Chapter 6: Infrastructure

About this document

Lead Authors: Emma Ferranti, Daniel Donaldson, Sarah Greenham, Xilin Xia, Andrew Quinn, Rachel Fisher.

Contributing Authors: Lindsay Beevers, Nicholas Cork, Thomas Critchley, Harriet Dudley, Neil Ferguson, Guy Howard, Kristen MacAskill, Georgia McArdell, Erika Palin, Rachel J. Perks, Louise Rudolph, Stefán Smith, Nikki Van Dijk, Geoff Watson, Christopher White.

Additional Contributors: Kate Armstrong, Alexander Askew, Rachel Doley, Rachel Hay, Lucy Martin, Anisha Nijhawan, Jenny Pirret, Maria Pregnolato, Andrew Romang, Rachael Steller, Karina Rodriguez Villafuerte, Xinfang Wang, Grant Wilson, Louis Worthington.

This publication is available in PDF format at the end of the page >

6.1 Chapter summary

Infrastructure – including energy, communications networks, transport, and water systems – is fundamental to the functioning of UK society and its economy.  Extreme weather and long-term climate change can cause damage to infrastructure or alter the surrounding environment. This can disrupt services, reduce reliability or quality of services, and increase maintenance needs. Our infrastructure systems are interconnected and depend on each other to operate successfully. A failure in one system can impact other systems, or broader socioeconomic activities. For example, transport networks rely upon communications networks to function. This chapter considers the risks to the UK infrastructure sector from climate change.

The urgency score for Risks from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems (I1) is assessed as Critical action needed (the highest urgency score). This urgency score is reached in the 2050s when the risk magnitude rises to Very High (Medium confidence) for all nations. There is expected to be very large and frequent damage, with very large extent or Very High pervasiveness. This brings irreversible loss of system functionality and systemic risk, costing billions annually. The risk magnitude is driven by High magnitude risks within individual infrastructure systems and compounded by high levels of interconnectedness between systems. There are high levels of connectedness with energy systems (I2, I3, and I4) and digital and communication systems (I8), which increases the potential for cascade failures across systems.

Risks with an urgency score of Critical investigation (the second highest urgency score) include: Risks to fuel supply infrastructure (I4); Risks to road transport systems (I5); and Risks to aviation and maritime transport systems (I7). These urgency scores occur at different time horizons for different risks and nations.

Across the sector, increase in risk is driven by: future intensification of climate-related hazards such as higher temperature, flooding (fluvial, pluvial, coastal), wildfires, higher sea levels and erosion; and infrastructure condition and design in some sectors such as transport and water and wastewater (I5, I6, I9). Many long-life infrastructure systems such as roads, railways, and sewage systems were not designed for the present climate, or for future climates. For some risks, e.g., water supply and wastewater (I9), failure to build resilience will have public health consequences.

Infrastructure failure and disruption has the greatest impacts on communities with the fewest resources to cope with disruptions, such as emergency reserves, suitable housing and flexible employment or transportation.

Net Zero is changing the infrastructure landscape particularly for electricity generation (I2), electricity transmission and distribution (I3), fuel supply (I4), and road transport (I5). This will change the exposure and vulnerability of infrastructure systems compared to the present day. It also provides opportunities to build in climate resilience through the design and development of new infrastructure.

Adaptation Reporting Power (ARP) reports and observed weather impacts are key sources of evidence for the infrastructure sector. There has been some sector specific modelling that provides information about future climate impacts for the infrastructure sector, such as the work done in the Climate Services for a Net Zero World programme (CS-N0W) for electricity generation, transmission and distribution, and fuel supply systems (I2, I3, I4). However, evidence of impacts on infrastructure in future climate scenarios is generally either limited (e.g., one scenario, one time horizon) or does not exist for different time periods, climate scenarios, or sectors.

Adaptation plans and policies exist for most sectors. Adaptation actions are starting to take place but are not on the scale required to deliver climate-resilient infrastructure systems. Some sectors (e.g., electricity generation, I2, electricity transmission and distribution, I3, rail, I6, water and wastewater, I9) are more advanced in terms of adaptation plans and policy. There is less evidence of adaptation action and progress in Northern Ireland for all sectors. Evidence of the effectiveness of adaptation actions is currently limited because there has been insufficient time for adaptation actions to deliver a benefit, there are limited monitoring and evaluation processes in place and/or adaptation actions are insufficient.

Table 6.1: List of risks and urgency scores for Infrastructure by country. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.
ID	Risk		Present	2030	2050	2080	Urgency
I1	Risks to the delivery of infrastructure services from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems	UK	H • • •	H • • •	VH • •	VH •	CAN
		England	H • • •	H • • •	VH • •	VH •	CAN
		Northern Ireland	H • • •	H • • •	VH • •	VH •	CAN
		Scotland	H • • •	H • • •	VH • •	VH •	CAN
		Wales	H • • •	H • • •	VH • •	VH •	CAN
I2	Risks to electricity generation	UK	M • •	M • •	M •	M •	MAN
		England	M • •	M • •	M •	M •	MAN
		Northern Ireland	M • •	M • •	M •	M •	MAN
		Scotland	M • •	M • •	M •	M •	MAN
		Wales	M • •	M • •	M •	M •	MAN
I3	Risks to electricity transmission and distribution systems	UK	H • • •	H • • •	H • •	H • •	MAN
		England	H • • •	H • • •	H • •	H • •	MAN
		Northern Ireland	H • • •	H • •	H • •	H • •	MAN
		Scotland	H • • •	H • • •	H • •	H • •	MAN
		Wales	H • • •	H • • •	H • •	H • •	MAN
I4	Risks to fuel supply systems	UK	H •	H •	H •	H •	CI
		England	H • •	H • •	H •	H •	CI
		Northern Ireland	H •	H •	H •	H •	CI
		Scotland	H • •	H • •	H •	H •	CI
		Wales	H • •	H • •	H •	H •	CI
I5	Risks to road transport systems	UK	H • •	H • •	H •	VH •	CI
		England	H • •	H • •	H •	VH •	CI
		Northern Ireland	H • •	H • •	H •	VH •	CI
		Scotland	H • •	H • •	H •	VH •	CI
		Wales	H • •	H • •	H •	VH •	CI
I6	Risks to rail transport systems	UK	H • •	H • •	H • •	VH • •	MAN
		England	H • •	H • •	H • •	VH • •	MAN
		Northern Ireland	M • •	M • •	M • •	H • •	MAN
		Scotland	M • •	M • •	H • •	H • •	MAN
		Wales	M • •	M • •	M • •	H • •	MAN
I7	Risks to aviation and maritime transport systems	UK	H •	H •	H •	H •	CI
		England	H • • •	H • •	H •	H •	CI
		Northern Ireland	H • •	H •	H •	H •	CI
		Scotland	H • • •	H •	H •	H •	CI
		Wales	H •	H •	H •	H •	CI
I8	Risks to digital and communications systems	UK	M •	M •	M •	H •	FI
		England	M •	M •	M •	H •	FI
		Northern Ireland	M •	M •	M •	H •	FI
		Scotland	M •	M •	M •	H •	FI
		Wales	M •	M •	M •	H •	FI
I9	Risks to water supply and wastewater systems	UK	H • • •	H • •	H • •	H •	MAN
		England	H • • •	H • •	H • •	H •	MAN
		Northern Ireland	H • •	H • •	H • •	H •	MAN
		Scotland	H • • •	H • •	H • •	H •	MAN
		Wales	H • •	H • •	H • •	H •	MAN
I10	Risks to waste management systems, excluding wastewater systems	UK	H •	M •	M •	M •	CI
		England	L •	L •	L •	L •	FI
		Northern Ireland	L •	L •	L •	L •	FI
		Scotland	L •	L •	L •	L •	FI
		Wales	H •	M •	M •	M •	CI

6.2 Risks to Infrastructure

6.2.1 Risks to the delivery of infrastructure services from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems – I1

This risk considers the interdependencies between sectors, and how a failure or disruption in one system can disrupt the delivery of services within one or more infrastructure systems. For example, disruptions to electricity generation, distribution or transmission can lead to widespread impacts across multiple other sectors such as transport and digital and communications systems.

Table 6.2: Urgency scores for I1 Risks to the delivery of infrastructure services from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.
ID	Risk		Present	2030	2050	2080	Urgency
I1	Risks to the delivery of infrastructure services from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems	UK	H • • •	H • • •	VH • •	VH •	CAN
		England	H • • •	H • • •	VH • •	VH •	CAN
		Northern Ireland	H • • •	H • • •	VH • •	VH •	CAN
		Scotland	H • • •	H • • •	VH • •	VH •	CAN
		Wales	H • • •	H • • •	VH • •	VH •	CAN

6.2.1.1 Evidence relevant to the entire United Kingdom

The climate risk for this sector is broadly UK-wide, and therefore the devolved nations will experience similar current and future drivers of risk, current and future magnitudes of risk, and levels of preparedness for risk.

Current and future drivers of risk

Infrastructure systems such as transport, energy and telecommunications are highly interconnected to other infrastructure systems and a disruption in one sector can trigger failures in others, thereby amplifying the overall impact of an initial incident. For example, a power outage can disable communication networks, disrupt water supply systems reliant on electric pumps, and halt transportation services that depend upon signal systems. These failures, in turn, can affect emergency response, healthcare delivery, and economic activities (Figure 6.1).

Figure 6.1. The loss of critical infrastructure systems in Lancaster following Storm Desmond, 2015 (Ferranti et al., 2017).

Several factors drive increased risk to infrastructure services from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems, ranging from climate change to deepening interdependencies between systems. Key drivers include:

• The intensification of climate change impacts, such as extremes of heat and rainfall. For example, across the UK, recent warming has exceeded temperature records spanning more than 300 years and rainfall has increased over the winter months, with October to March 2023-2024 recording the second wettest winter for the UK since 1836 (Kendon et al., 2025). This increases the risk within individual critical infrastructure systems, particularly electricity generation (I2), electricity transmission and distribution (I3) and digital and communications infrastructure (I8), as well as exacerbating the consequences from system interdependencies. More frequent and severe extreme weather events (e.g., heatwave or storms) can trigger downstream failures across interconnected networks.
• The interconnectedness of infrastructure services. Electricity generation and transmission and distribution systems (I2, I3) underpin most other infrastructure services. The increasing use of digital sensors and communications, together with AI, deepens the interdependence with the digital and communications sector (I8).
• Co-location of critical infrastructure items. This allows the same weather event to impact multiple systems, thereby amplifying the potential impact of an extreme weather event. For example, where data servers and electricity substations are co-located, the same event could lead to multi-system failures. Similarly, co-located coastal infrastructure services are at risk from storm surges and flooding which can simultaneously impact port operations, electricity substations located along the coast, and adjacent wastewater facilities, having knock-on effects on supply chain distribution.
• Increasing exposure to climate risks occurring overseas due to global supply chains, digital technologies, and energy systems. Upstream disruptions to these supply chains from extreme weather overseas can affect key manufacturing hubs or transport corridors. This can create downstream impacts on the availability of critical components, fuel supplies and food distribution in the UK. These interdependent risks are often nonlinear, rapidly escalating, and difficult to predict or contain.

Assessment of current magnitude of risk

The current magnitude of this risk is assessed as High with High confidence given the many observed examples of infrastructure interdependencies causing major damage and disruption or foregone opportunities. For example, a loss of energy generation following a likely lightning strike to an overhead transmission line north of London in August 2019 led to major disruption on the railway network, including blocked lines out of Farringdon and King’s Cross stations, along with wider cancellations and significant delays impacting thousands of passengers (ORR, 2020; NESO, 2019).  Data centre outages from extreme weather events led to loss of operations to Guy’s and St. Thomas NHS Trust following the heatwave in July 2022 (see I8 digital and communications systems, and NHS, 2023).

