West Suffolk Council's net zero pledge pushed back by nine years
A council said it had been forced to push its "ambitious" net zero target back by nine years, after conceding a "more realistic plan" was needed.West Suffolk Council had hoped to be completely net zero by 2030, having declared a climate emergency in September 2019.The authority said it had made "significant progress" in reducing its carbon emissions while helping homeowners, businesses and the wider community do the same.However, it said due to "elements out of our control" a "more deliverable timeline" had to be established, with a revised target of 2039 being set.
'Being honest is key'
Gerald Kelly, independent cabinet member for governance, regulatory and environment, said net zero by 2030 was "an ambitious aim"."Pushing ourselves to hit that target has put us in the strong position we are in today, but due to elements out of our control, we now need a more realistic plan," he said."And being honest about that fact is a key part of maintaining trust in this agenda."Since declaring a climate emergency, the authority said it had prevented at least 7,000 tonnes of carbon consumed by third parties such as homes, businesses and community groups from entering the atmosphere every year.Through various schemes, it said it had also helped those struggling with the cost of living to manage energy costs.The council's own carbon consumption currently stands at just below 5,000 tonnes each year - 13% lower in absolute terms than in 2019, it said.It also wants to remove a further 1,000 tonnes before 2029 and plant 5,000 trees.
Last year, a review of the council's progress towards net zero identified areas for improvement.The council's Environment and Sustainability Reference Group recommended actions including phasing out gas use in authority buildings and exploring opportunities to set more stringent building standards.Work to remove gas will soon get under way, after the council was awarded £4.1m from the government to decarbonise its Bury St Edmunds and Haverhill leisure centres.
'Momentum and optimism'
Despite the funding, the authority said new national demands meant its target had become harder to achieve.It cited government-led initiatives such as Simpler Recycling, which will aim to streamline waste collections across England by making councils separate food waste and dry recycling from general waste by 2026.However, the council said this would increase the demand for new waste collection vehicles, which in turn would boost emissions. Despite this, Kelly assured residents net zero would one day become a reality in the west of the county. "The new trajectory includes decarbonising the leisure centres in Bury St Edmunds and Haverhill, installing solar canopies at the Mildenhall Hub car park, to name a few projects," he said."The revised target allows us to keep the momentum and optimism for tackling climate change going and continue to make significant progress."
Follow Suffolk news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
25 minutes ago
- Sky News
UK will be forced by NATO to increase defence spending to 3.5% to keep US on side, Sky News understands
The UK will be forced to agree this month to increase defence spending to 3.5% of national income within a decade as part of a NATO push to rearm and keep the US on side, Sky News understands. The certainty of a major policy shift means there is bemusement in the Ministry of Defence (MoD) about why Sir Keir Starmer 's government has tied itself in knots over whether to describe an earlier plan to hit 3% of GDP by the 2030s as an ambition or a commitment, when it is about to change. The problem is seen as political, with the prime minister needing to balance warfare against welfare - more money for bombs and bullets or for winter fuel payments and childcare. Sir Keir is due to hold a discussion to decide on the defence spending target as early as today, it is understood. As well as a rise in pure defence spending to 3.5% by 2035, he will also likely be forced to commit a further 1.5% of GDP to defence-related areas such as spy agencies and infrastructure. Militaries need roads, railway networks, and airports to deploy at speed. This would bolster total broader defence spending to 5% - a target Mark Rutte, the head of NATO, wants all allies to sign up to at a major summit in the Netherlands later this month. It is being referred to as the "Hague investment plan". Asked what would happen at the summit, a defence source said: "3.5% without a doubt." Yet the prime minister reiterated the 3% ambition when he published a major defence review on Monday that placed "NATO first" at the heart of UK defence policy. 1:46 The defence source said: "How can you have a defence review that says NATO first" and then be among the last of the alliance's 32 member states - along with countries like Spain - to back this new goal? Unlike Madrid, London presents itself as the leading European nation in the alliance. A British commander is always the deputy supreme allied commander in Europe - the second most senior operational military officer - under an American commander, while the UK's nuclear weapons are committed to defending the whole of NATO. Even Germany, which has a track record of weak defence spending despite boasting the largest economy, has recently signalled it plans to move investment towards the 5% level, while Canada, also previously feeble, is making similar noises. 