental health, and having pride in them being made right here. > Heat pump systems are key for Europe’s competitiveness, its energy security > and tackling climate change.

LONDON — The vast majority of new U.K. homes will have rooftop solar panels installed by default, the government has announced. The new policy will mean residents of new-build homes will save up to £530 per year compared to the energy price cap, the government estimates. The announcement comes in advance of the Future Homes Standard, to be published in autumn, which will set the regulations and guidelines for newly built homes. The government confirmed today that solar panels will be included in that plan, leading to installations across the vast majority of new homes. Requirements stop short of a mandate, with regulations instead amended to explicitly promote solar for the first time. Exceptions will include practical issues like the proximity of trees or overhead shade — but these are expected to be rare cases. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said: “Solar panels can save people hundreds of pounds off their energy bills, so it is just common sense for new homes to have them fitted as standard. So many people just don’t understand why this doesn’t already happen. With our plans, it will.” Miliband told the BBC this morning he expected the rollout to be “almost universal” and that the move was “just common sense.” The government is now working with the solar industry to establish technical details ahead of publication. The Future Homes Standard will also see homes built with low carbon heating such as heat pumps and heat networks. The government has already ditched requirements for heat pumps to be installed at least one meter away from a property boundary, and doubled the number of heat pumps permitted per detached house from one to two. Last year, the EU introduced a similar law mandating that all new buildings be solar-ready.

Europe is at a pivotal crossroads. Geopolitical instability and economic anxiety dominate the headlines and risk leading politicians into neglecting, or worse, actively dismantling, the continent’s climate leadership. This must not happen. Rather than turning their backs in a time of crisis, EU leaders should seek to accelerate climate action as a path to both security and prosperity.   In the face of rampant disinformation and constant undermining by vested interests in the fossil fuel industry, some now talk of diluting Europe’s climate goals to appease lobby groups and climate-skeptic politicians. This would be a big mistake. Climate ambition cannot be diminished or dismissed for short-term political goals or vested interests. It must be long-sighted, future-proofed and transformational. Europe must now, more than ever, double down and show that climate action delivers for people, particularly those who have lost faith that climate action can benefit their everyday lives.  A commitment to reducing net emissions by at least 90 percent by 2040, phasing out fossil fuels and a strong Clean Industrial Deal that puts cities at the center of its delivery is as important to the health and well-being of Europeans as a strong defense policy, trade relationships or social safety net. If done well, with workers and families’ needs at the center, it will be essential to building a resilient, competitive and secure Europe.   If Europe wants to win hearts, minds and markets, it must prove how the climate transition delivers not just long-term targets, but also tangible benefits — and this all begins in cities with good green jobs, security, healthier places to live, work and play and lower bills.  Europe cannot achieve industrial competitiveness without decarbonization, and it cannot meet its climate commitments without transforming industry. Cities are hubs of economic activity, innovation and workforce development that will determine whether Europe succeeds in achieving both goals.   City leaders understand how EU policies land on the ground. Empowered cities can turn high-level climate ambition into real economic transformation.  Today, Europe’s 18 C40 cities, representing approximately 48 million residents and contributing €3.51 trillion to the global economy, already support 2.3 million green jobs — 8 percent of their total employment — including over 1.3 million in sectors like clean energy, waste and transport. That number will only grow as key sectors decarbonize. With the right support, cities can accelerate the creation of good, green jobs and better access to them: jobs that are safe, secure and future-proof.   > Europe’s 18 C40 cities, representing approximately 48 million residents and > contributing €3.51 trillion to the global economy, already support 2.3 million > good, green jobs   The examples are everywhere: London’s Green Skills Academy is reskilling thousands for low-carbon careers. Rotterdam, where construction materials and buildings account for 25 percent of the city’s €1.3 billion annual spend, is using procurement to scale the circular economy, and through the Circular Materials Purchasing Strategy, strives for a 50 percent reduction in primary resource consumption by 2030. Considering that C40’s European cities have reduced per-capita emissions by 23 percent between 2015 and 2024, these are not just local initiatives — they are scalable models of the industrial transformation Europe needs.   Cities also control powerful economic levers. Strategic procurement can shape markets, drive clean-tech adoption and support local small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). For example, Oslo mandates zero-emission construction in public projects, and five years on, 77 percent of municipal building sites are emission-free, a great example of procurement driving industry-wide changes. With direct access to funding and streamlined EU instruments, cities can go further and faster, creating demand for clean innovation and building thriving local economies from the ground up.  