LONDON — Britain must “back the Americans in this vital fight against Iran!” said Reform UK Leader Nigel Farage the day the war began. Less than two weeks on and he’s changed his tune. We “don’t have a Navy” and “cannot get involved directly in another foreign war,” Farage told a press conference on Tuesday. What’s changed? An energy shock. When the conflict had just started, and before it — predictably — sent oil and gas prices soaring and became a cost-of-living issue, he was all for it. But as soon as it threatened to hit British voters in their pockets, and proved deeply unpopular in polls of normal Brits, he went all wobbly. Some of Farage’s political opponents are determined not to let the populist leader distance himself from his original enthusiasm. “Trying to pull the wool over our eyes,” said Green Party Leader Zack Polanski on Tuesday, responding to an X post in which Farage’s Treasury spokesperson, Robert Jenrick, said the “war needs to come to an end as soon as possible, because it is making Britain poorer.” Having initially backed the conflict, Reform, said Polanski, is now “the party of foreign wars and higher bills.” Liberal Democrat Leader Ed Davey has taken a similar tack, telling the BBC on Monday that voters worried about the war’s effect on the cost of living should remember that Farage’s Reform, like the Conservative’s Kemi Badenoch, “cheered on Donald Trump.” Farage insisted Tuesday there’s no inconsistency, and that his original position had merely been that Prime Minister Keir Starmer should have allowed U.S. forces to launch attacks on Iran from U.K. bases from the outset of the conflict, not necessarily that the U.K. should join attacks on Iran. But the shift in tone reveals something fundamental about British politics in 2026: The cost of living is everything. A war that threatens to send it even higher always had the potential to prove unpopular. “The public are deeply uneasy about what they think could be unnecessary and costly involvement in foreign wars, [and have] significant hesitations about too close an alignment with President Trump,” said pollster Scarlett Maguire, director of Merlin Strategy. Ed Miliband posted a video seeking to “reassure” voters that the “cost of living crisis remains our number one priority — because its yours.” | Sean Gallup/Getty Images “The cost of living crisis in this country only exacerbates this, with voters already feeling that the government are not doing enough to bring down energy prices and inflation,” she added. On Tuesday, Farage and Jenrick attempted to flip the narrative by blaming “a ruinous climate agenda” for high energy costs in the U.K. The two unveiled a pledge not to increase taxes on gasoline, a promise they would pay for by scrapping green spending on heat pumps and carbon capture technology. And the Reform UK leader downplayed the impact of the war on oil and gas prices. “If the Straits of Hormuz are cleared — I accept that’s an ‘if’ — oil will be back into the low 80s [dollars per barrel],” predicted Farage at the event at service station Derbyshire. But he was challenged by a local news reporter, who noted that a third of people in the local area use heating oil to warm their homes — and are already seeing prices rise. The Labour government has, so far, been cautious not to attack Reform or the Conservatives too fiercely for their initial stance on the war, wary of driving a further wedge between Downing Street and the White House. But they are seeking to portray themselves as the grown-ups in the room, laser-focused on the cost of living. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband posted an uncharacteristically sober video message to social media on Tuesday, seeking to “reassure” voters that the “cost of living crisis remains our number one priority — because its yours.” Despite its own missteps over the Iran war, that’s a message Starmer’s government will be desperate to land, as the conflict’s shockwaves continue to hit Britain’s shores. Noah Keate contributed to this report.