2:37 The source signalled it was inconceivable the UK would not follow suit and said officials across Whitehall understand the spending target will rise to 3.5%. The source said it would be met by 2035, so three years later than the timeline Mr Rutte has proposed. Defence spending is currently at 2.3%. A second defence source said the UK has to commit to this spending target, "or else we can no longer call ourselves a leader within NATO". 3:12 Sky News's political editor Beth Rigby challenged the prime minister on the discrepancy between his spending ambitions and those of his allies at a press conference on Monday. Sir Keir seemed to hint change might be coming. "Of course, there are discussions about what the contribution should be going into the NATO conference in two or three weeks' time," he said. "But that conference is much more about what sort of NATO will be capable of being as effective in the future as it's been in the last 80 years. It is a vital conversation that we do need to have, and we are right at the heart of that." New Sky News podcast launches on 10 June - The Wargame simulates an attack by Russia to test UK defences Mr Rutte, a former Dutch prime minister, said last week he assumes alliance members will agree to a broad defence spending target of 5% of gross domestic product during the summit in The Hague on 24 and 25 June. NATO can only act if all member states agree. "Let's say that this 5%, but I will not say what is the individual breakup, but it will be considerably north of 3% when it comes to the hard spend [on defence], and it will be also a target on defence-related spending," the secretary general said. The call for more funding comes at a time when allies are warning of growing threats from Russia, Iran, and North Korea as well as challenges posed by China. But it also comes as European member states need to make NATO membership seem like a good deal for Donald Trump. The leaders of all allies will meet in The Hague for the two-day summit. The US president has repeatedly criticised other member states for failing to meet a current target of spending 2% of national income on defence and has warned the United States would not come to the aid of any nation that is falling short. Since returning to the White House, he has called for European countries to allocate 5% of their GDP to defence. This is more than the 3.4% of GDP currently spent by the US. Mr Rutte is being credited with squaring away a new deal with Mr Trump in a meeting that would see allies increase their defence spending in line with the US president's wishes.
BBC News
30 minutes ago
- BBC News
'A clear idea' - what is Man Utd's transfer strategy
It's been a busy few days at Manchester agreeing to sign Matheus Cunha, speaking with Brentford's Bryan Mbeumo, finding out Bruno Fernandes won't be joining Saudi Arabian side Al Hilal and that Jadon Sancho will return from Chelsea, along with a £5m payment, it has been a whirlwind return from their troubled post-season tour of where are they now and what is their transfer strategy moving forward? What is Man Utd's transfer strategy? Fernandes took a bit of time mulling over the Al Hilal offer after United head coach Ruben Amorim said in Hong Kong on Friday he thought his captain would stay at the 30-year-old wanted to talk it through with his family as, after all, the sums being offered were truly staggering and could not just be dismissed out of this point last week, many at United thought Fernandes would go. Now we know he won' amid his assertions about Fernandes, Amorim said something else that nailing him down on individuals and specifics would be impossible, I asked Amorim if he knew what he wanted his squad to look like when pre-season training began at the start of July."Yes," he said. "I have a clear idea what we want."As you know, we are bit limited and can't do it all in one summer. But there is a clear picture for what we want."The initial approach - and as a guide it still holds - was to go for younger, hungry players, who can is the basis on which 20-year-old Denmark international Patrick Dorgu arrived in a £25m deal from Serie A outfit Lecce in February to address the problematic left wing-back berth. It was the same with 18-year-old Arsenal central defender Ayden players made promising contributions, albeit in a struggling some issues are so urgently in need of addressing, no time for development is what Amorim wanted, as an absolute priority, was to reinforce his attack. Time and again towards the end of the Premier League season, the United boss had lamented his side's ability to make the most of the chances they were creating. Between them, Wolves' Cunha and Mbeumo scored 35 league goals last season. The campaign before, it was 21. They are proven in England in a way Rasmus Hojlund and Joshua Zirkzee were not before moving to United for a combined fee of almost £110m in the summers of 2023 and 2024 signings alone is a bit early to confirm a significant shift away from buying in from overseas – and the arrival of Mason Mount from Chelsea in 2023 is proof United had not completely ignored the domestic market it does take out some of the risk when you buy players who know the challenges that lie ahead."I think they are players who can come in and hit the ground running," former United skipper Gary Neville told Sky Sports."United has become a very difficult place for new signings to operate in the last 10 years. Cunha and Mbeumo have got Premier League experience and lots of games under their belt."When I watch Manchester United's wide players, they