Yet today, only 13 percent of the global workforce is ready for these future careers, and Europe faces urgent skills shortages in high-emitting sectors. Cities are ideally placed to bridge that gap. Madrid and London, for instance, are already training workers in retrofitting, heat pumps and renewables. Paris streamlines business registration to support start-ups, while Lisbon provides free ESG training to SMEs, ensuring they meet evolving climate standards. But this needs serious investment at the EU level and real collaboration. Without structured EU-city collaboration, industrial policies risk being disconnected from economic realities and workforce needs.  A just transition also means ensuring that new green jobs are high-quality, inclusive and secure. The green economy has the potential to create 30 percent more jobs compared with a business-as-usual approach, but only if inclusion and fairness are built in from the start so these jobs will go to those who need them the most. Cities, in partnership with unions, businesses and workers, can ensure that industrial shifts translate into widespread job opportunities, particularly for marginalized communities. Projects such as ‘Boss Ladies’ in Copenhagen are championing the inclusion of women in the building sector.   A Clean Industrial Deal that excludes cities will fall short. One that recognizes them as co-creators — alongside businesses, unions and communities — can build the industrial, climate and social transition Europe urgently needs in a time of crisis. Cities must be full partners, with direct access to the tools, funding and policy frameworks needed to drive this transition.   To translate ambition into action, the Clean Industrial Deal must include clear national frameworks for sustainable investment, early business engagement and market-shaping tools like grants, innovation hubs and procurement. With strong public-private partnerships and targeted investments in cities, we can create the conditions for green jobs, resilient industries and lower energy bills.  This unpredictable decade has presented a once-in-a-generation opportunity for Europe to create a future that works for everyone. Europe’s clean industrial strategy must prioritize city-led innovation, invest in workforce transformation and deliver for those who feel most left behind. That is how Europe can regain global leadership — not by pulling back, but by proving how climate action can be the surest path to economic resilience, energy independence and shared prosperity.  > This unpredictable decade has presented a once-in-a-generation opportunity for > Europe to create a future that works for everyone.  

LONDON — Labour came into office promising to bring down exorbitant energy bills.  Voters, anxious about the cost of living, expect the government to act on its pledge — but their bills are still rising. Inside Downing Street, that is starting to cause alarm.  “The prime minister has given all his ministers a very clear steer that bringing down bills is of critical importance,” Energy Minister Michael Shanks told the U.K. parliament last week. POLITICO spoke to 27 energy analysts, officials, pollsters, Labour politicians and their opponents, to work out the options open to ministers and the size of the political challenge if they fail. Many lamented a public debate marked by a lack of honesty on all sides. Labour insists that its drive to rid the power system almost completely of fossil fuels by 2030 will bring down bills. It may well, experts say — but that’s unlikely to be in time for the next general election in 2029, the only political timeline that matters for Prime Minister Keir Starmer. The Conservative opposition, meanwhile, along with rightwing upstarts Reform UK, blame Labour’s climate policies for high bills, ignoring the primary cause of spiraling prices: the cost of gas.  There are options for driving down bills. But, as the government is finding, each involves a fraught political trade-off.  ‘ONE OF THE BIGGEST CONCERNS’ Annual average household energy costs will jump another £111 on Tuesday, up to £1,849. That’s lower than at the peak of the energy crisis, but still 52 percent higher than at the end of 2021, before the war in Ukraine drove up prices. High prices are forcing businesses to the wall, too. Royal Stafford, a ceramics maker in Stoke-on-Trent, closed in February citing the cost of heating its kilns. It had been open for 180 years. “The ceramics industry is in our DNA,” local Labour MP David Williams said during an inquest in parliament in March. “If we fail to act now, we risk losing not only the unique skills that … have been honed in the Potteries for hundreds of years, but the communities formed around them.” Williams isn’t the only worried Labour backbencher. “This is one of the biggest concerns on the doorstep I hear in the constituency and around the country, especially in rural areas,” said Terry Jermy. Jermy won his countryside seat from former Conservative Prime Minister Liz Truss by just 630 votes in July. Starmer’s enemies sense weakness. It’s only a matter of time, said Richard Tice, a Reform MP, before the issue ignites his party’s political project.  “People feel more and more duped. And so, as time goes on, the penny will keep dropping — and we will just keep ramming home this message that you’ve been lied to, you’ve been misinformed, you’ve been misled,” he said.  THE TORY PIVOT Reform are not the only ones sharpening their attacks.  Last month, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch withdrew her party’s support for the U.K.’s goal of reaching net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. “Responsible leaders,” Badenoch said, “don’t indulge in fictions which are going to make families poorer.” Few energy experts agree net zero efforts are the main driver of high bills, though. “The most important factor” is the price of gas, said Guy Newey, the boss of Energy Systems Catapult.  