Assessment of future magnitude of risk

The future magnitude of risk is determined by the magnitude of risk within individual infrastructure systems, particularly electricity supply and distribution, and their level of interconnectedness.

2030s, central warming scenario:

In the near future, there may be some amplification of climate hazards, for example hot summers are expected to continue to become more frequent in the UK and annual average rainfall and the frequency of heavy rainfall events is increasing (State of the Climate chapter). There may also be changes to the infrastructure landscape, including increasing interdependence with digital and communication systems (I8). It is likely that the magnitude of risk will increase but will remain in the High magnitude banding. The Net Zero transition will begin to change the infrastructure assets associated with electricity generation, fuel supply, and electricity distribution and transmission. This new infrastructure may present an opportunity to build-in increased resilience. Thus, expert judgment considers the magnitude of risk in the 2030s to be similar to present day with High confidence.

2050s, central and high warming scenarios:

By the 2050s, climate change impacts will have significantly intensified. Convective short duration rainfall events are increasing with warmer temperatures, there are changes in east Atlantic storminess, and floods that occurred every 50 years are expected to increase in frequency (State of the Climate chapter); these contribute to an increased magnitude of risks. Infrastructure systems are expected to be increasingly interconnected, particularly with energy generation, transmission and distribution (I2, I3), and digital and communication systems (I8), thereby increasing the potential for impacts. Infrastructure systems are likely to have changed significantly as the UK transitions to Net Zero. The short life of many communications technologies means many current day assets are likely to have been replaced. However, some infrastructure assets associated predominantly with fuel supply and transport services have much longer lifetimes where risks from climate change are likely to increase. An economic study indicates the risks from infrastructure interdependencies could reach billions per year by 2050s (Watkiss, 2022). Risk magnitude therefore rises to Very High, but the single source of evidence combined with expert judgment reduces the confidence to Medium.

2080s, central and high warming scenarios:

By the 2080s, climate change impacts continue to intensify, further increasing the magnitude of risk. UK storm severity could increase by around 30% while rising sea levels will increase flood and coastal erosion risks (State of the Climate chapter). Infrastructure systems are likely to have changed significantly as technology advances. There is no specific evidence for this time period; expert judgment considers the magnitude of risk to remain Very High, but the confidence level to be Low.

Level of preparedness for risk

The CCC (2023a) has identified the lack of systematic national assessment of interdependency risks, while the NIC (National Infrastructure Commission, now the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority, NISTA) recommended in 2022 and 2024 that “regulators … put in place a system for cross-sector stress testing, which addresses interdependencies and the risk of cascade failures”, and highlighted the need to include climate change in traditional hazard analysis, and the role for the Cabinet Office in coordinating effort across Government (NIC, 2022; 2024).

Several infrastructure bodies exist (partly identified in the Civil Contingencies Act (2004)) which could facilitate improved cross-sector coordination on climate change interdependencies:

• Infrastructure Operators Adaptation Forum
• Climate Resilient Infrastructure Scotland
• Local Resilience Forums (England and Wales)
• Cabinet Office-led Infrastructure, Resilience and Security Working Group
• National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA)

The Department for Transport is, at the time of writing, undertaking work to support transport stakeholders in furthering their understanding of risks arising from interdependencies.

Assessment of the evidence base and evidence gaps

More research is urgently needed on the current level of risks to key interconnected infrastructure networks. While the impacts of extreme weather events on transport and energy sectors are somewhat understood, more research is required to understand the downstream impacts into other infrastructure services.

At present, there is no means to monitor and evaluate progress in managing the risks from interdependencies via the ARP process; ARP reports are submitted by organisations, and no organisation oversees adaptation progress or mandates adaptation actions. There is also a lack of sight of cross-Government collaboration on systematic national assessment of interdependency risk (CCC, 2025a), as well as an urgent requirement to understand the downstream impacts of sector-specific adaptation strategies on interconnected infrastructure systems.

6.2.1.2 England

Current and future magnitude of risk

Key climatic considerations in England that influence risks from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems are high temperatures and heatwaves, droughts, high winds, storms, and flooding (fluvial, pluvial, and coastal). For example, more severe heatwaves that reach higher temperatures and last longer are expected across the UK, however greater increases in maximum temperatures are projected over southern England and Wales.

The congested nature of London’s infrastructure produces a total of 114 potential cascading risks to the transport system in the present-day, 2050s, and 2080s (TfL, 2024a). For example, significant risks to power substations from both high temperatures and flooding, particularly during periods of high demand, can have downstream impacts on power supply for critical operations linked to rail infrastructure (e.g., track, signage) and road networks (e.g., street lighting). By the 2050s, increases in winter rainfall (State of the Climate chapter) will lead to increased pluvial and fluvial flooding which in turn can damage infrastructure and disrupt service.

The southeast of England is most at risk from drought (State of the Climate chapter), which could disrupt interconnected infrastructure services that rely on water for cooling (I9) such as thermal power plants, electricity substations for transmission, and data centres for cooling systems. By the 2050s, summers will be hotter and drier (State of the Climate chapter) which will lead to increased length and severity of heatwaves and droughts, which in turn can impact water resources, transport structures and digital services.

As reported in risks to digital and communications systems (I8), 80% of data centres are clustered centrally around the M25 and adjacent to existing fibre optic and power infrastructure. Therefore, a single extreme weather event (e.g., heatwave or storm) could result in the shutdown of multiple data centres simultaneously. This could disrupt interconnected infrastructure services causing power grid instabilities, impacts on transport and water systems, and widespread telecommunication networks failures.

Evaluation of urgency score

Risk magnitude is considered High for present day and for 2030s, with High confidence given the observed examples of infrastructure interdependencies causing major damage and disruption or foregone opportunities on the scale of £millions per year. If these increase in the near future, impacts will remain in High magnitude banding. For 2050s onwards, risks from infrastructure interdependencies could reach billions per year (Watkiss, 2022); confidence is Medium for 2050s but reduces to Low for 2080s where scoring is based solely on expert judgment. Many ARP4 reports now consider upstream and downstream interdependencies as part of their reporting process; however, plans and policies remain limited (CCC, 2025a), thus there are no changes to Risk magnitude after considering adaptation.

Table 6.3: Urgency scores for I1 Risks to the delivery of infrastructure services from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems for England. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.1.3 Northern Ireland

Current and future magnitude of risk

The specific climatic consideration in Northern Ireland that influences risks to the delivery of infrastructure services from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems is storms, particularly those producing high winds and flooding. For example, decreases in low river flows (leading to drought) and increases in high flows (leading to flooding) are expected across the UK, however for Northern Ireland increases in mean winter river flows are projected. The local road network within Northern Ireland is at high risk of flooding due to both extreme rainfall events and the overall poor condition of the roads (CCC, 2023b). Should this lead to road closures during a storm event, there could be knock-on consequences for access or maintenance of other systems. Electricity generation and transmission are part of the Irish Grid, thus there are international interdependencies, and under a different regulatory framework than Great Britain.

Evaluation of urgency score

Risk is considered High for present day and for 2030s, with High confidence given the observed examples of infrastructure interdependencies causing major damage and disruption, or foregone opportunities on the scale of millions per year; if these increase in the near future, impacts will remain in High magnitude banding. For 2050s onwards, risks from infrastructure interdependencies could reach billions per year (Watkiss, 2022). Confidence is Medium for 2050s but reduces to Low for 2080s where scoring is based solely on expert judgment. There is little reporting on infrastructure adaptation to risk from infrastructure from interdependencies. Thus, there are no changes to Risk magnitude after considering adaptation.

Table 6.4: Urgency scores for I1 Risks to the delivery of infrastructure services from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems for Northern Ireland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.1.4 Scotland

Current and future magnitude of risk

The specific climatic considerations in Scotland that influence risks to the delivery of infrastructure services from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems are extremes in precipitation, strong winds, erosion and drought. For example, in future windstorms there is increased potential for the combined impact of extreme winds and rainfall across the UK, however the largest increase in storm days is projected for Scotland.

As reported in risks to rail (I6) and digital and communications systems (I8), winter storms can have a significant impact on rail transportation services and digital and communications services. For example, in 2022, Storms Dudley, Eunice, and Franklin occurred in the same week in February (Met Office, 2022a). This resulted in widespread disruption and cancellations to railway services across the country, including a tree that caught fire when it fell onto overhead lines (Network Rail, 2022). When train services are delayed or suspended it can lead to an increase in pressure on other modes of transportation (e.g., buses and taxis), although these may also be impacted by the same storm. Similarly, Storm Arwen impacted Scotland in November 2021 and Storm Éowyn in January 2025, leading to downstream impacts on phone and broadband connections. Broadband services failure can lead to multi-sector disruption, with reports in the media that these lead to impacts on transport, due to the loss of communication between drivers and the control centre, and real-time monitoring and control of water treatment works and/or power grids.

As reported in risks to water and wastewater (I9), a small but substantial part of the Scottish population (2.5%) rely on private water supplies (DWQR, 2024). Currently Scotland experiences a drought event every 20 years, although by 2040 this is likely to occur every 3 years (Visser-Quinn et al., 2021). Given that the River Spey and the River Tay are both susceptible to drought and abstraction, this will increase pressure on water supplies (Visser-Quinn et al., 2021). Drought and abstraction could impact buried infrastructure (e.g., I4), while insufficient supply may impact sectors that require water for cooling (e.g., I2), irrigation or processing.

Evaluation of urgency score

Risk is considered High for present day and for 2030s, with High confidence given the observed examples of infrastructure interdependencies causing major damage and disruption, or foregone opportunities, on the scale of £millions per year; if these increase in the near future, impacts will remain in High magnitude banding. For 2050s onwards, risks from infrastructure interdependencies could reach billions per year (Watkiss, 2022); confidence is Medium for 2050s but reduces to Low for 2080s where scoring is based solely on expert judgment. Many ARP4 reports now consider upstream and downstream interdependencies as part of their reporting process, however, plans and policies remain limited (CCC, 2025a). Thus, there are no changes to risk magnitude after considering adaptation.

Table 6.5: Urgency scores for I1 Risks to the delivery of infrastructure services from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems for Scotland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.1.5 Wales

Current and future magnitude of risk

The specific climatic considerations in Wales that influence risks to the delivery of infrastructure services from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems are flooding, high winds, erosion, and high temperatures. For example, more severe heatwaves that reach higher temperatures and last longer are expected across the UK, however greater increases in maximum temperatures are projected over southern England and Wales.

As reported in risks to rail (I6), storms Dudley, Eunice, and Franklin occurred in one week in February 2022 and resulted in major transport disruption in Wales, with some Wales & Western railway services stopped, and Network Rail suspending all services (Met Office, 2022a; Network Rail, 2022). When train services are delayed or suspended, it can increase pressure on other modes of transportation (e.g., buses and taxis), though these are likely also impacted by the same storm. For example, heavy precipitation from winter storms can cause flooding. As reported in risks to road transport systems (I5), flooding and associated landslips are the primary drivers for road maintenance and renewal. Coastal road schemes specifically have a growing risk of coastal erosion under climate change (GOV Wales, 2023). When roads and rail are closed due to flooding, it can have widespread downstream impacts on other infrastructure services. This can include delays to engineers responding to substation failures, or preventing deliveries of fuel to substations or backup generators and chemicals to water and wastewater treatment sites.