have to be able to get from box to box quickly, and they have to be able to travel with the ball and without the ball. Mbeumo and Cunha can do that, they both run forward with real intent and purpose."The players who are going to leave are more jinkers and play in smaller spaces."The great unknown is whether Amorim would play Cunha and Mbeumo - if he signs and, as yet, United have not made contact with Brentford - behind a number nine in the two '10' slots, or if one of them will operate as a main striker, or they will swap. Who could leave and what are the challenges ahead? Amorim was adamant in Hong Kong that United could work around Fernandes staying at Old Trafford from a financial point of the situation is not no European football of any sort next season, finances will be tight. Amorim has already said he can operate with a smaller squad given there are fewer matches, so sales are speaking, there are three Amorim just does not want – so the likes of Sancho, Antony, Marcus Rashford and Alejandro who have struggled and it would make sense to sell – Hojlund and Zirkzee fit into this group, as does the bulk are players who have something to offer and United would be open to keeping but would let go if the right bid came the major issue around all of this is how long would it take to do a deal and how much would it cost?Take Sancho for has been established Chelsea would have signed him on reduced terms, which he was not prepared to a Premier League club that has just qualified for the Champions League are baulking at Sancho's wages, it is fair to assume most other clubs will reach the same conclusion. If Sancho refuses to drop his demands and Amorim wants him out, United will have to negotiate some kind of puts them back in the uncomfortable position of paying a player to play for a rival. It is the kind of situation minority owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe finds so irritating and wants to when you take a realistic approach to Sancho, Antony and Rashford in particular, it is hard to see how that situation is avoided. The same could also be said of many United players who remained at the club last matches may have finished but for United technical director Jason Wilcox and chief negotiator Matt Hargreaves, the hard work is just beginning. It is how well they do, getting players in and out, that will determine how much progress Amorim can be expected to make.
The Sun
30 minutes ago
- The Sun
Amazon warns illegal streamers of hidden danger on ‘dodgy' Fire Sticks used to watch Premier League games on the cheap
AMAZON has warned Fire Stick users of the hidden dangers when using dodgy apps to illegally stream Premier League games and more on the cheap. A new report has pointed the finger at tech giants like Amazon for being "both friend and foe" in solving rampant piracy that's costing TV firms billions. 2 2 More than 50 per cent of Brits watching illegal streams on a physical device were found to be doing so via an Amazon product, according to research by Enders Analysis. Big broadcasters like Sky say Amazon isn't doing enough to address the issue. Nick Herm, Sky Group's chief operating officer said the report "highlights the significant scale and impact of piracy, particularly on premium live sport". "It's a serious issue for anyone who invests in creating and delivering world-class content," he explained to the BBC. "We'd like to see faster, more joined-up action from major tech platforms and government to address the problem and help protect the UK creative industries." Amazon told The Sun it has made changes to its Fire TV devices to make it more difficult to stream pirated content. And it has on-device warnings to alert customers of the risks associated with sideloaded apps which are downloaded from outside the approved Amazon Appstore. Those risks are largely concerned with fraud. There have been numerous cases of people looking to illegal streaming as a way to slash their TV bills, only to be left severely out of pocket. One victim recently revealed to The Sun how thousands was accessed from his bank account after signing up to one. Major Illegal Streaming Network Shut Down Across Europe Fortunately, his bank flagged it as fraud and stopped the payment, but not everyone has been so lucky. 'Pirated content violates our policies regarding intellectual property rights, and compromises the security and privacy of our customers," a spokesperson said. "We work with industry partners and relevant authorities to combat piracy and protect customers from the risks associated with pirated content. "Our Appstore prohibits apps that infringe upon the rights of third parties and we warn customers of the risks associated with installing or using apps from unknown sources.' Elsewhere in the report, Facebook -owner Meta was accused of being a source of adverts for illegal streaming devices. People streaming content illegally are at risk of fraud and other dangers when using dodgy TV devices. But that's not the only possible consequence. They can slow down your broadband connection and affect other gadgets around your home too. "Illegal streaming isn't just unsafe, it's actively harmful," said Liz Bales, CEO of the British Association for Screen Entertainment (BASE), and The Industry Trust for IP. "Devices used for piracy are often infected with hidden malware, leading to crashing apps, severely disrupted performance, and compromised home networks. "This puts personal data and entire households at risk." Image credit: Getty