Tory net-zero skepticism means “surrendering us to fossil-fuel markets controlled by petrostates and dictators,” Energy Secretary Ed Miliband shot back during a debate in the House of Commons. Energy department officials pointed POLITICO to the pipeline of renewable energy already approved or seeking planning permission, which they said could start to shift electricity bills before 2029. “Every wind turbine and solar panel we install will help cut our reliance on foreign dictators and bring down bills,” a department spokesperson said. “Over this parliament we will be working relentlessly to translate the much cheaper wholesale costs of clean power into lower bills for consumers.” But Miliband’s position is overly simplistic, said David Reiner, a professor of technology policy at Cambridge University. Last month, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch withdrew her party’s support for the U.K.’s goal of reaching net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. | Carl Court/Getty Images “The government has a number of conflicting claims, which I don’t think you can fully reconcile,” he said. “The idea that we can move relatively rapidly to reduce emissions, and at the same time we see that somehow reflected in lower bills, and also have some sense of energy security — it’s not clear that we can completely square that circle.” Labour is “not on track” to fulfil its election promise to cut annual bills by £300 by 2030, agreed Adam Berman, director of policy at trade group Energy UK. Climate policies “will lower energy bills,” he said, “but it will take time for that to materialize.” Privately, some Labour officials admit the same. “It’s too late in terms of [lower bills contributing to winning] a second parliament, because people want to see their energy bills come down now, not in 2030,” said a senior government official, granted anonymity to speak candidly about internal discussions. THE GAS CONUNDRUM Labour isn’t facing a full-blown public backlash yet. But one could be on its way, said Scarlett Maguire, a director at political consultancy J.L. Partners. “It’s basically there for the picking. … I would say Labour don’t have much time.” One official close to Miliband, who was not authorized to speak publicly, said the party knew it needed to win over the public on the long-term promise of clean energy bringing stable, cheaper bills.  “We feel we’re on the right track politically,” they said, “and we know how important it is and we know that we’ve made and will continue to make an argument to the country about getting off the up-and-down rollercoaster [of gas prices] and we need to get on and deliver.” The same official pointed towards work by pollsters More in Common, which showed almost five times more people believe clean energy would bring down the cost of living than raise it. Miliband likes to reference strong public support for net-zero policies, and derides his opponents as out of touch with both climate science and voters.  But close observers of the Conservatives say its leaders think support for climate efforts is soft.  Recent polling by Conservative peer Michael Ashcroft found six in 10 voters expect net zero to hurt them financially. Ongoing economic pain will drown out any goodwill Labour gets for a principled stance on climate change, argued Henry Hill, deputy editor of the ConservativeHome website. “The public can be all in favor of net zero — and then they can throw you out of office for higher energy bills,” he said. Starmer knows that his options are limited because, ultimately, dramatic rises and falls in British bills will be decided far from Britain. Getting more renewable energy online will start to eat into gas’ dominance and could begin to impact wholesale power prices within the next five years, several experts said. | Paul Ellis/AFP via Getty Images This is because of how the U.K. energy market works. Every half hour, national electricity prices are set based on the most expensive source of energy required to meet total demand for the next 30 minutes. Right now, almost all of the time, that means gas. Gas price is determined by regional and global market factors, something the government “can basically do nothing about at all,” said Newey from Energy Systems Catapult. Getting more renewable energy online will start to eat into gas’ dominance and could begin to impact wholesale power prices within the next five years, several experts said. But to break the grip of commodity prices? “We’re talking about at least a decade [or] longer,” said Reiner. “If I was the government, I would be hoping with all my heart that the gas price fell,” said Newey. OPTIONS, OPTIONS Hence Starmer’s demand that his ministers find other ways to ease the pain.  There are policy levers Labour can pull to try and bring down bills. But none are easy political choices.  One is to shift so-called green levies — the 11 percent of energy bills used to pay for climate policies and clean energy — elsewhere. This could immediately drop bills by hundreds of pounds each year. Advocates say ministers could raise the same money more fairly through general taxation.  But the government is not about to agree to the required income tax hike. “That’s unlikely to happen in the short term, given the fiscal situation that we face,” Miliband told MPs in January.  Those levies are heavily weighted onto electricity prices rather than gas, so shifting that balance could make clean tech like heat pumps cheaper to run. But that in turn would punish those with gas boilers who can’t afford to make the switch. Miliband’s team are also quizzing the industry about extending the length of contracts awarded to companies building green energy schemes like solar farms and wind turbines, guaranteeing returns well into the 2040s in exchange for lower prices.  A separate proposal would scrap Britain’s national wholesale price for electricity and replace it with a string of local prices — but that process, expected to conclude in the summer, is bogged down in a row between major energy companies over whether this will help or hinder energy prices and the green transition. Government officials warn that such a major overhaul won’t bring a quick fix on bills, although advocates of the change say it could help in less than four years.  Then there is the break-glass emergency option: the U.K. government taking on some, or all, of the green levies. In Australia, the Labor government is throwing $1.8 billion (£880 million) at pre-election bill relief, after failing to deliver on promises to cut prices. The incoming German coalition is discussing spending €50 billion (£42 billion) lowering energy costs. But copying that would mean the Treasury raising more debt, smashing through Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ ironclad fiscal rules. Even the Treasury’s resolve might weaken though if, as the 2029 election looms closer, Labour still hasn’t found a way to deliver for voters and for its own restive MPs. Additional reporting by Giovanna Coi.

