Jingyi Li
jingyi-climate.bsky.social
Jingyi Li
@jingyi-climate.bsky.social
Researcher at Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research (Manchester). Dedicated to equitable energy transition. Currently interested in Geothermal.
Most of the remaining 1.5 °C carbon budget for even a 50-50 chance has already been used. Yet the final wording still relies on phrases like “notes with concern” and “acknowledging” instead of firm requirements that match what the science is telling us.
November 21, 2025 at 12:38 PM
Equity is named as “central” (I.5), yet the Global Mutirão still treats it in soft language. The implementation accelerator remains "cooperative, facilitative and voluntary" (III.41) that actually closes the gap between those most responsible for emissions and those facing the worst impacts.
November 21, 2025 at 12:38 PM
Global Mutirão repackages a fragile model of voluntary action. The vagueness, which was the political compromise in 2015 is largely preserved and there is still no clear plan for using the Paris framework, domestic law and finance to ratchet contributions fast enough. No accountability.
November 21, 2025 at 12:38 PM
Some serious reflections: 10 years after PA we are still relying on deliberately vague voluntary pledges in Global Mutirão; equity is named but not enforced; there is no clear fossil fuel phase out plan even though most of the 1.5 °C carbon budget (50% chance) has already been used up.
November 21, 2025 at 12:38 PM
10 years on from the Paris Agreement (PA) the text keeps “recognising efforts”, which often feels like a polite way of saying - we tried and failed to deliver what was needed, but we will still congratulate ourselves for trying.
November 21, 2025 at 12:38 PM
For more of our insights, please see the piece on The Conversation theconversation.com/how-mine-wat...
How mine water could warm up the UK’s forgotten coal towns
Funding gaps, regulatory red tape and a shortage of skilled workers are stalling the UK’s mine-water heating projects.
theconversation.com
April 15, 2025 at 2:23 PM
For policy blog with Policy@Manchester, please read here: blog.policy.manchester.ac.uk/posts/2025/0...
A load of hot water: overcoming the barriers to decarbonising the heating sector
blog.policy.manchester.ac.uk
April 15, 2025 at 2:23 PM
There is no reason and no excuse for leaving coal mining towns behind, again, as the unavoidable impacts of climate change unfold. These deliberately forgotten places must be actively included in the just transition if we claim to build an energy-secure, prosperous, and low-carbon future for all.
April 15, 2025 at 2:23 PM
3. Reassess the ‘business-as-usual’ economic structure—where short-term profits are prioritised over long-term equity, entrenching inequalities that were never natural to begin with.
April 15, 2025 at 2:23 PM
But they don’t need to be labelled ‘levelling-up’ areas, if effective measures are taken:
1. Implement tiered and sufficient funding support.
2. Enable an effective transition away from fossil fuel subsidies by recognising and leveraging overlapping competencies with the geothermal sector (cont'd).
April 15, 2025 at 2:23 PM
Or are we going to perpetuate such communities' position as 'vulnerable groups' in every crisis, while 'acting' as a 'saviour' again and again?
April 15, 2025 at 2:23 PM
Structural barriers, ranging from 1) undefined ownership, 2) existing but ineffective funding support, 3) prolonged regulatory processes, and 4) a short-term, profit-driven mindset, continue to sideline this geothermal resource, which holds real potential to level up underserved communities.
April 15, 2025 at 2:23 PM
This work is a reflection based on the standpoint that "the challenge to tackle climate change lies not in the technology, but in the implementation.”
April 15, 2025 at 2:23 PM
Thank you Alice!
April 15, 2025 at 1:26 PM
The fundamental question remains: why are we pursuing a transition model that preserves energy poverty? Where are the policies that prioritise alleviating today's energy hardship, not just hypothetical future savings that merely return us to 2019 cost levels?
March 5, 2025 at 5:21 PM
The CB7 fails to adequately address energy/technology diversification. It focuses on scaling already-visible solutions, rather than exploring alternatives that might better serve diverse household needs and income levels.
March 5, 2025 at 5:21 PM
Citizens panels were convened to discuss EV expectations, but a lack of enquiries related to other low-carbon travelling expectations, such as public transport, is not emphasised but treated only as an alternative.
March 5, 2025 at 5:21 PM
CB7 also exhibits clear survivor bias in technology selection. After dropping hydrogen for building heating, heat pumps became the default solution. Similarly, EVs are positioned as the primary transport decarbonisation method.
March 5, 2025 at 5:21 PM
Whilst CB7 celebrates future theoretical savings, millions struggle today with energy costs. Current policy funding (£2.1bn/yr) covers just 56% of the required £4.8bn/yr needed to address fuel poverty.
March 5, 2025 at 5:21 PM
The fuel poverty reality is stark: 3.12 million households (12.7%) remain fuel poor in 2025. The fuel poverty gap - the shortfall in energy affordability - has increased 66% since 2020 to £417 annually per household.
March 5, 2025 at 5:21 PM