Evaluation of urgency score

Risk is considered High for present day and for 2030s, with High confidence given the observed examples of infrastructure interdependencies causing major damage and disruption, or foregone opportunities on the scale of £millions per year. If these increase in the near future, impacts will remain in High magnitude banding. For 2050s onwards, risks from infrastructure interdependencies could reach £billions per year (Watkiss, 2022). Confidence is Medium for 2050s but reduces to Low for 2080s where scoring is based solely on expert judgment. Many ARP4 reports now consider upstream and downstream interdependencies as part of their reporting process; however, plans and policies remain limited (CCC, 2025a). Thus, there are no changes to Risk magnitude after considering adaptation.

Table 6.6: Urgency scores for I1 Risks to the delivery of infrastructure services from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems for Wales. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.2 Risks to electricity generation – I2

This risk covers the diverse mix of electricity generation assets including nuclear, fossil fuels, renewables and storage, as well as the associated security of supply. Infrastructure associated with the supply of fuel is covered in I4. Electricity generation in England, Scotland and Wales is part of the GB energy market whereas generation in Northern Ireland is part of the Single Electricity Market for the island of Ireland.

Table 6.7: Urgency scores for I2 Risks to electricity generation. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.
ID	Risk		Present	2030	2050	2080	Urgency
I2	Risks to electricity generation	UK	M • •	M • •	M •	M •	MAN
		England	M • •	M • •	M •	M •	MAN
		Northern Ireland	M • •	M • •	M •	M •	MAN
		Scotland	M • •	M • •	M •	M •	MAN
		Wales	M • •	M • •	M •	M •	MAN

6.2.2.1 Evidence relevant to the entire United Kingdom

Current and future drivers of risk

The electricity generation mix of the UK as depicted in Figure 6.2 has continued to evolve over the last five years, including shutdown of the UK’s last coal-fired generation station in 2024.

Figure 6.2. Map of Major Power Producers in the UK (operational May 2025) Source: DESNZ, 2025b

In 2024, electricity generation in the UK was produced via renewables (50.4%), fossil fuels (31.8%), nuclear (14.2%) and other fuels and storage. The share from renewables increased from 36.6% in 2019 (DESNZ, 2025a). The growth of renewable generation continues, having increased tenfold since 2000 (DESNZ, 2025b). From 2019 to 2024, in the UK, the capacity of renewable generation grew from 47 GW to 60.6 GW (DESNZ, 2025c) and the total generation capacity grew from 103.1 GW to 105.4 GW (DESNZ, 2025d).

Meeting the 2030 Clean Power targets will require substantial addition of offshore wind, onshore wind, and solar generation alongside a range of technologies. These include low carbon dispatchable generation and storage for periods of lower renewable generation along with nuclear power from large scale plants and potentially Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) (NESO, 2024a; Smith et al., 2023). According to the National Energy System Operator (NESO), Wind and Solar could make up 80-84% of Great Britain’s 2030 supply (NESO, 2024a). In 2030, most gas generation is anticipated to remain on the system to maintain security of supply (NESO, 2024a), but unabated gas generation will increasingly need to be replaced by gas with CCS or hydrogen-fired turbines. The CCC Seventh Carbon Budget Balanced Pathway phases out unabated gas capacity by 2050 (CCC, 2025b). By 2050, the CCC projects further growth in renewable generation with capacity projections of 125 GW for offshore wind, 37 GW for onshore wind, and 106 GW for solar PV (CCC, 2025b). However, asset owners report newer generation assets have climate risk built into their design (EUK, RUK, and SEUK, 2025). There is also expected to be at least a doubling of electricity demand as other sectors like heating and transport decarbonise, placing further reliance on electricity generation (CCC, 2025b). This increases the wider societal consequences of loss of power across health (H1), the built environment (BE7, BE8), and the economy (E1). The magnitude of risk in these downstream sectors would be above and beyond what is presented in this section (I2).

With supply increasingly dependent on wind and solar, demand becoming more sensitive to changes in temperature, and correlated weather patterns across Europe potentially limiting import capacity during prolonged periods of low wind and low temperatures, weather is expected to become the dominant driver of resource adequacy risk in a decarbonised power system (NESO, 2025a; Lücke et al., 2024). Studies anticipate changes from climate to be small within the context of inter-annual variability of wind, however less evidence is available to understand changes in relevant extremes (Kapica et al., 2024; Bloomfield, 2025). Increased exposure to any relevant changes in climate can be effectively managed through proper planning of the supply mix, including sufficient long-duration energy storage and low carbon dispatchable power (NESO, 2025a; NESO, 2025c). Increasing decentralisation can reduce the exposure to loss of a single asset but may introduce new failure modes due to lack of visibility and control e.g., 2019 system event (Ofgem, 2020). Furthermore, understanding risks of cascading failures between sectors (as discussed in I1) remains important as the generation mix changes.

Risks to electricity generation are made up of two key components, risks of damage to electricity generation assets themselves, and risks to security of supply posed by changes in generation output. The hazards and impacts are summarised in Table 6.8.

Table 6.8: Summary of the range of weather hazards that impact electricity generation. Information from EUK, RUK, and SEUK (2025) and Energy UK (2021) except where otherwise stated.

Assessment of current magnitude of risk

Currently there is a Medium risk from climate change, determined from multiple sources of evidence including sector level adaptation plans and strategies. The more limited evidence for impact quantification, particularly impact to assets, results in a Medium confidence, indicating an urgency score of More action needed.

For risks to assets, ARP4 surveys indicated the largest number of responses for high and low temperatures, high winds and lightning (EUK, RUK, and SEUK, 2025). While magnitude was not quantified for these areas, one respondent had already experienced impacts from the inability to discharge cooling water due to high temperatures, and similar experiences have been seen throughout Europe during the 2025 heatwave (Czyzak et al., 2025). ARP4 surveys also indicated widespread flood risk across generation technologies (EUK, RUK, and SEUK, 2025). Sayers et al. (2020) quantified the number of power stations exposed to significant risk from flooding (surface water, fluvial and coastal) as 242 for the UK in the 2020s, under a 2°C warming scenario and current levels of adaptation. Overall, for risks to generation assets, quantitative evidence is limited as electricity generators are not required to submit climate resilience strategies to Ofgem and voluntarily submitted ARP reports are provided at a sector level (CCC, 2025a).

Maintaining adequate security of supply is not a new issue, and electricity generation has demonstrated resilience to recent weather-related hazards. When considering the security of supply in current climate, the NESO 2024/25 winter outlook indicated a Loss of Load Expectation – “the [mean] number of hours when demand is higher than available generation during the year” – of 0.1 hours/year which is well below the 3-hour limit in the Reliability Standard (NESO, 2024b). Great Britain has shared electricity markets which couples the operational impacts of generation shortfall across nations (NESO, 2025b). Overall, this diversification reduces the overall risk of loss of individual facilities but can create other challenges during more widespread regional events such as the heat and drought across Europe in 2022 (RTE, 2023). Though in a separate Single Electricity Market, Northern Ireland is also interconnected with Great Britain and is partly dependent on GB for energy security (UK Parliament, 2018). NESO, in Great Britain and System Operator for Northern Ireland (SONI) manage their respective systems to maintain security of supply, accounting for unexpected breakdown or loss of generation facilities (NESO, 2024b; SONI, 2024). As a result, there are limited recent examples of generation failure leading to widespread power outages (Energy UK, 2021; EUK, RUK, and SEUK, 2025). Robust economic evaluations of the associated impacts remain limited. However, widespread or long-lasting shortfalls of supply at Great Britain level inevitably have large impacts across many sectors and impacts could vary significantly based on location.

Assessment of future magnitude of risk

Extreme weather and other climate hazards (e.g., flooding) will increase in frequency and magnitude in the future. However, evidence quantifying the magnitude of impacts to UK electricity generation, particularly assets, remains limited. Across hazards, asset owners report new plants have climate risk built into asset design, while climate risks to existing plants are mitigated by site managers through site-level policies (EUK, RUK, and SEUK, 2025). The future decarbonised power system will be more weather dependent (NESO, 2025a). Studies assessing changes to wind generation highlight the importance of spatial diversity to security of supply (Abdelaziz et al., 2024; Bloomfield, 2025). Further studies indicate potential reductions in hydropower output but find the magnitude of these changes is tightly linked to abstraction (Golgojan et al., 2024; Dallison and Patil, 2023). One estimate puts the overall national increase in water demand for the power sector in the order of 1,000 ML per day (Water Resources East, 2023). Though future water abstraction needs for electricity generation remain uncertain, the sector is “potentially very sensitive to reduction” as even small reductions could prevent plants from operating (Water Resources East, 2023, p.30). Increased temperatures will also reduce solar PV efficiency, becoming more important as the fleet of solar generation grows, but this can be counter-balanced by reductions in cloud cover, highlighting the uncertainty around future changes to production (Belcher et al., 2023; EUK, RUK, and SEUK, 2025; Kuriakose et al., 2025). In the progression towards 2080, as a result of changes to the weather-sensitivity of the system, models indicate an increase in the duration and severity of the most extreme stress events (Bloomfield, 2025), demonstrating the need for adequate flexible supply and storage to complement weather dependent renewables (Lücke et al., 2024; NESO, 2025a). The magnitude of these events is influenced by a variety of factors including spatial diversity and composition of generation, interconnection with neighbouring countries, and asset damage (Sanchez et al., 2023; Lücke et al., 2024; Bloomfield, 2025). Increased exposure to any relevant changes in climate can be effectively managed through proper planning of the supply mix, including sufficient long-duration energy storage and low carbon dispatchable power (NESO, 2025a; NESO, 2025c). Although risk to the supply of electricity is recognised in the National Adaptation Programmes for each UK nation (CCC, 2023b; CCC, 2023c; CCC, 2023d; CCC, 2025a), evidence indicates adaptation to address damage to assets is still in its infancy

2030s, central warming scenario:

From an asset perspective, under a 2 °C warming scenario and current levels of adaptation, Sayers et al. (2020) identified increases in the number of power stations exposed to significant risk from flooding. When considering future security of supply, by 2030, renewable generation is expected to grow to 80 to 84% of GB’s power supply (NESO, 2024a) with capacity of renewable generation anticipated to more than double in the UK (CCC, 2025b). Available evidence suggests changes in generation output over this period resulting from climate change are anticipated to be small (Bloomfield, 2025). Bloomfield (2025) also identified that overall, climate change is expected to lead to a small reduction to system-level stress events. Despite the projected system changes, it is anticipated that sufficient dispatchable generation will be present to provide backup in the event of a weather-related reduction in output (NESO, 2025a). Therefore, the magnitude of risk is kept constant between present day and 2030s.

2050s, central and high warming scenarios:

From an asset perspective, growth in existing power station exposure to flooding increases (Sayers et al., 2020). When considering future security of supply, a five-fold increase in renewable generation capacity from the present is anticipated for the UK with the CCC (2025b) estimating 125 GW of offshore wind, 37 GW onshore wind, 106 GW solar PV, 38 GW of low carbon dispatchable capacity, and 35 GW (139 GWh) of battery storage. Demand is also projected to more than double from 279 TWh in 2025 to 692 TWh in 2050. Studies anticipate changes to generation production from climate to be small within the context of inter-annual variability, however less evidence is available to understand changes in relevant extremes (Bloomfield, 2025). Bloomfield (2025) also identified that overall, climate change is expected to lead to a small reduction to system-level stress events. Increased exposure to any relevant changes in climate can be effectively managed through proper planning of the supply mix, including sufficient long-duration energy storage and low carbon dispatchable power (NESO, 2025a; NESO, 2025c).

2080s, central and high warming scenarios:

From an asset perspective, existing power station exposure to flooding increases (Sayers et al., 2020). Research suggests there may be an increase in periods of low solar and wind resources for the UK (Kapica et al., 2024) which are anticipated to be managed through adequate planning for security of supply. Studies anticipate changes from climate to be small within the context of inter-annual variability of wind, however less evidence is available to understand changes in relevant extremes (Kapica et al., 2024; Bloomfield, 2025).