LONDON — U.K. Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper will announce a critical minerals deal with Kazakhstan on Thursday as the West scrambles to diversify its supply chains away from China. Britain’s top diplomat will host foreign ministers from the five Central Asian countries — Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan — at Lancaster House in London. Cooper will unveil the critical minerals deal with Kazakh Foreign Minister Yermek Kosherbayev, alongside pacts with the other countries covering carbon capture and higher education. “Central Asia is an important region with huge potential to boost economic growth,” Cooper told POLITICO in a statement. “These agreements deliver for British businesses, strengthen economic security and are a clear demonstration of U.K. support for the independence of the Central Asian states.” The new plan of action will diversify U.K. supply chains by supporting British investment in critical minerals in Kazakhstan. The MoU was signed by Kazakhstan’s Deputy Minister for Industry Olzhas Saparbekov and Trade Minister Chris Bryant. “Global demand for critical raw materials is rising rapidly, driven by clean energy technologies, advanced manufacturing and defence industries,” Kosherbayev wrote in a recent op-ed. Kazakhstan, he noted, produces 22 of the 36 minerals identified in the U.K.’s Critical Minerals Strategy last November, including uranium, titanium, silicon and rhenium. Kazakhstan is a global critical minerals powerhouse, supplying over 40 percent of the world’s uranium and leading in titanium production. It is a top‑ten copper and zinc exporter. Early this month, U.K. Foreign Minister Seema Malhotra was in Washington for a key meeting of 50 nations to diversify critical mineral supply chains away from China. The U.K. set out a Critical Minerals Strategy last November to ensure that by 2035 no more than 60 percent of Britain’s supply of any one critical mineral comes from a single country. In further efforts to support the economic security and independence of the Central Asia republics, Cooper will also announce a new agreement on U.K. education cooperation with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, alongside a second campus for Coventry University in Almaty, Kazakhstan, and a new AI Center at the university’s campus in Astana. She will also unveil a deal for British start-up Valor Carbon and the Government of Kyrgyzstan to develop carbon capture projects and a £100 million deal to plant 25,000 hectares of forest.

Europe’s chemical industry has reached a breaking point. The warning lights are no longer blinking — they are blazing. Unless Europe changes course immediately, we risk watching an entire industrial backbone, with the countless jobs it supports, slowly hollow out before our eyes. Consider the energy situation: this year European gas prices have stood at 2.9 times higher than in the United States. What began as a temporary shock is now a structural disadvantage. High energy costs are becoming Europe’s new normal, with no sign of relief. This is not sustainable for an energy-intensive sector that competes globally every day. Without effective infrastructure and targeted energy-cost relief — including direct support, tax credits and compensation for indirect costs from the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) — we are effectively asking European companies and their workers to compete with their hands tied behind their backs. > Unless Europe changes course immediately, we risk watching an entire > industrial backbone, with the countless jobs it supports, slowly hollow out > before our eyes. The impact is already visible. This year, EU27 chemical production fell by a further 2.5 percent, and the sector is now operating 9.5 percent below pre-crisis capacity. These are not just numbers, they are factories scaling down, investments postponed and skilled workers leaving sites. This is what industrial decline looks like in real time. We are losing track of the number of closures and job losses across Europe, and this is accelerating at an alarming pace. And the world is not standing still. In the first eight months of 2025, EU27 chemicals exports dropped by €3.5 billion, while imports rose by €3.2 billion. The volume trends mirror this: exports are down, imports are up. Our trade surplus shrank to €25 billion, losing €6.6 billion in just one year. Meanwhile, global distortions are intensifying. Imports, especially from China, continue to increase, and new tariff policies from the United States are likely to divert even more products toward Europe, while making EU exports less competitive. Yet again, in 2025, most EU trade defense cases involved chemical products. In this challenging environment, EU trade policy needs to step up: we need fast, decisive action against unfair practices to protect European production against international trade distortions. And we need more free trade agreements to access growth market and secure input materials. “Open but not naïve” must become more than a slogan. It must shape policy. > Our producers comply with the strictest safety and environmental