In 2025, major companies across industries started to weaken or drop their promises to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050. This shift, driven by political changes and economic pressures, raises big questions about the fight against climate change, with firms like retailers, banks, and carmakers choosing profits over green targets.
This retreat comes almost a year after Donald Trump returned to the White House, pushing for more fossil fuel production. In the UK, political moves by leaders like Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage have broken old agreements on cutting emissions, leading businesses to rethink their plans.
Political Changes Spark the Shift
Politics played a key role in this trend. Trump’s call to “drill baby, drill” gave fossil fuel companies a boost and made firms question strict green rules. In the UK, the Conservative Party dropped its net zero by 2050 goal, while Labour defended its own policy against criticism from former leader Tony Blair.
This backlash spread beyond borders. Conservative groups in the US hailed 2025 as a turning point against what they call climate overreach. Meanwhile, global talks at COP30 in Brazil failed to agree on phasing out fossil fuels, despite big pledges on renewables. These events created uncertainty, making businesses wary of bold climate steps.
Experts say this political divide hurts long-term planning. Without steady government support, companies face risks in investing in clean tech.
Key Industries Scale Back Pledges
Many sectors felt the impact. In retail, UK supermarket Morrisons pushed its net zero target back by 15 years to 2050 for its full supply chain. Other retailers followed, citing high costs and supply issues.
The energy sector saw big moves too. Oil giants like BP and Shell cut back on green projects, focusing instead on shareholder returns. Carmakers lobbied for weaker electric vehicle rules in the US, EU, and UK, as battery car sales grew slower than expected.
Banks and financial firms also pulled away. Some removed decarbonization goals from their sites, driven by underperforming green funds and pushback against ESG investing.
- Retail: Companies face rising energy bills and supply chain hurdles, leading to delayed targets.
- Automotive: Slower EV adoption prompts calls for relaxed regulations.
- Energy: Firms prioritize profits amid fluctuating oil prices.
In aviation, airlines struggled with sustainable fuel mandates, adding to the retreat.
Economic Pressures Drive Decisions
Money concerns fueled much of this change. High costs of switching to clean energy, plus inflation, made green investments hard to justify. A Harvard Business Review analysis noted that intangible benefits of sustainability often fail to convince shareholders.
Global investment in clean energy hit $2 trillion in 2025, double that of fossil fuels, per the International Energy Agency. Yet, many firms saw better short-term gains in traditional operations. In the UK, aiming for just 80 percent emissions cuts by 2050 could save 350 billion pounds, according to energy experts.
This table shows examples of companies and their changes:
| Company | Industry | Original Pledge | 2025 Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Morrisons | Retail | Net zero by 2035 | Delayed to 2050 |
| BP | Energy | Major green shift | Scaled back renewables |
| Shell | Energy | Ambitious cuts | Reduced green spending |
| Nike | Apparel | Sustainability focus | Cut efforts amid costs |
These shifts highlight a focus on immediate profits over long-term climate goals.
Logical reasoning suggests that without clear returns, businesses will keep prioritizing shareholders. Recent events, like oil price spikes from global tensions, only add to the pressure.
Global Trends Offer Some Hope
Not all news is grim. China led in renewables, with clean power surpassing coal for the first time in 2025. Innovations like carbon-light AI and recycled materials gave hope, as noted in eco-business reports.
The UN’s Net Zero Coalition stresses that cutting emissions to near zero is vital to limit warming. Groups like The Climate Pledge, founded in 2019, keep pushing companies to act together.
Despite retreats, some leaders warn that abandoning net zero raises power bills and hurts investment. Business voices in Australia and elsewhere argue renewables offer the cheapest path forward.
What This Means for the Future
This retreat could slow progress on climate goals, leading to more severe weather and economic losses. Deloitte research warns inaction might cost the global economy $178 trillion by 2070, while action could add $43 trillion.
Yet, the trend might push for more realistic targets. Companies are urged to rethink supplier ties and governance to build real accountability.
As 2025 ends, the debate continues. Will businesses recommit, or will the backlash grow? Share your thoughts in the comments and spread this article to join the conversation on climate action.