BERLIN — Germany’s Greens believed they were only just getting started, but they may have already reached a dead end. After becoming a key part of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s coalition government with their best election result ever in 2021, the Greens believed they would cement their place as an established party with the bonafides to govern while making the fight against climate change mainstream. But now the party is set to return to its long-standing position in the opposition after a disappointing fourth-place finish in Germany’s national election, far behind Friedrich Merz’s victorious conservatives. That leaves the Greens — who emerged from environmental and peace protest movements of the 1970s and early 1980s — with nowhere to go but back to their activist roots. “We will make life difficult for the conservatives,” said Katharina Dröge, the co-leader of the Greens parliamentary group, after the vote. “If you really intend to dismantle climate protection in this country, there will be parliamentary resistance against it.” The problem for the Greens is they may have already done everything they can to influence the next government’s climate policies. Incoming Chancellor Merz needed the Greens to pass a historic package of constitutional reforms through parliament earlier this month that will unleash hundreds of billions of euros in new borrowing for defense and infrastructure — and the Greens used that unexpected leverage to great effect, pushing the conservative leader to commit €100 billion to fight climate change in order to reach a goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. But with Merz likely to close a deal with the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) to form the next coalition government in the coming weeks, that’s likely the last direct say Germany’s Greens, once the great hope of European environmentalists, will have in forming national policy for years. At the same time, there are many ways things can go wrong from the perspective of those who want to see the German government do more to fight climate change. “It’s good that there’s clarity on climate funding, but there’s no guarantee that the money will actually flow into meaningful climate protection measures,” said Vicki Duscha, a climate policy expert at the Fraunhofer Society, Europe’s largest applied research institution. The Greens are now being forced to confront their relative powerlessness while locked in an impassioned internal debate about which course to follow in their quest to win back power. SPLIT PERSONALITY The Greens have long been split between two factions: the realos, or realists, the more moderate and pragmatic wing of the party, and the fundis, the fundamentalists, who are less willing to compromise on their core beliefs. The divide in many ways remains intact as the Greens seek a new identity in opposition, with some in the party seeing a centrist approach as more likely to bring them back to power, and others arguing they need to double down on their core ideals. The problem for the Greens is they may have already done everything they can to influence the next government’s climate policies. | Maja Hitij/Getty Images Whichever way they go, they are bound to pay a price. While in power the Greens endured fierce attacks from right-wing politicians, who depicted them as willing to destroy Germany’s economy for their ideology. The Greens’ push to replace gas boilers with more environmentally friendly heat pumps came under particular attack. At the same time, climate activists sharply criticized the Greens for making compromises that party leaders viewed as a necessary response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine — and the energy crunch that followed. When Greens politicians advocated one compromise deal on coal in 2022, activists in movements like Fridays for Future, once seen as a natural ally of the Greens, became some of their loudest critics. “The climate crisis makes no compromises,” Linda Kastrup, a Fridays for Future activist, said at the time. But given their new place in the opposition, the only way to maneuever politically may be back to the left — to the fundi side of things. Sven-Christian Kindler, a former Greens lawmaker who did not run for reelection in the February vote, sees the Greens’ missteps as rooted in what he sees as the party’s shift to the center in recent years. When Greens politicians advocated one compromise deal on coal in 2022, activists in movements like Fridays for Future, once seen as a natural ally of the Greens, became some of their loudest critics. | Omer Messinger/Getty Images “Some of us assumed that by being pragmatic, we could fill the political void left by [former Chancellor] Angela Merkel,” Kindler told POLITICO. After Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, that shift to the center became more pronounced, many inside the party believe. Green Economy Minister Robert Habeck’s move to keep coal plants running longer than promised was one key shift. But the Greens also abandoned their pacifist roots, with Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock forcefully pushing for arms deliveries to Kyiv. “All that combined cost us votes — despite what we did right in government,” Kindler said. For many inside the party, the solution is clear. “My suggestion: Become greener again,” said Felix Banaszak, one of the Greens’ national leaders, in a recent interview. “This includes talking more about ecology again, i.e. climate, environmental and nature conservation, and justifying climate protection on its own merits — instead of just as a lever for economic growth,” he went on. “Now is the time to prevent ecological regression.”