standards in > the world. Yet resource-constrained authorities cannot ensure that imported > products meet those same standards. Europe is also struggling to enforce its own rules at the borders and online. Our producers comply with the strictest safety and environmental standards in the world. Yet resource-constrained authorities cannot ensure that imported products meet those same standards. This weak enforcement undermines competitiveness and safety, while allowing products that would fail EU scrutiny to enter the single market unchecked. If Europe wants global leadership on climate, biodiversity and international chemicals management, credibility starts at home. Regulatory uncertainty adds to the pressure. The Chemical Industry Action Plan recognizes what industry has long stressed: clarity, coherence and predictability are essential for investment. Clear, harmonized rules are not a luxury — they are prerequisites for maintaining any industrial presence in Europe. This is where REACH must be seen for what it is: the world’s most comprehensive piece of legislation governing chemicals. Yet the real issues lie in implementation. We therefore call on policymakers to focus on smarter, more efficient implementation without reopening the legal text. Industry is facing too many headwinds already. Simplification can be achieved without weakening standards, but this requires a clear political choice. We call on European policymakers to restore the investment and profitability of our industry for Europe. Only then will the transition to climate neutrality, circularity, and safe and sustainable chemicals be possible, while keeping our industrial base in Europe. > Our industry is an enabler of the transition to a climate-neutral and circular > future, but we need support for technologies that will define that future. In this context, the ETS must urgently evolve. With enabling conditions still missing, like a market for low-carbon products, energy and carbon infrastructures, access to cost-competitive low-carbon energy sources, ETS costs risk incentivizing closures rather than investment in decarbonization. This may reduce emissions inside the EU, but it does not decarbonize European consumption because production shifts abroad. This is what is known as carbon leakage, and this is not how EU climate policy intends to reach climate neutrality. The system needs urgent repair to avoid serious consequences for Europe’s industrial fabric and strategic autonomy, with no climate benefit. These shortcomings must be addressed well before 2030, including a way to neutralize ETS costs while industry works toward decarbonization. Our industry is an enabler of the transition to a climate-neutral and circular future, but we need support for technologies that will define that future. Europe must ensure that chemical recycling, carbon capture and utilization, and bio-based feedstocks are not only invented here, but also fully scaled here. Complex permitting, fragmented rules and insufficient funding are slowing us down while other regions race ahead. Decarbonization cannot be built on imported technology — it must be built on a strong EU industrial presence. Critically, we must stimulate markets for sustainable products that come with an unavoidable ‘green premium’. If Europe wants low-carbon and circular materials, then fiscal, financial and regulatory policy recipes must support their uptake — with minimum recycled or bio-based content, new value chain mobilizing schemes and the right dose of ‘European preference’. If we create these markets but fail to ensure that European producers capture a fair share, we will simply create new opportunities for imports rather than European jobs. > If Europe wants a strong, innovative resilient chemical industry in 2030 and > beyond, the decisions must be made today. The window is closing fast. The Critical Chemicals Alliance offers a path forward. Its primary goal will be to tackle key issues facing the chemical sector, such as risks of closures and trade challenges, and to support modernization and investments in critical productions. It will ultimately enable the chemical industry to remain resilient in the face of geopolitical threats, reinforcing Europe’s strategic autonomy. But let us be honest: time is no longer on our side. Europe’s chemical industry is the foundation of countless supply chains — from clean energy to semiconductors, from health to mobility. If we allow this foundation to erode, every other strategic ambition becomes more fragile. If you weren’t already alarmed — you should be. This is a wake-up call. Not for tomorrow, for now. Energy support, enforceable rules, smart regulation, strategic trade policies and demand-driven sustainability are not optional. They are the conditions for survival. If Europe wants a strong, innovative resilient chemical industry in 2030 and beyond, the decisions must be made today. The window is closing fast. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is CEFIC- The European Chemical Industry Council  * The ultimate controlling entity is CEFIC- The European Chemical Industry Council  More information here.