Cascading risks are a particular concern for electricity generation, with electricity generation supply underpinning the entire economy, particularly with further demand growth and decarbonisation of heating and transport. Other interdependencies also include electricity transmission and distribution networks (I3) and fuel supply systems (I4).

Level of preparedness for risk

From an asset perspective, prior overall sector reports have indicated the perspective that near future impacts from climate change will be ‘relatively small’ compared to currently managed operational risks (Energy UK, 2021) and the latest ARP4 report indicated high industry confidence in plans to manage with future climate risks (EUK, RUK, and SEUK, 2025). Further mechanisms such as the Capacity Market also provide a pathway to manage the supply and demand balance (NESO, 2025a). Adaptation plans for electricity generation assets have been provided at a sector level via Energy UK, with coverage expanding to Renewable UK and Solar Energy UK in ARP4, capturing a wider share of the overall market (EUK, RUK, and SEUK, 2025). While these adaptation reports provide a qualitative demonstration of awareness of the risks that face the sector, they lack detailed adaptation strategies with quantitative measures of success beyond the present. This is further evidenced in CCC evaluations for each of the devolved nations for the generation sector which indicate clear gaps in data (CCC, 2023b; CCC, 2023c; CCC 2023d; CCC, 2025a). New electricity generation often requires environmental impact assessments, including climate change resilience assessment (EUK, RUK, and SEUK, 2025). However, existing reporting mechanisms and requirements for individual generators may not align with other adaptation monitoring and evaluation mechanisms (EUK, RUK, and SEUK, 2025).

For security of supply, the process is well established with NESO in GB and SONI in NI performing regular assessments to inform resource adequacy (NESO, 2025a; EirGrid and SONI, 2025). These processes provide a mechanism to continue to assess the implication of changes in climate to the energy sector on a regular basis.

Assessment on the evidence base and evidence gaps

The range of electricity generation technologies included in sector level ARPs is increasing, with ARP3 expanding coverage to include 50 MWe to 100 MWe distributed thermal plants (Energy UK, 2021) and greater than 100 MWe wind turbines and ARP4 expanding in the trade bodies represented (EUK, RUK, and SEUK, 2025). However, the ARP4 report lacks sufficient detail to enable understanding of the climate resilience of individual companies (Ofgem, 2025a) and greater insight into plant level. The growth in offshore wind also places a higher reliance on undersea cables and offshore infrastructure and there is more limited data about historical failures of these assets (Warnock et al., 2019). With a larger share of the generation mix covered by distributed generation, understanding the impacts on smaller scale distributed generation is also currently a gap (Gordon et al., 2021). Efforts to understand the changing effects to security of supply are growing, but there are remaining gaps in understanding the impacts of climate related events beyond those captured in UKCP18 and management of uncertainty (Bloomfield, 2025; Dent et al., 2024). Licence conditions set out requirements for NESO to take on new responsibilities related to resilience and security including understanding of the impacts from extreme weather hazards now and in the future (Ofgem, 2025a). Given the anticipated growth in energy storage, more evidence is needed around the management of systems with a high penetration of storage. Concerted efforts to bridge energy and climate modelling in the UK and around the world are producing substantive collaborations and research, particularly covering the impact of climate on electricity generation (Craig et al., 2022; Energy Systems Integration Group, 2023).

6.2.2.2 England

Current and future magnitude of risk

Most of the climate risk for this sector is GB-wide, and therefore the devolved nations will experience similar current and future drivers of risk; current and future magnitude of risk; and levels of preparedness of risk. In 2023, electricity generation in England came from renewables (42%), nuclear (15%), gas (38%) and other fuels (5%), with wind alone accounting for 22.7% (DESNZ, 2024a). By 2030, it is anticipated that there will be a lower nuclear contribution to electricity generation, compared with 2023, as the Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors approach the end of their operating life (NESO, 2024a). Nuclear assets are highly resilient to the near-term potential effects of climate change, and the Office for Nuclear Regulation continues to follow up on the industry’s commitments to update nuclear safety and security cases, ensuring resilience into the future (ONR, 2024). With the majority of existing thermal power plants located in England, water availability is an important consideration as temperatures increase (Byers et al., 2020). Under a 2 °C warming scenario, Sayers et al. (2020) identified 229 power stations in the 2020s exposed to significant risk from flooding. A 2030s scenario was not provided but is anticipated to show greater risk as the 2050s and 2080s show higher exposure, reaching 410 stations in 2080 for a 4 °C scenario (Sayers et al., 2020). The CCC (2025a) evaluated progress on adaptation of the energy sector in England and found limited progress on delivery and implementation, partial policies and plans for reducing vulnerability of energy assets to extreme weather, and limited policies and plans for system level security of supply.

Evaluation of Urgency Score

The urgency assessment for England is More action needed due to the Medium magnitude and confidence out to the 2030s. The risk magnitude is anticipated to increase to High in the 2050s and 2080s due to the substantial increase in exposure, with Low confidence due to the rapidly changing generation supply mix and lack of quantitative assessments of impact. However regular assessments of the security of supply by NESO suggest that adaptation will contain risk at present levels.

Table 6.9: Urgency scores for I2 Risks to electricity generation for England. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.2.3 Northern Ireland

Current and future magnitude of risk

Most of the climate risk for this sector is similar to that of GB, and therefore NI will experience similar current and future drivers of risk, and current and future magnitude of risk. However, unlike other devolved nations, NI has a separate regulator (Utility Regulator), a separate transmission system operator (SONI) and is part of a different energy market leading to different risk preparedness. In 2023, electricity generation in NI came from renewables (51%), gas (43%), coal (5%) and other fuels (1%) (DESNZ, 2024a). From 2019 to 2023 generation capacity declined from 4.0 GW to 3.3 GW in Northern Ireland, with the biggest reduction a 559 MW decrease in coal fired generation (DESNZ 2024a; Table 5.12). The ARP4 report did not include generation in NI. For energy assets in Northern Ireland, “no monitoring data on asset vulnerability” was available (CCC, 2023b). No large installations for hydropower, or power stations at risk from flooding were identified for NI (CCC, 2023b). When considering the security of supply for NI, SONI 2024/25 Winter Outlook indicated a Loss of Load Expectation of 0.23 hours but also noted “multiple prolonged forced generator outages” from July to September 2024 and three System Alerts due to insufficient dispatchable generation (SONI, 2024). From an asset perspective, Storm Darragh recently caused significant damage at a power station in NI and forced three out of six generators into extended outages (SONI, 2025).

Evaluation of Urgency Score

The urgency assessment for NI is More action needed due to the Medium magnitude and confidence in the current day. While there remains limited evidence specific to Northern Ireland, Energy UK indicated most principles in their ARP4 report could be applied equally to sites in NI. Therefore, the magnitude is kept the same as the other devolved nations.

Table 6.10: Urgency scores for I2 Risks to electricity generation for Northern Ireland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.2.4 Scotland

Current and future magnitude of risk

Most of the climate risk for this sector is GB-wide due to the shared market, and therefore the devolved nations will experience similar current and future drivers of risk, current and future magnitude of risk, and levels of preparedness of risk. In 2023, electricity generation in Scotland came from renewables (70%), nuclear (19%), gas (7%) and other fuels (4%) (DESNZ, 2024a). By 2030, it is anticipated that there will be a lower nuclear contribution to electricity generation, compared with 2023, as the Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors approach the end of their operating life (NESO, 2024a). The largest share was provided by wind, which accounted for 53.4% of Scotland’s generation in 2023 (DESNZ, 2024a). Under a 2 °C warming scenario, Sayers et al. (2020) identified 10 power stations in the 2020s exposed to significant risk from flooding. A 2030s scenario was not provided but anticipated to be increased as 2050s and 2080s show higher exposure reaching 17 in 2080 for a 4 °C scenario (Sayers et al., 2020). CCC (2023b) evaluated progress on adaptation of the energy sector in Scotland and indicated insufficient data on indicators across the range of hazards, and key policy milestones are largely reserved. Also, CCC (2023d) indicated it is unclear the extent to which adaptation is considered in system level security of supply.

Evaluation of Urgency Score

The urgency assessment for Scotland is More action needed due to the Medium magnitude and confidence out to the 2030s. The risk magnitude is anticipated to increase to High in the 2050s and 2080s due to the substantial increase in exposure, with Low confidence due to the rapidly changing generation supply mix and lack of quantitative assessments of impact. However regular assessments of the security of supply by NESO suggest that adaptation will contain risk at present levels.

Table 6.11: Urgency scores for I2 Risks to electricity generation for Scotland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.2.5 Wales

Current and future magnitude of risk

Most of the climate risk for this sector is GB-wide, and therefore the devolved nations will experience similar current and future drivers of risk; current and future magnitude of risk; and levels of preparedness of risk. In 2023, electricity generation in Wales came from gas (59%), renewables (34%), and other fuels (7%). The largest source of renewable generation was wind, which accounted for 22.5% of Wales’s generation in 2023 (DESNZ, 2024a). CCC (2023c) evaluated progress on adaptation of the energy sector in Wales and identified mixed progress on security of supply, highlighting the lack of a detailed risk assessment for electricity generation in the Energy UK (2021) ARP3 Report (which remains the case in the latest ARP4 report (EUK, RUK, and SEUK, 2025)) and variable quality climate resilience plans.

Evaluation of Urgency Score

The urgency assessment for Wales is More action needed due to the Medium magnitude and confidence out to the 2030s. The risk magnitude is anticipated to increase to High in the 2050s and 2080s due to the substantial increase in exposure, with Low confidence due to the rapidly changing generation supply mix and lack of quantitative assessments of impact. However regular assessments of the security of supply by NESO suggest that adaptation will contain risk at present levels.

Table 6.12: Urgency scores for I2 Risks to electricity generation for Wales. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.3 Risks to electricity transmission and distribution systems – I3

This risk covers assets involved in the transmission and distribution of electricity, including overhead lines, underground cables, and substation equipment.

Table 6.13: Urgency scores for I3 Risks to electricity transmission and distribution systems. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.
ID	Risk		Present	2030	2050	2080	Urgency
I3	Risks to electricity transmission and distribution systems	UK	H • • •	H • • •	H • •	H • •	MAN
		England	H • • •	H • • •	H • •	H • •	MAN
		Northern Ireland	H • • •	H • •	H • •	H • •	MAN
		Scotland	H • • •	H • • •	H • •	H • •	MAN
		Wales	H • • •	H • • •	H • •	H • •	MAN

6.2.3.1 Evidence relevant to the entire United Kingdom

Current and future drivers of risk

The electricity network comprises around 500,000 miles of wires and cables across the UK (ENA, 2025c). Transmission systems are operated by NESO in GB and SONI in NI (ENA, 2025c). The transmission network consists of a mix of physical assets to transmit electrical energy from multiple sources of generation across the UK as well as import and export electricity between Norway, mainland Europe and Ireland (National Grid, 2024a). The UK transmission infrastructure carries electricity using approximately 7,000 km of overhead power lines carried by approximately 21,000 pylons and one high voltage subsea cable linking the grid in Scotland with the grid in England. There are over 300 substations where voltage levels are stepped up or down for purposes of transmission (at either 400 kV or 275 kV) before connecting with the ‘grid supply points’ on the distribution networks.

The electricity distribution network is divided into 14 regions with multiple connection points (grid supply points) to the transmission grid. Those 14 regions are managed by 6 Distribution Network Operators (DNOs) with a range of physical assets to step voltage up or down before supplying electricity to end users. The electricity is supplied to end-users at different voltages (132 kV, 66 kV, 33 kV, 11 kV) on the primary network and at less than 1 kV on the secondary (low voltage) network (BEIS, 2022a). The networks consist of transformers (ground or pole mounted) and switchgears in substations, overhead power lines on towers and poles (low voltage), underground cables, link boxes (connecting cables), smart control systems, and tunnels and bridges for carrying cables/lines.