John Kampfner is a British author, broadcaster and commentator. His latest book “In Search of Berlin” is published by Atlantic. He is a regular POLITICO columnist. This is a tale of two cities, two streets and an unlikely divergence that speaks volumes about the state of politics in Europe today. Parisian authorities are forging ahead with plans to make the city 100 percent navigable by bike. On the Rue de Rivoli, one can pedal serenely in the knowledge that one lane is solely for cyclists, the other reserved for buses. Meanwhile, in Berlin, the first major decision taken by the incoming senate was to reopen one of the most famous thoroughfares, which had been partially closed off to vehicles. On Friedrichstrasse, where one could previously drink a coffee on wide wooden benches in the middle of the road, the cars have returned. So, as Germany heads to the polls on Feb. 23, the country once seen as a climate trailblazer is now in danger of becoming a laggard. And the Christian Democrats (CDU) — the party almost certain to lead the next government — is on a mission to dilute environmental targets, with leader Friedrich Merz framing all things green through the now-familiar “woke” and “anti-growth” lens. It’s no coincidence that environmental policies were barely mentioned in the first televised election debate between the CDU leader and Chancellor Olaf Scholz. Instead, the questions ranged from migration — which dominated the discourse — to cost of living, kindergarten locations and an arcane battle over the use of gender in the German language. In a recent stump speech in Bochum, the industrial heartlands of the Ruhr, Merz had already stated that the economic policy of recent years had been geared “almost exclusively toward climate protection. I want to say it clearly as I mean it: We will and we must change that.” Along these lines, the chancellor-in-waiting has vowed to scrap subsidies for environmentally friendly heat pumps (which brought the Greens so much political trouble last year). He has also described wind turbines as “ugly,” and vowed to bring back nuclear energy. Of course, some of this is clearly performative — technologically speaking, a nuclear comeback won’t happen — but it is central to Merz’s strategy to give the CDU a more distinctive conservative direction after the centrist era of former Chancellor Angela Merkel. And just how far he goes in rolling back some of the progress will depend on the party’s eventual coalition partner. Friedrich Merz is framing all things green through the now-familiar “woke” and “anti-growth” lens. | Maja Hitij/Getty Images As it stands, an alliance with the Social Democratic Party (SDP) — without Scholz — seems the most likely outcome, not least because they’re less likely to stand in Merz’s way on the environmental front. Across the Western world, the green movement is on a downward slide. It isn’t just the case in Donald Trump’s America — U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has signaled a British version of “grow, baby, grow” by approving plans to expand three of London’s airports. And though the mayor of Paris is pushing hard to green the capital city, French President Emmanuel Macron is showing far less enthusiasm than before. When Scholz assembled his “traffic light” coalition in December 2021, the Greens were a pivotal player. Having secured a record share of the vote, the party was joining the government for the first time since 2005. And as Robert Habeck — the party’s current candidate for chancellor — took over the country’s Ministry for Economic Affairs with an expanded environmental brief, expectations were high. Then, two months later, came Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. Suddenly put on a war footing, Habeck’s task was to improvise a new energy policy and extricate Germany from Russia’s clutches. He was on the hunt for secure energy from anywhere, whatever the source, and that included going hat in hand to places like Qatar for supplies of LNG. The government’s record hasn’t exactly been disastrous, but it has, indeed, been patchy. It has secured some clear successes, particularly in renewable energy — wind and solar power provided 47 percent of Germany’s electricity in 2024, up from 31 percent in 2021. And emissions have steadily fallen, just not at the rate that was hoped for. As a result, Germany is expected