The energy landscape is always evolving, and another challenge is rapidly coming into view: data. The rise of artificial intelligence (AI), cloud computing and machine learning is driving unprecedented demand for electricity. This trend is only set to accelerate as the UK seeks to establish itself as a global leader in AI. The UK government has rightly committed to being an ‘AI maker, not taker’. But that ambition comes with consequences. According to the National Grid’s Future Energy Scenarios 2024, data centers could become one of the UK’s fastest-growing sources of demand by the 2030s. AI data centers are used to train the most advanced AI, including frontier models such as ChatGPT, and require vast amounts of energy due to their continuous utilization. We cannot meet this surge in demand simply by layering data center load on top of an already stretched energy system. COORDINATION WILL BE CRITICAL Last month, a report from Aurora Energy Research highlighted that an uncoordinated approach to power sourcing could see power sector emissions increasing by 14 percent, which would directly undermine the UK’s decarbonization goals and drive up wholesale electricity prices. > Without change, we risk slowing down both the deployment of AI infrastructure > and our energy transition. Instead, we need a coordinated way to unlock the potential of the AI sector. The current approach, where most data centers cluster around areas like London and the Thames Valley, driven by proximity to demand, is unsustainable. These regions are often far from large-scale sources of generation and already face grid constraints such as network connection bottlenecks. Different thinking is viable for data centers geared toward AI workloads, which are less sensitive to latency — the delay of data transfer — and therefore do not need to be sited close to major cities. Without change, we risk slowing down both the deployment of AI infrastructure and our energy transition. To help mitigate this risk, we should align our energy and digital strategies more closely. That starts with a national framework to strategically site new data centers in areas with available grid capacity, preferably close to power generation sources. Drax Power Station could be one of those locations. via Drax CO-LOCATING DATA CENTRES AND POWER GENERATION In 2024 Drax Power Station was the UK’s single largest source of renewable power by output. Our site in Selby, North Yorkshire, provides approximately 2.6 GW of dispatchable power capacity, enough power for five million homes. Unlike intermittent renewables, Drax generates power whether or not the wind is blowing or the sun is shining. But the site’s potential reaches beyond what it delivers today. We already benefit from planning consents, which — alongside the right policy support and regulatory framework — could allow us to transform Drax into the world’s largest engineered carbon removals facility by installing bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) on two of our generating units. BECCS is unique. It is the only technology that can simultaneously generate renewable power and remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. And, significantly, co-locating a data center with the power station could help enable the delivery of this world leading technology. > Building data centers next to power stations brings multiple advantages. It > enhances system resilience and reduces the risk of plant curtailment. It > minimizes energy lost in transmission, something that becomes more pronounced > the further electricity has to travel. Large power stations like Drax Power Station were designed to support industrial-scale generation. They have substantial grid connections, large surrounding estates and access to cooling water. These attributes make Drax Power Station uniquely suited for the possibility of hosting a hyperscale data center. Building data centers next to power stations brings multiple advantages. It enhances system resilience and reduces the risk of plant curtailment. It minimizes energy lost in transmission, something that becomes more pronounced the further electricity has to travel. It also supports the connection of new energy capacity by relieving congestion on the grid queue. Unlocking this potential, however, will require a rethink of current regulations. SEIZING THE OPPORTUNITY At present, power stations are restricted from supplying electricity simultaneously to both the grid and a private off-taker such as a data center. These rules were written for a different era, one that did not anticipate intense energy consumers such as AI clusters emerging as a major player in the energy ecosystem. By unpicking these constraints, we can free up untapped capacity, provide flexible solutions for energy security and support the digital infrastructure needed to drive economic growth. The government’s recent announcement of AI Growth Zones is a welcome step. If designed properly, this initiative could be the catalyst for a strategic rollout of AI infrastructure across the UK. Rather than clustering growth in already congested urban areas, Growth Zones can enable us to locate data centers where power is plentiful, where local communities stand to benefit from investment and where the grid can accommodate growth. This is about more than just plugging in servers. It’s about creating a coherent and forward-looking strategy that links where we generate power to where we use it — and recognizes that AI and energy are now inextricably linked. Subject to clear government policy support and milestones, combining BECCS with a large-scale data center at Drax Power Station could align with this industrial strategy. Together, these developments could create the option for a globally unique proposition: a carbon negative data center — delivering world-leading innovation for the UK and directly countering the perspective that AI growth will mean more carbon emissions.   These projects could protect and create thousands of high-quality jobs in a region that has historically powered the UK but that now faces the risk of deindustrialization as a result of declining heavy industry. A joined-up plan for energy and digital growth can offer lasting economic resilience to communities that need it the most. > It’s time to think smarter about how we build, power and place the critical > infrastructure of the 21st century. At Drax, we are ready to be part of that future. We are already a leading renewable energy generator in the UK and we have the infrastructure and ambition to implement a cutting-edge data center solution at Drax Power Station, helping the country secure its place as a digital leader while keeping the lights on. It’s time to think smarter about how we build, power and place the critical infrastructure of the 21st century. We must ensure new data capacity is integrated in ways that enhance grid stability without compromising the transition to clean energy or negatively affecting the needs and rights of local communities. With the right strategy, the UK doesn’t have to choose between energy security and digital growth. We can achieve both.