With increasing reliance on renewable energy generation, and increasing electrification of demand, distribution networks will have increased levels of distributed generation and storage technology being connected. Smart control systems will be deployed to support the operational requirements associated with these network changes (e.g., as discussed in Marot et al., 2022). Increasing societal dependence on electricity further emphasises the importance of transmission and distribution network resilience. This is noted in sections on health (H1), built environment (BE9), digital infrastructure (I8), and economy (E1). The magnitude of risk in downstream sectors would be above and beyond what is presented in this section (I3). Both transmission and distribution networks will need to expand to support this transition.

Alongside changing risks from climate, electricity transmission and distribution networks are currently undergoing a significant transformation. NESO (2024c) anticipates 1,000 km of onshore, and 4,500 km of offshore network infrastructure will need to be built by 2030, more than double the total built in the last 10 years. At the distribution level, proactive investment of £37-50 billion is needed by 2050, at least double current annual rates (NIC, 2025). Dependence on electricity networks is also increasing as the CCC (2025b) projects annual electricity demand to more than double from 2023 to 2050. The growth in assets increases exposure to current and future weather hazards. The extent and nature of this transition is long-term and extends beyond the 5-year price control periods that are used to inform current planning and investment decisions (see for example: ENA, 2025d; NESO, 2024c; Ofgem, 2025a; Ofgem, 2025b; Ofgem, 2022c). This indicates the need for long-term building capabilities and regulatory approaches (Ofgem, 2025b).

The types of faults that assets (as described above) experience due to different weather hazards are well documented and have been summarised in Table 6.14.

Table 6.14: Summary of the range of weather hazards that impact transmission and distribution networks. Information taken from Hawker et al. (2024) and ARP4 reporting.

Electricity distribution and transmission operators (along with the Energy Networks Association) have published two rounds of the Adaptation Reporting Power (ARP3 in 2021 and ARP4 in 2024) in the last 5 years. The Energy Networks Association’s overall report for ARP3 identified 15 current risks to the electricity network (ENA, 2021). Of these, five were associated with high temperatures, three with summer drought, four with heavy precipitation and flooding, one with lightning, one with wildfires and one with prolonged growing seasons. Risks and risk scores across the sector are largely unchanged between ARP3 (ENA, 2021) and ARP4 (ENA, 2024a). However, reviews and updates of design standards, along with observations of current impacts, have resulted in some reductions of risk (e.g., drought, transformer impacts from urban heat islands) by Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks (SSEN) Transmission and Distribution (ENA, 2024a).

Substation flooding is identified as the current risk with highest impact overall. The impact of flooding to electrical substations is further outlined in Engineering Technical Report (ETR) 138 which provides an industry standard for substation protection (ENA, 2018). The risks of fluvial, pluvial, and coastal flooding either remain flat or increase from current day to 2100.

Increase in temperature is considered the next highest risk in ARP reporting and is further exacerbated by anticipated increased cooling demand (BE9). Some distribution network operators report the difference between winter (heating) and summer (cooling) demands to have already notably reduced in comparison to historical differences (e.g., as reported by SSEN (2024) in relation to risks of transformer overheating with coincident cooling demand). Therefore, an increase in heat-related risks with coincident cooling demand increases are likely to be observed as early as the 2030s and continue into the future. McGuire et al. (2025) identified underground cables (distribution), connectors, transformers (transmission and distribution), and protection devices as the most vulnerable to extreme heat and heatwaves. Central, southern and eastern parts of England are identified as regions with the greatest potential heat related risks. Evidence from other parts of the world, however, shows that design standards and system operation can mitigate risks associated with extreme temperatures that go beyond the extremes associated with current and future UK climate scenarios (Guddanti et al., 2025).

Distribution network assets are at greater risk from high winds than transmission grid assets as they are at lower height than transmission lines, leading to increased risk from trees and other falling objects (ENA, 2016). Increases in growing season length will increase the risk to distribution network assets, as will increased risk of tree limb failure due to increased risk of disease and/or other environmental stressors (Lyttek et al., 2024). Transmission lines are also designed to withstand higher winds but can still be impacted during windstorms (Wilkinson et al., 2024).

Winds and gales have been demonstrated as the dominant cause of weather induced faults in northern parts of Great Britain (Souto et al., 2024). Despite reporting of significant impact from winds during storm events such as Arwen and Eunice (BEIS, 2022b), ARP3 and ARP4 largely ignore wind and storm hazards in climate risk assessment. This was based on an understanding at the time that the climate change signal in storm strength and wind (gust) speeds contained relatively large uncertainty compared to natural variability (Wallace et al., 2020) and so could not be assessed from a climate change risk perspective. Continued observed impacts from storms and recent research (Manning et al., 2023a) shows this hazard increasing into the future (see State of the Climate chapter for further discussion) Extensive studies have been carried out to estimate the fragility of electricity networks to wind and show that impacts grow as wind speeds increase (Wilkinson et al., 2022). The impacts are further affected by factors such as localised network resilience and compounding effects such as season or wind direction (Donaldson et al., 2023; Manning et al., 2024; Manning et al., 2025).

Some UK electricity demand is met via international generation, relying on connection to electricity systems in Norway, Denmark, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and the Republic of Ireland, which provide 9.3 GW capacity for both import and export of electricity. Typically, and currently, the UK is a net importer of electricity: importing a total of 43.7 TWh (net 33.4 TWh) or 16% of total electricity demand in 2024 (DESNZ, 2025b). This reliance on interconnection means that there is an international dimension to system vulnerability, including simultaneous stress in interconnected countries from weather hazards (Bloomfield, 2025). This has been recognised in the European Union strategy on climate change adaptation, highlighting that “climate change impacts across borders” matter for energy markets and supplies (European Environment Agency, 2025). Although the UK is no longer in the EU, it shares multiple interconnections with the EU and EEA nations. Due to the location of the above ground interconnector assets being along the coast, the primary current risk to interconnectors comes from coastal (sea level rise and storm surge) and river flooding, with risk from high temperature and heatwaves becoming an issue by 2050 (National Grid Ventures, 2024).

Assessment of current magnitude of risk

The assessment of present-day risk is based on reported impact of weather in the ARP reports, and industry documented cost resulting from consumer compensation and the repair of network assets. Specifically, named storms have brought substantial disruption to electricity distribution networks in the UK. In 2021, storm Arwen resulted in a loss of power for over 1 million customers, with approximately 40,000 without power for more than three days (Ofgem, 2022a). In 2022, storms Dudley, Eunice, and Franklin caused loss of power to over 1 million homes (Met Office, 2022a). In 2023, Babet and Ciarán each led to loss of power to over 100,000 customers (Wright et al., 2024). In 2024, storms Darragh and Éowyn led to power losses to approximately 259,000 (Energy Networks Association, 2024b), and approximately 621,000 (Energy Networks Association, 2025a) customers, respectively. Storm Éowyn led to significant power cuts across NI, with loss of power to approximately 285,000 households, requiring 12 days to fully restore power to over 99% of affected households (Northern Ireland Electricity Networks, 2025).

Each storm represents a significant disruption as well as financial expense. In the case of Arwen, DNOs paid nearly £40 million across consumer resilience funds and compensation payments (Ofgem, 2022a), and approved investment across all DNOs in response to this disruption was in the order of £150 million (Ofgem, 2024), with network resilience costs for 2021-22 reported as £133 million (Ofgem, 2022b).

Other extreme weather events besides storms have led to disruption in supply. For example, the heatwave in July 2022 strained distribution networks and led to power cuts across parts of England (Met Office, 2022b). Wildfires are reported as an emerging issue. Despite warming, snow and ice accumulation remain a risk (albeit reducing) to network assets (Wright et al., 2024). Reported impacts from extreme events inform current magnitude of risk, including those from storms despite there being no observed climate change signal in present-day storm intensity (gusts upward of 100 mph; Kendon et al., 2024).

Assessment of future magnitude of risk

2030s, central warming scenario:

Evidence shows the risk is anticipated to increase due to increasing hazard and exposure. Significant building of infrastructure is expected between present day and the 2030s (DESNZ, 2025e). The size of the network (in terms of number of assets) will increase along with reliance on the network with further electrification of heating and transport. The profile of asset vulnerability (i.e. the types and relative proportion of types of vulnerability) is not expected to change significantly, however the increase in network size will lead to increased exposure to hazards. ARP4 reports show an increase in the underlying magnitude scores in some risks from the present day. These increases in score, however, are insufficient to change magnitude band. This gives high confidence that magnitude will remain at least high.

2050s, central and high warming scenarios:

Evidence shows the risk is anticipated to increase due to the increasing hazard and exposure. However, the increase is not sufficient to move into the Very High category. The frequency of high wind, high rainfall and severe storm events is expected to increase (Manning et al., 2023a; 2024) from a 1981-2000 baseline. These studies give insight into changes in wind gust speed for the high warming scenarios that overlap the 2050s and 2080s time periods. Further changes in windstorm intensity, extreme heat, precipitation and extreme cold temperature for different UK regions for the same high warming scenario and time periods are shown in Manning et al. (2023b). Overall, high temperature extremes are expected to increase, cold temperature extremes to decrease, and there will be little change for wind and precipitation extremes.

As the system decarbonises, it is expected that by the 2050s a much greater degree of localised storage, generation and associated control systems will be implemented. These distributed network assets will bring changes to the level of exposure and types of vulnerability to weather that are not yet fully understood, thereby providing uncertainty in assessing risk magnitude.

Based on the changes in hazard intensity and uncertainty in levels of system exposure, there is medium confidence that risk magnitude will be at least high.

2080s, central and high warming scenarios:

Evidence shows the risk is anticipated to increase due to increasing intensity of hazards and increasing level of exposure. However, the increase is not sufficient to move into the Very High category. The uncertainty in the way the transmission and distribution networks develop out to the 2080s lowers the confidence scores given to the risk magnitude. Existing assets will have similar vulnerability as present day but will be affected by aging, changes in network operation and increased weather hazards. The resilience of future assets to weather extremes remains uncertain.

Based on the changes in hazard intensity and uncertainty in levels of system exposure, there is Medium confidence that risk magnitude will be at least high.

Level of preparedness for risk

Network companies have submitted to all four ARP rounds and network operators’ climate resilience strategies are reported to have improved (Ofgem, 2025a). Their Climate Change Adaptation Working Group (established in 2009) enables knowledge exchange and there is improved collaboration across companies on standardising measures of climate resilience and dealing with shared risks. Work is underway to develop climate resilience metrics and indicators initially for the distribution networks, followed by the wider sector (Ofgem, 2025a). However, Ofgem (2025a) indicates challenges remain, including the valuation of resilience measures, uncertainty around climate risks indicated in ARP4, and addressing cascading, compound and interdependent risks. The sector has developed adaptive pathways to support resilience planning.

Current design standards of underground assets, such as cables, used in the transmission system are reported as designed to withstand the more extreme temperature conditions projected in the UK (ENA, 2024a). Further work to review standards which support resilience to future climate is underway (Ofgem, 2025a). Future resilience will further depend on changes in demand, network asset aging, replacement and development, and network management. These dependencies contain significant uncertainty, but this is reflected in the adaptive planning approaches set out in ARP4 reporting. Changes to electricity demand, due to changes in climate, will impact on system loads and ability to compensate for reduced capacity under extremes (see BE9 and Wright et al., 2024). In the price control reporting period RIIO-ET2 from 2021-2026 (Ofgem, 2021) an average transmission asset life expectancy of 45 years is used to allow asset depreciation/replacement cost to be calculated for customer charges. An Ofgem commissioned report (CEPA, 2024) states that asset management can extend the current life expectancy range (of 41-70 years) for ‘traditional’ assets (i.e., cables, transformers and switchgears). Therefore, the assets of today will likely be subject to the climate change hazards of the 2050s and 2080s. Impacts of climate change on aging assets poses additional uncertainty (National Grid, 2024b).