to fail to meet its goal of cutting 65 percent of greenhouse gases by 2030, compared to 1990. According to a report by the country’s Council of Experts on Climate Change last week: “In light of the new geopolitical situation and the cyclical and structural weakness of the German economy, the conflicting objectives of climate protection policy with other policy areas are becoming increasingly apparent.” The language here is studiously diplomatic, but with the target of 1.5 degrees Celsius now a pipe dream, the commission also noted: “The comprehensive embedding of climate policy measures into an overall political strategy is now more important than ever.” The biggest problem here remains Germany’s car obsession. Too many combustion engine cars are being registered, while sales of electric vehicles fall — just like in other countries. Germany was asleep at the wheel in the first phase of electrification — one of its many failures in innovation. And as spending on infrastructure atrophied, the unreliability of the once-envied Deutsche Bahn has become embedded in the national psyche, leading more people to return to the roads. It would be unfair to suggest Merz is hostile to the green agenda, per se, but he’s using hostile rhetoric for a reason, trying to portray the cause as inimical to economic recovery. Truth is, he’ll only get so far. Many targets have already been embedded into the German economy and cannot be unpicked. Whether part of the next government or in opposition, the Greens aren’t going to just disappear — even as the Left party appears to have swallowed up a chunk of the Green vote in recent weeks. Indeed, the party has fallen from its high of 15 percent, but not by much. Acknowledging just how much the mood has turned, though, even the Greens themselves don’t mention climate protection that much on the campaign trail. They’d rather talk about housing and health care instead. Meanwhile, Habeck is caught in between, the whipping boy for both sides, denounced as metropolitan and “woke” by populists and as a sellout by the left. Much of the movement’s impetus has dissipated — for the moment at least.  

LONDON — Britain hopes to keep out of Donald Trump’s global trade war. But persuading the unpredictable United States president not to clobber British imports with his punitive tariff regime won’t be easy. As Trump threatens to slap tariffs on friendly countries like Canada and insists he’ll also hit the European Union, officials in London are mulling ways to avoid taking a hit of their own.  Trump insisted Sunday night that a deal to spare Britain “can be worked out.” So could buying more American gas do the job? It’s a plan — alongside a potential boost in British arms imports from the U.S. — now being talked up in Westminster as a way to curry favor with the commander-in-chief. “We are going to have to get gas from somewhere if we are producing less in the North Sea,” former Energy Secretary and U.K. Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng told POLITICO, referring to the fast-depleting reserves off the U.K. coast.  Until more nuclear power comes online, “the U.S. is the natural place to go,” Kwarteng argued. “The only other options are Qatar or Russia — and we’re not going to get it from there.” This sort of pivot could land well with Trump, who is already trying to order around the EU on fossil fuels. “The one thing they can do quickly is buy our oil and gas,” Trump said, when asked how the bloc could avoid threatened tariffs.  He has also moved to scrap a Joe Biden-era freeze on permits for new liquefied natural gas (LNG) drilling projects — a process by which gas is cooled into a liquid and shipped across the world before being converted back to gas. One former U.K. energy department figure — granted anonymity to speak freely — agreed a deal could be possible, pointing out the U.K. made similar arrangements following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. That resulted in U.S. LNG ramping-up to 26 percent of total U.K. energy imports. “Better to buy from the States than Qatar,” they said, echoing Kwarteng. “Something Trump wants is for the U.K. and European countries to increase their purchases of U.S. energy, which could be [used as] a bargaining chip,” agreed Maxime Darmet, a senior economist at Allianz Trade.   Matthew Oresman, partner at the international law firm Pillsbury, said: “That’s an area where there’s a U.K. need, and a U.S. desire and U.S. supply … which could be part of that bridge-building.” Donald Trump has also moved to scrap a Joe Biden-era freeze on permits for new liquefied natural gas (LNG) drilling projects. | Chris McGrath/Getty Images “I think there are going to be a number of bargains that the U.K. might need to put on the table,” Labour MP and Business and Trade Committee Chair Liam Byrne said.  Trump is a “very transaction-focused politician,” Byrne said, adding: “LNG purchases could be one thing the U.K. could offer to do.” GREEN GRUMBLES OVER GAS GUZZLING  More gas imports will surely prove controversial with the North Sea oil and gas sector, already frustrated by the government’s toughened tax regime and its moves to ban new fossil fuel licenses in British waters.  But dependence on U.S. LNG will only “increase as time goes on” as domestic output falls during the next decade, predicted Glen Bryn-Jacobsen from National Gas. LNG also pollutes more heavily than domestically-sourced gas — due to the regasification process and shipping — so stepping up imports could all create yet another Whitehall row between growth hawks and greenies. Ana Maria Jaller-Makarewicz, lead energy analyst, Europe, at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, argued the U.K. should be ramping up domestic clean energy as an alternative. “Instead of committing to more LNG imports, risking increasing potential emission impact, the U.K. should continue reducing gas demand by scaling up renewable energy and deploying heat pumps,” she said. “We should be doing everything we can to reduce our reliance on gas,” said Liam Hardy, head of research at the Green Alliance think tank. He added: “If we must import gas, doing this by pipeline from Norway leads to much lower emissions than shipping it from the United States.”  Those concerns are unlikely to get much of a hearing in the White House, though, where Trump has pledged to “drill, baby, drill.” He signed an executive order vowing to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Accord, a key agreement for pursuing global climate action, the evening of his inauguration.  Speaking of his dealings with the Trump administration during his first term, Kwarteng said: “They were very ideological. We were very keen to decarbonize at the time. The U.S. had no truck with that at all. Their priorities were divergent, even if we got on well with his personal interlocutors.” JET DIPLOMACY It’s not only energy imports where Whitehall’s attention is turning in the era of Trump’s trade war. The U.K. may also look to buy more U.S. defense exports to pacify Trump and avoid future tariffs. One defense industry figure, granted anonymity to speak freely, said further British orders of the American-made F-35 fighter jets could now be in play. U.S. LNG ramped-up to 26 percent of total U.K. energy imports. | Mario Tama/Getty Images The U.K. has to date ordered 48 of the fighter jets, after originally promising to buy 138 in 2015. But there has been doubt about reaching this figure due to Britain’s efforts to build new stealth jets with Italy and Japan as a part of the Global Combat Air Program (GCAP). Trump’s return to the White House may change the government’s thinking. A senior Whitehall figure said when it came to purchasing more American F-35s “everything was on the table” as a part of the U.K.’s ongoing defense review. The British government has been strategizing for months on how to convince the president not to slap tariffs on British goods. Sam Lowe, trade expert at Flint Global, said one of the most difficult scenarios for Starmer would be a demand from Trump to buy more U.S. food products — particularly beef or chicken. Lowe said this would “require regulatory change” and result in a “big fight with farmers.” This was a serious block to a trade deal in Trump’s first term as it would require the British government to accept U.S. food safety standards and legislate to allow practices like hormone-treated beef or chlorine-washed chicken on supermarket shelves. Starmer has already said this is a red line his government will not cross. But in a new world defined by Trumpian deal-making, the risk of tariffs may yet concentrate minds in Whitehall. This article has been updated. Graham Lanktree contributed to this report.