Assessment on the evidence base and evidence gaps

ARP reporting provides a good overview of the risks and adaptation actions underway. There is an increased understanding in relation to expected increases in storm and wind intensity, however more research is required to understand why some storms are responsible for larger power outages than others, and how this may change in the future (Wilkinson et al., 2024). More research is also needed on thresholds of vulnerability for individual assets, particularly when it comes to temperature, to inform wider system resilience.

There is a disparity in the level of evidence across hazards. For flooding and windstorms, there are observational records from recent extreme weather events and research on increasing severity and frequency of these events and associated impacts. Current observations of failures and their association to extreme temperatures is limited, as is understanding of specific asset-type and wider system risks, when considering new assets related to grid decarbonisation (e.g., battery storage) and changing load profiles (McGuire et al., 2025). Greater clarity is needed on the role climate change should have on current and future design standards of assets. This should be informed by expected life of assets.

Evidence on the risks and adaptation planning for Northern Ireland was limited in comparison to other UK nations as the network operators are not subject to the same adaptation reporting power as those operating in Great Britain. Ofgem require submission of climate resilience strategies for electricity transmission and distribution companies but lack a clear metric to quantify resilience (Ofgem, 2025a). This is being developed as part of Ofgem’s framework for electricity distribution price control for the period of 2028 to 2033 (RIIO-ED3), and ongoing work of the ENA’s Climate Change Resilience Working Group (CCRWG). NESO also plays a strategic role in ensuring the network is designed to maintain security of supply with future climate in mind, but given the nascency of the organisation, limited information is available as to the consideration of resilience in Strategic Spatial Energy Plans (CCC, 2025b).

6.2.3.2 England

Current and future magnitude of risk

The high voltage transmission network for England and Wales includes 4,500 miles of high voltage lines and underground cables and is owned and maintained by National Grid Electricity Transmission (National Grid Electricity Transmission, 2024). There are five major DNOs in England: SP-ENWL, NGED, NPG, SSEN and UKPN (ENA, 2025b), each of which filed ARP3 and ARP4 reports. As many of these companies cover multiple devolved nations, most of the climate risk for this sector is not differentiated between nations in these reports.

There are some noted differences in projected changes of extreme (hazardous) weather for the distribution network regions covering England (Manning et al., 2023b). Northwest England is projected to experience more intense windstorm events by 2060-2080, with minor, or no changes elsewhere in England. While an increase in high temperatures during hot spells will be widespread, the increase in frequency is greatest in the Southeast of England. The risk of flooding is anticipated to grow across all of England as wet spells will become wetter. The risk of ice accumulation will reduce as cold spells become milder across all of England.

Evaluation of urgency score

The overall urgency score for England is given as More action needed. In all time periods and scenarios of warming, the magnitude of climate risk is High. Confidence for present day is based on observed recent-past weather impacts and so is High; confidence remains High for the 2030s near future. For 2050s and 2080s, both projected changes in weather extremes and changes to transmission and distribution networks reduce confidence in the magnitude scoring to Medium.

Table 6.15: Urgency scores for I3 Risks to electricity transmission and distribution systems for England. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.3.3 Northern Ireland

Current and future magnitude of risk

The high voltage transmission network for Northern Ireland includes 1,500 km of high voltage (275 kV and 110 kV) lines and the distribution network includes 45,000 km of lower voltage (33 kV and lower) lines (NIE Networks Ltd, 2015). Both are owned and maintained by Northern Ireland Electricity Networks, who also operate the distribution network. The transmission network, however, is operated by an independent transmission system operator, SONI, who also plans the future design of the power system and markets (SONI, 2026). Land connections to the Republic of Ireland transmission network leads to strong coordination with EirGrid (the Republic of Ireland’s transmission system operator).

Regionally projected changes of extreme (hazardous) weather (Manning et al., 2023b) show no significant change to windstorm intensity and corresponding impact. An increase in high temperatures during hot spells and an increase in wetter weather by 2060-2080 are both deemed significant to network risks. As with all nations, cold weather will be less severe.

Evaluation of urgency score

The overall urgency score for Northern Ireland is More action needed. In all time periods and scenarios of warming, the magnitude of climate risk is High. Confidence for present day is based on observed recent-past weather impacts and so is High. As network operators in Northern Ireland are not subject to the same reporting as those in Great Britain, there is less evidence for future time periods, so confidence scores are Medium for 2030s, 2050s and 2080s.

Table 6.16: Urgency scores for I3 Risks to electricity transmission and distribution systems for Northern Ireland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.3.4 Scotland

Current and future magnitude of risk

The high voltage transmission network for Scotland includes 10,000 km of overhead lines and undersea and underground cables which are owned and maintained by SP Energy Networks Transmission (SP Energy Networks, 2025) and Scottish Hydro Electric Transmission (Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks – Transmission, 2016). There are two DNOs in Scotland: SSEN and SPEN (Energy Networks Association, 2025b), and both filed ARP3 and ARP4 reports. As both companies cover multiple devolved nations, most of the climate risk for this sector is not differentiated between nations in these reports.

Considering projected changes in extreme weather for Scotland (Manning et al., 2023b): windstorm intensity increases for extreme storms; extreme wet spells become more frequent; and maximum temperature during hot spells will increase. As for all the UK, cold spells will become warmer and less severe.

Evaluation of urgency score

The overall urgency score for Scotland is More action needed. In all time periods and scenarios of warming, the magnitude of climate risk is High. Confidence for present day is based on observed recent-past weather impacts and so is High; confidence remains High for the 2030s near future. For 2050s and 2080s, both projected changes in weather extremes and changes to transmission and distribution networks reduce confidence in the magnitude scoring to Medium.

Table 6.17: Urgency scores for I3 Risks to electricity transmission and distribution systems for Scotland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.3.5 Wales

Current and future magnitude of risk

The high voltage transmission network for England and Wales includes 4,500 miles of high voltage lines and underground cables is owned and maintained by National Grid Electricity Transmission (National Grid Electricity Transmission, 2024). There are two DNOs in Wales: NGED and SPEN (Energy Networks Association, 2025b) and both filed ARP3 and ARP4 reports. As both companies cover multiple devolved nations, most of the climate risk for this sector is not differentiated between nations in these reports. A minor increase in windstorm intensity is projected for North Wales with increases in South Wales, along with warmer and much more frequent hot spells, and more intense wet spells (Manning et al., 2023b). As with all places in the UK, cold spells will become warmer and less severe.

Evaluation of urgency score

The overall urgency score for Wales is More action needed. In all time periods and scenarios of warming, the magnitude of climate risk is High. Confidence for present day is based on observed recent-past weather impacts and so is High; confidence remains High for the 2030s near future. For 2050s and 2080s, both projected changes in weather extremes and changes to transmission and distribution networks reduce confidence in the magnitude scoring to Medium.

Table 6.18: Urgency scores for I3 Risks to electricity transmission and distribution systems for Wales. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.4 Risks to fuel supply systems – I4

This risk considers the UK’s entire liquid and gaseous fuel supply chain, spanning offshore production, import terminals, transmission and distribution networks, storage sites and emerging low-carbon fuels such as hydrogen and biofuels.

Table 6.19: Urgency scores for I4 Risks to fuel supply systems. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.
ID	Risk		Present	2030	2050	2080	Urgency
I4	Risks to fuel supply systems	UK	H •	H •	H •	H •	CI
		England	H • •	H • •	H •	H •	CI
		Northern Ireland	H •	H •	H •	H •	CI
		Scotland	H • •	H • •	H •	H •	CI
		Wales	H • •	H • •	H •	H •	CI

6.2.4.1 Evidence relevant to the entire United Kingdom

Current and future drivers of risk

The UK’s fuel-supply system is complex, including: offshore North Sea oil and gas fields; coastal terminals; oil refineries; gas-processing plants; pilot hydrogen production hubs; steel pipelines; local gas-pipe network; road and rail tankers; and, biofuel and biomass sector import terminals, blending facilities and pellet trains supplying generators. As the UK decarbonises, the composition of UK fuel-supply system will evolve, with the reduction of fossil fuel infrastructure and increase of renewable fuel infrastructure. The exact composition of future fuel supply system remains uncertain; however, National Gas (2024) in their ARP4 report assumed the size and scale of the transmission network remains the same to the end of the century, as it is independent of the gas that is transported (methane today or the emerging hydrogen economy alongside carbon dioxide in the future). With no major hydrogen transportation pipelines in operation in GB, NESO (2024a) expects limited hydrogen infrastructure by 2030. In 2030, most gas generation is anticipated to remain on the system to maintain security of supply (NESO, 2024a), but unabated gas generation will increasingly need to be replaced by gas with CCUS (Carbon Capture Usage and Storage) or hydrogen-fired turbines. The CCC Seventh Carbon Budget Balanced Pathway phases out unabated gas capacity by 2050 (CCC, 2025b).

A summary of the main climate risks to fuel supply infrastructure is provided in Table 6.20. On hot days, refineries and gas plants struggle to cool, and clay soils heave and shrink which bends or cracks buried pipelines; wildfire is a risk to exposed assets. Cold snaps can reduce equipment capacity. Coastal floods can impact refineries, LNG, oil terminals, and halt tanker berths, while inland floods can inundate depots and scour pipelines. Strong winds can damage above ground assets, uproot trees and damage buildings. Storms also contribute to lightning strikes and storm surges. Additionally, increases in magnitude of dry-wet cycles in future (Huang et al., 2023) could increase the rate of strength deterioration in strain softening clay material, potentially causing damage to buried fuel supply assets (Postill et al., 2023).

Table 6.20: Climate Hazard impacts to fuel supply infrastructure. All statements are informed by ARP4 reports unless otherwise indicated.

Change in vulnerability is mainly driven by replacement of old assets, especially gas pipelines. The Iron Mains Risk-Reduction / Replacement Programme (IMRRP) (Health and Safety Executives, 2025) will remove cast- or ductile-iron gas mains within 30 m of a building by 2032 and re-lay it in weld-free polyethylene or modern steel to reduce the explosion risk from pipe fracture and corrosion. This will reduce the vulnerability of gas pipelines. While proposed as a safety measure, ARP reports consider this a climate resilience measure too as polyethylene is flexible and corrosion-proof, so it tolerates shrink-swell clay, landslip and flood scour better than brittle iron, reducing the likelihood of leak or rupture during extreme wet-dry cycles. Pipeline diversions have also been mentioned by Gas Distribution Networks (GDNs) in ARP reports (Cadent Gas, 2024; NGN, 2024) to provide long-term resilience to pipelines vulnerable to flooding.

Under the CCC’s Balanced Pathway in which overall economy-wide oil and gas demand reduces by 65% from 2025 to 2040, while hydrogen, Carbon Capture, Usage, and Storage (CCUS) and widespread electrification increase. This reduces exposure of some legacy assets such as oil refineries, and iron gas mains as there will be a reduced role of them in the energy system because of decommissioning. However, it also creates fresh hotspots, notably large, coastal hydrogen/CCUS complexes and new pressurised-gas corridors, where multiple climate hazards co-exist. Specifically:

• Coastal concentration of new assets: Government-backed industrial-cluster plans site hydrogen and carbon-capture hubs at the Humber, Teesside, Merseyside, north-east Scotland and south Wales to tap existing ports and pipelines. Environment Agency “environmental-capacity” studies warn that these estuarine zones carry some of the UK’s highest fluvial, tidal-surge and sea-level-rise risks, plus potential cooling-water and electrolysis-water shortages (Environment Agency, 2022, 2023a, 2024).
• New pipeline corridors: Projects such as East Coast Hydrogen, Project Union and the Humber Hydrogen Pipeline envisage hundreds of kilometres of high-pressure hydrogen and carbon dioxide lines by the early-2030s. These lines traverse river crossings and shrink–swell clay belts, so will need to be designed to be resilient to flood- and ground-movement hazards familiar from today’s gas grid.
• Closure or conversion of refineries: Petroineos ceased crude processing at Grangemouth in April 2025, removing 13% of UK refining capacity (S&P Global, 2025). Such retirements reduce the number of flood-exposed liquid fuel sites. For imported products, coastal terminals remain at risk of storm surge threat.

New infrastructure should be built with climate resilient design to mitigate climate risks.

Assessment of current magnitude of risk

This risk includes major fuel types – oil, natural gas, hydrogen, and biofuels – and assesses climate risks across the entire fuel supply chain, although the amount of evidence varies across sectors. Existing evidence suggests that the biggest risks are precipitation and temperature related. Most evidence comes from gas sector ARP4 reports that utilised matrix-based risk assessment approach from the Energy Network Association (ENA) (Cadent Gas, 2024; ENA, 2021; NGN, 2024; SGN, 2024; WWU, 2024). In ARP4:

• Northern Gas Networks (NGN) identified 34 risks, 7 of which were rated medium, which can be summarised into threats from flooding, erosion, ground movement, and snow and ice. National Gas reported 28 risks, with 9 classified as medium or high. In particular, “above ground assets affected by raised temperatures” and “risk to underground pipes from river erosion” was rated high. Increased temperature may reduce asset performance, and when coupled with increased demand for gas driven electrical generation for air conditioning may pose challenges to asset operation. Erosion may make pipelines unsupported therefore susceptible to physical damages.
• Wales & West Utilities (WWU) identified 109 risks, of which 53 are rated medium or high, which mainly fall into precipitation or temperature related hazards.
• Cadent Gas reported 10 medium risks out of 22 total risk categories, mainly attributed to flood and river erosion.
• National Grid Ventures (2024) assessed fluvial and coastal flood risks to Grain LNG as high.

While NGN and Cadent report more modest risk in ARP4 as compared to the third round of ARP reports (2021) citing successful adaptation, the evidence base remains largely qualitative. The medium/high scoring used in the ARP reports is not comparable with medium and high scoring used in this report. However, combining all the medium to high risks from ARP reports justifies annual economic loss of hundreds of millions of pounds.

Since 2024, the COMAH (Control of Major Accident Hazards) has required climate-related risk assessment (CDIOF, 2024) to control Natural Hazards Triggering Technological Disasters (NaTech). However, there are no publicly available climate risk assessments for crude-oil, refined-product or multi-product pipelines, and import terminals. Nonetheless, the physical hazard set, exposure profile and vulnerability mechanisms closely mirror those documented for the gas grid in ARP4 with the exception that road (I5) and rail transport (I6) play a more significant role in transporting liquid fuels. Product pipelines share comparable burial depths, materials and river-crossing routes with gas pipes, meaning ground-movement, scour and flood hazards are likely to affect them in similar ways. Exposure, too, is shared: oil and gas assets cluster in low-lying coastal zones such as the Humber, Teesside and Milford Haven, where sea-level rise and storm surge could cause significant impacts although there is a lack of a detailed published information about how critical assets are exposed or protected. In addition, any weather-related disruption to road and rail transport is likely to affect fuel supply too but there is little evidence to quantify the risk from such dependency. Given these parallels in hazard, exposure and vulnerability, the additional risk from dependency on road/rail transport, and uncertainties about individual asset exposures, risk is still considered High.

Similarly, there are no publicly available climate risk assessments for North Sea oil and gas facilities. In the last five years, several winter storms have impacted offshore installations. For example, Storm Éowyn forced another shutdown of the Triton floating production, storage and offloading vessel in January 2025 (Offshore-Energy, 2025). These minor events support retaining the overall High risk rating.

Present-day hydrogen assets are still limited to pilot electrolysers and first-wave coastal schemes such as Net Zero Teeside, HyNet North-West and East Coast Hydrogen. Many are located in low-lying estuaries where tidal surge, river flooding and water-supply stress coincide (Environment Agency, 2022, 2023a, 2024). With few sites but high per-asset vulnerability and strong interdependence on electricity and cooling water, existing evidence reinforces the high residual risk scoring.

For biofuels and biomass, supply is imported from a handful of east-coast ports, most notably Immingham. Associated British Ports’ adaptation report (APA, 2021) keeps coastal-flood and storm-delay risks in the medium band, which again reinforces an overall high risk for the whole fuel supply infrastructure.

It must be noted that existing evidence focuses on risk to infrastructure assets or individual points of the whole fuel supply system. It is likely that such risk could cascade into system-wide failures, such as widespread loss of home heating that impacts public health, which also depends on factors such as fuel storage or alternative routes of fuel transportation. However, there is little evidence (e.g., major incidents in the past or detailed published analysis) to suggest that such risk is substantial enough to change the overall risk rating.

Assessment of future magnitude of risk

Extreme weather events such as heavy rainfall and hotter temperatures and heatwaves will increase with frequency and magnitude into the future (State of the Climate chapter). Periods of drought followed by heavy rainfall are also projected to be more frequent and greater in magnitude as climatic change intensifies. The impacts of coastal flooding and storm surges are likely to be greater as sea level rises. Soil moisture changes can create ground movement and pipe damage. Reppas et al. (2025) identify this as an increasing risk by 2080 using the RCP8.5 high-emissions scenario, driven primarily by declining summer soil moisture and intensified shrink-swell cycles in expansive clay.

As the UK decarbonises, the energy supply landscape will evolve. Reliance on oil and gas is expected to significantly reduce, with growth in new low-carbon fuels and supporting infrastructure. Some existing infrastructure is likely to be decommissioned (such as gas distribution networks where heating is electrified), with other infrastructure being retained or repurposed; for example, 83% of the network in Great Britian is considered suitable for hydrogen (ARUP, 2023). Similarly, a French study (CRE, 2023) suggests that only a small percentage of existing assets (up to 7% of pipelines and half of compressor stations) will be decommissioned due to decarbonisation. However, some new infrastructure will also be needed, for instance for CCUS as well as hydrogen. Where new infrastructure is built, there is an opportunity to build resilience in from the outset.

2030s, central warming scenario:

The ARP reports indicate that the changes to risk are likely to be incremental. There is unlikely to be a step-change in either climate forcing or the energy generation in the near future. Thus, while there may be some changes to infrastructure, and some intensification of climate change impacts, they are likely to be in range of present-day impacts, leading to a score of High magnitude, with Medium confidence.

2050s, central and high warming scenarios:

ARP4 reports assess climate risk for a RCP8.5 high warming scenario for the 2050s. Two GDNs and National Gas indicate climate risk will increase, while there are no comparisons for the other GDNs. In ARP4, National Gas report a greater number of high risks; flooding and sea level rise become high risks. Wales and West Utilities (2024) reported 16 high risks in comparison with 6 for current days. Northern Gas Networks also increased their scores across most of their risk categories. Oil consumption is projected to reduce by 84% from 2025 levels by 2050, while total gas consumption is projected to reduce by 77% from 2025 levels by 2050 (CCC, 2025b). Future decommissioning of oil and gas infrastructure should reduce the exposure of this fuel supply infrastructure. The introduction of new infrastructure for low-carbon fuels including hydrogen and synthetic fuels will introduce new exposure, but using climate risk assessments for developments should mitigate risks. Considering evidence, risk magnitude is likely to stay in the High magnitude banding, but confidence reduces to Low given uncertainties associated with changing energy infrastructure.

2080s, central and high warming scenarios:

Climate projections indicate that the main climate hazards will intensify in 2080s (Wallace et al., 2020). The development of hydrogen and biofuel infrastructure is expected to have happened by 2080, given the UK’s statutory commitment to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 (CCC, 2025b). How this changes the exposure and vulnerability of fuel supply infrastructure to climate risk remains uncertain. ARP4 reports from three GDNs and National Gas have assessed the climate risk for 2100, which provides a basis for assessing the risk for 2080s, and indicate an increased risk as compared to 2050s but with lower confidence. Balancing all evidence, the risk remains High and confidence is Low.

Level of preparedness for risk

ARP4 reports from GDNs provide some evidence about the effectiveness of climate adaption. Notably, Northern Gas, Cadent Gas, and Wales and West Utilities (2024) report an overall reduction of risks in APR4 as compared to ARP3, because of adaptation. Reported adaptation measures include flood risk assessment, proactive pipeline checks, replacing pipe mains with polyethylene pipes, implementing mitigation measures such as flood defences. Some of the actions, such as pipeline replacement, are not driven by climate resilience but are effective for reducing climate risk. However, quantitative evidence for the benefits of climate adaptation is lacking and better monitoring and evaluation is needed. Ofgem provided further requirements for climate resilience strategies for gas distribution and transmission companies as part of RIIO-3 (Ofgem, 2024; Ofgem, 2025a), but data availability is still lacking (CCC, 2025a). The transition to low-carbon fuels and associated new infrastructure is an opportunity to increase climate resilience via climate resilient design.

Assessment on the evidence base and evidence gaps

Most evidence comes from ARP4 reports from GDNs and National Gas and their main conclusions are supported by a small number of independent studies. There are no ARP reports for Northern Ireland GDNs. While the drivers of climate risks are well-known, there are very few independent studies that translate climate hazards into climate risk quantitatively by integrating vulnerability and exposure. And evidence about how risks from the fuel supply sector translates into systematic risk is also lacking. A main barrier for such studies is the lack of data concerning asset locations and conditions; these may be unavailable due to their sensitive nature and can also be incomplete or missing. Initiatives to address this include the National Underground Asset Register (NUAR) which provides access to buried utility asset data and has the potential to support climate resilience use cases (UK Government, 2025). The National Infrastructure Spatial Tool (HM Treasury, 2025a) aims to bring strategies, data and tools in a single platform to consider opportunities and constraints including flood risk for infrastructure. As part of a DSIT programme, Matthews et al. (2025) provided recommendations to support data sharing. For low carbon energy infrastructure including hydrogen and CCUS facilities, resilience is acknowledged in regulatory frameworks (DESNZ, 2025a; DESNZ, 2025b), technical codes considering climate change impacts are still emerging.

6.2.4.2 England

Current and future magnitude of risk

There are major oil, gas, hydrogen and biofuel facilities in England, especially in coastal regions such as the Humber estuary. The ARP4 high risks include flooding, erosion, and high temperature. Presently, there are an estimated 1,300 gas infrastructure assets at risk of flooding; this is to increase to 1,400 in the 2040-2060 period (Environment Agency, 2025). The more prevalent clay-rich soils and smaller-diameter distribution mains located within southeast England make this region likely to face greatest risk from pipeline damages due to drought (Reppas et al., 2025).

Evaluation of urgency score

A review of the ARP reports and other evidence outlined in this section indicates the magnitude of current risk to be High. Confidence is Medium; although evidence is in agreement, there is not a robust and quantitative methodology to consider vulnerability and exposure, and independent risks assessment are limited in quantity and scope. For the 2030s, the climate risks are expected to be similar to present day. There will be new infrastructure, e.g., for the Humber Hydrogen Pipeline, or for CCUS which will change exposure and create new hotspots (Humber, Teesside, Merseyside) in areas of fluvial, tidal-surge and sea-level-rise risk. These near-term changes will not change the magnitude of risk from High (Medium confidence). For future time periods, there is increased uncertainty around the impact of climate hazards on the changing energy landscape. New infrastructure should be built with climate resilient design that mitigates risk, but the magnitude and frequency of climate hazards is expected to increase. All things considered, the magnitude of risk is expected to remain within the High banding for 2050s and 2080s, but with Low confidence, as the assessment is made using expert judgment and limited information for different scenarios from ARP reports. ARP reports do include credible adaptation plans, including adaptation measures in recent years, from which they report an associated reduction in risk. This is largely qualitative, and there are no dedicated climate risk assessments for crude-oil, refined-product or multi-product pipelines, nor for import terminals. As such, the risk magnitude after considering adaptation remains High.