BERLIN — Friedrich Merz took another step toward becoming German chancellor on Monday — while launching some scathing attacks on the very people with whom he will likely have to govern. As the conservative leader lined up with most of Germany’s lawmakers in a vote of a no-confidence in the country’s beleaguered current chancellor, Olaf Scholz, Merz accused the heads of the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the Greens of having humiliated the country and caused its economic decline.  The heated and largely inward-looking parliamentary debate preceding the vote — the SPD and the Greens are in government now and could be future coalition partners for Merz as well — suggested the next coalition may be as incompatible and conflictual as the one that just fell. “You’re leaving the country with one of the biggest economic crises in its post-war history,” Merz told Scholz, accusing the SPD leader of “embarrassing Germany” in dealings with its European counterparts.  The vote against Scholz paves the way for an early election set for Feb. 23, an outcome that was virtually assured following the collapse of Germany’s fractious three-party coalition last month. Monday’s bitter debate suggests that what comes next may not be pretty either, at a time when Europe is dealing with multiple fragmented, weak governments. MERZ’S ONLY CHOICES Germany’s center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU), led by Merz, and its conservative sister party in Bavaria — the Christian Social Union (CSU) — are currently leading polls by a wide margin. But they remain far from an absolute majority, so will need to govern in coalition with at least one other party. But you wouldn’t have guessed it from the tenor of Monday’s debate. “We are replacing this standstill and the redistributive economic policies of the Social Democrats and Greens with an economic policy of motivation and competitiveness,” Merz said. He argued for cuts to social spending and more private investment in the economy, and  castigated Economy Minister Robert Habeck of the Greens as “the face of Germany’s economic crisis.” Merz’s natural coalition partner, the fiscally conservative Free Democratic Party (FDP) led by former Finance Minister Christian Lindner, is polling at just five percent, not nearly enough for an absolute majority and barely above the threshold needed to gain seats in parliament. That doesn’t leave Merz with many palatable choices for coalition allies.  Germany’s parliament is increasingly fractured due the rise of radical parties on both sides of the spectrum. Merz has said he refuses to govern with the radical-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), which is now polling in second place at 19 percent. Meanwhile, the newly formed populist-left Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW) is in fifth place with 7 percent. ‘PREOCCUPIED WITH OURSELVES’ Much of the political conversation so far has centered on Germany’s domestic issues, rather than on how the country will deal with the massive global challenges it now confronts, from Donald Trump’s return to the White House — and the possibility that he’ll stop U.S. military support for Ukraine — to the breakdown of the free trade that has long underpinned Germany’s export-oriented economic model. Scholz, for example, barely mentioned Ukraine in his comments during Monday’s parliamentary debate. When he did mention the war it was mainly to reinforce the message that he is the prudent choice to prevent an escalation in the fighting given his refusal to provide Ukraine with German-made Taurus cruise missiles. Friedrich Merz criticized Olaf Scholz for failing to keep his promise, following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, to fundamentally rebuild Germany’s depleted armed forces after decades of disarmament. | Hannibal Hanschke/EPA-EFE “We will not do anything that puts our own security at risk and that is why we are not supplying any cruise missiles, a far-reaching weapon that can have a deep impact on Russia,” Scholz said. “And we are certainly not sending any German soldiers to fight in this war, not with me as chancellor.” Merz, on the other hand, criticized Scholz for failing to keep his promise, following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, to fundamentally rebuild Germany’s depleted armed forces after decades of disarmament.  But he offered few details on how he would pay for such a military expansion, other than to say it would be a budgetary priority. Habeck was one of the few to warn that Germany’s pre-election debate has been too insular, noting “we are largely preoccupied with ourselves” while the world around us “is not in a good state of affairs.” He also warned the next government may not bring the unity and effectiveness many desire. “There are no guarantees that we will get back to a quick and smooth government after the new election,” he said. TRAVELING IN ANOTHER GALAXY Scholz began the debate by defending his record as chancellor and vowing to maintain social spending, securing pensions and jobs while pursuing a “politics of respect” for those with lower incomes. He blamed his political opponents for Germany’s stagnating economy. “We need more growth,” he said. “But then we must ask ourselves how much stronger our economy could have grown if our infrastructure were up to scratch, if we had the electricity grids, wind turbines and solar parks that we need for a clean, secure and affordable energy supply — electricity grids, wind turbines and solar parks that some of the parties represented here have been fighting against for years.” Merz seemed to save much of his vitriol for Robert Habeck, the chancellor candidate for the Greens and economy minister inside Scholz’s coalition, lambasting his focus on clean-energy initiatives. | Hannibal Hanschke/EPA-EFE Merz shot back, asking Scholz what he had been doing while in government as an SPD politician for 22 of the last 26 years. “Why didn’t you actually do all the things you mentioned here?” Merz asked. “Were you traveling in another galaxy? Have you traveled to another planet?” But Merz seemed to save much of his vitriol for Habeck, the chancellor candidate for the Greens and economy minister inside Scholz’s coalition, lambasting his focus on clean-energy initiatives. “Mr. Habeck, you are the federal minister of economics in the fourth-largest economy in the world,” Merz said. “People want to know more than how they can replace their refrigerators and how they can get a heat pump into their cellar.” Merz also criticized Green proposals to raise taxes on the wealthy. “I can only say to you, have a good journey with your proposals and then look for a coalition partner who will go along with them,” he said. “It’s not us, Mr. Habeck, to put it bluntly. No way will you be able to do this economic policy with us, to make it very clear right from the start.” Nette Nöstlinger contributed to this article from Brussels.