Table 6.21: Urgency scores for I4 Risks to fuel supply systems for England. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.4.3 Northern Ireland

Current and future magnitude of risk

Gas pipeline infrastructure was built from the 1990s onwards (DETINI, 2008), and is newer and less extensive than for other devolved nations. There are no oil refineries. In the NI Fourth Carbon Budget (CCC, 2025c), natural gas is a transitional power source that will be phased out or paired with CCUS, with a small strategic supply of unabated gas. Hydrogen provides a solution for low-carbon electricity generation and specific sectors like chemicals, but not for heating buildings. Such transitions will change the exposure of the fuel supply sector, but developments of hydrogen and CCUS facilities should include climate adaptation within their design, mitigating risk. There are no ARP reports from NI.

Evaluation of urgency score

Climate hazards documented in ARP reports from GB will also impact infrastructure in NI, and thus expert judgment considers the Risk magnitude to be High for present day, as per other UK nations (Sections 6.2.4.2, 6.2.4.4, 6.2.4.5). Confidence is Low given limited evidence. For near future, the magnitude of climate hazards and energy generation landscape is unlikely to change, thus risk remains High, with Low confidence. For the 2050s and 2080s, climate hazards are expected to intensify. Exposure of the network may change if CCUS infrastructure is introduced, but there is no strategy for this at present. Assuming a similar energy generation landscape in the future, and an intensification of hazards, risk may increase, but expert judgment considers this to remain in the High magnitude banding. There is no evidence of adaptation actions for NI, so risk magnitude is not reduced.

Table 6.22: Urgency scores for I4 Risks to fuel supply systems for Northern Ireland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.4.4 Scotland

Current and future magnitude of risk

There are major oil, gas, hydrogen and biofuel facilities in Scotland in coastal places like St Fergus and Grangemouth. The ARP4 high risks; flooding, erosion, high temperature are relevant for Scotland. The 7th Carbon Budget (CCC, 2025d) proposes reducing oil and gas and further developing of plans to develop CCUS and hydrogen in the Scottish Cluster. This changes exposure; new estuarine infrastructure faces fluvial, tidal-surge and sea-level-rise risks, but climate resilient design would mitigate risks. Other industry is being retired, such as Petroineos ceasing crude processing at Grangemouth in April 2025.

Evaluation of urgency score

Reviewing the ARP reports and other evidence outlined in this chapter indicates the magnitude of current risk to be High. Confidence is Medium; although evidence is in agreement, there is not a robust and quantitative methodology to consider vulnerability and exposure, and independent risks assessment are limited in quantity and scope. For the 2030s, the climate risks are expected to be similar to present day. There will be new infrastructure (e.g., for CCUS) and other infrastructure may retire, which will change exposure. These near-term changes will not change the magnitude of risk from High (Medium confidence). For future time periods, there is increased uncertainty around the impact of climate hazards on the changing energy landscape. New infrastructure should be built with climate resilient design that mitigates risk, but the magnitude and frequency of climate hazards is expected to increase. All things considered, the magnitude of risk is expected to remain within the High banding for 2050s and 2080s, but with Low confidence, as the assessment is made using expert judgment given limited information on different climate scenarios. ARP reports do include credible adaptation plans, including adaptation measures in recent years, from which they report an associated reduction in risk. This is largely qualitative, and there are no dedicated climate risk assessments for crude-oil, refined-product or multi-product pipelines, nor for import terminals. As such, the risk magnitude after considering adaptation remains High.

Table 6.23: Urgency scores for I4 Risks to fuel supply systems for Scotland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.4.5 Wales

Current and future magnitude of risk

There are major oil, gas, hydrogen and biofuel facilities in Wales such as Milford Haven. The ARP4 reports (for National Gas and Wales & West Utilities) cite high risks of flooding, erosion, and high temperature are relevant for Wales.

Evaluation of urgency score

Reviewing the ARP reports and other evidence outlined in this chapter indicates the magnitude of current risk to be High. Confidence is Medium; although evidence is in agreement, there is not a robust and quantitative methodology to consider vulnerability and exposure, and independent risks assessment are limited in quantity and scope. For the 2030s, the climate risks are expected to be similar to present day, and there are unlikely to be major changes to fuel supply infrastructure. Hence the magnitude of risk will remain in the High banding (Medium confidence). For future time periods, there is increased uncertainty around the impact of climate hazards on the changing energy landscape. New infrastructure (e.g., for CCUS or biofuel facilities) should be built with climate resilient design that mitigates risk, but the magnitude and frequency of climate hazards is expected to increase. All things considered, the magnitude of risk is expected to remain within the High banding for 2050s and 2080s, but with Low confidence, as the assessment is made using expert judgment and limited information for different scenarios from ARP reports. ARP reports do include credible adaptation plans, including adaptation measures in recent years, from which they report an associated reduction in risk. This is largely qualitative, thus the risk magnitude after considering adaptation remains High.

Table 6.24: Urgency scores for I4 Risks to fuel supply systems for Wales. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.5 Risks to road transport systems – I5

This risk covers: the strategic road network in England administered by National Highways; the motorway and trunk road network in Scotland managed by Transport Scotland; the motorway and trunk road network in Wales managed by the North and Mid Wales Trunk Road Agent and South Wales Trunk Road Agent; local roads in England, Scotland and Wales which are the responsibility of local authorities; strategic roads and local roads managed by Department for Infrastructure Roads in Northern Ireland;  and some off-road paths, tracks and trails owned by local authorities or private landowners.

Table 6.25: Urgency scores for I5 Risks to road transport systems. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.
ID	Risk		Present	2030	2050	2080	Urgency
I5	Risks to road transport systems	UK	H • •	H • •	H •	VH •	CI
		England	H • •	H • •	H •	VH •	CI
		Northern Ireland	H • •	H • •	H •	VH •	CI
		Scotland	H • •	H • •	H •	VH •	CI
		Wales	H • •	H • •	H •	VH •	CI

6.2.5.1 Evidence relevant to the entire United Kingdom

Current and future drivers of risk

Climate hazards can damage and destroy road infrastructure (e.g., in Cumbria multiple bridges were damaged and two were destroyed by Storm Desmond in December 2015 (Pitcher, 2015)), disrupt travel and the distribution of goods, and reduce road safety. Flooding is particularly impactful and the percentage of the road network in areas at risk of flooding could increase from 38% to 46% by 2050 (e.g., Environment Agency, 2024); fluvial and pluvial flooding present increasing risk to pavements, ancillary infrastructure, and road users. Flash flooding, especially from convective storms with high rainfall intensity, is a growing risk (e.g., Valencia, Spain in 2024). Bridges and other structures are at risk of damage from scour and floating debris during high river flows (Maroni et al., 2021, 2023). Many such structures remain unassessed for flood risk, particularly on secondary routes (RAC Foundation, 2023). Moreover, climate projections indicate increased variability with more heatwaves and dry periods interspersed with very heavy rainfall episodes in summer (Kendon et al., 2023). This will raise the frequency and severity of landslides and debris flows on natural slopes (Tichavský et al., 2019; Winter and Waaser, 2024a, b; Winter et al., 2024), and increase the instability of engineered slopes, particularly older earthworks and embankments (Klaver et al., 2024; Rouainia et al., 2020; Wilks, 2015). Drier summers and wetter winters will increase the risk of damage to road pavements and ancillary assets as a result of shrinking and swelling of clay-rich soils affecting south-east of England in particular. Coastal erosion exacerbated by sea level rise and more powerful storms will increasingly threaten key road infrastructure, particularly in vulnerable locations (Hansom et al., 2017).

Temperature induced stresses, strains, and displacements are accelerating wear on bridges and other structures. Extreme heat events are expected to become more frequent, increasing road maintenance and repair costs due to road surface deformation (Mulholland and Feyen, 2021), but new temperature-resistant pavement materials are being adopted. (See sections 6.2.5.2 and 6.2.5.4) . Wildfire is an emerging risk (e.g., Argyll and Bute, 2024) which can damage road assets, reduce visibility (de Abreu et al., 2022; Doubleday et al., 2021), destabilise slopes, and contribute to flash flooding events (Farid et al., 2024). Wind speeds are likely to exceed operational limits for highways and bridges more frequently (National Highways, 2024). Lastly, extreme weather events occurring in close succession (e.g., storms Dudley, Eunice and Franklin in Feb 2022) are more likely under future climate scenarios. Successive events compound risk for already-damaged infrastructure can fail further, with potentially larger secondary or tertiary impacts (Gösling et al., 2023).

The vulnerability of infrastructure depends on the design standards that were in use at the time of construction. Many older assets were not designed for current or future climates. Vulnerability is also exacerbated by asset condition. The condition of local roads is generally poorer than strategic or major roads (CCC, 2025a, DfT 2024). Flooding, water ingress, and high temperatures were associated with a record number of potholes in the UK in 2023 (Taylor, 2024). A lack of real-time information on network impacts (particularly to key routes) can hamper resilience to extreme events (Deeming and Lamb, 2024).

Rates of walking and cycling decline during periods of adverse weather (Gösling et al., 2023), and projected increases in adverse weather events will place reliance on other modes. Adverse weather conditions (Bärwolff and Gerike, 2024; Vita et al., 2020), flooding and poor road surface conditions, including potholes (e.g., Cambridge Cycling Campaign, 2023), and grit and loose debris (Lißner et al., 2023) present an increased risk to the safety of pedestrians and cyclists, particularly those with disabilities. New cycling infrastructure is an opportunity for adaptation, particularly reducing flood risk, but unbound and thin bituminous surfaces recommended in some cycling design standards are themselves vulnerable to flood damage (Mallick et al., 2018; National Highways, 2022).

A significant transition in the vehicle fleet to alternative fuel vehicles would change the nature of vulnerabilities to road transport. For example, the widespread adoption of electric vehicles would reduce the reliance on refuelling infrastructure while increasing the reliance on electricity supply – overall the level of risk from electrification is not considered to be materially increased or decreased. Pavement deterioration may be accelerated by heavier axle loads and greater wheel torque, although the risk could be mitigated by battery placement (Gkyrtis, 2025; Hernandez et al, 2025) and future reductions in vehicle and/or battery mass through technological innovation. Autonomous vehicles could make this effect worse by concentrating repeated loads within the road pavement cross-section (Mattinzioli et al., 2023; Fares et al., 2024). Uptake of autonomous vehicles would increase the level of interdependency on digital and communications infrastructure, but digital tools could improve monitoring and maintenance of the road network.

Roads underpin other transport modes (e.g., rail, ports) and services (e.g., energy, water). Disruptions can cascade through national and international supply chains and transport networks (National Highways, 2022). Disruptions to the Strategic Road Network can significantly hamper the effectiveness of Emergency Services (National Highways, 2022).

Assessment of current magnitude of risk

The risk to road transport systems is assessed as High magnitude with Medium confidence across all UK nations. While relevant evidence is increasing, there is still insufficient knowledge of actual impacts to road infrastructure and resulting costs, particularly for local roads, bus services, active and new (electric and autonomous vehicles) mobility assets and infrastructure, thus supporting the Medium confidence rating. Due to the variable nature of extreme weather and exposure, the risk cannot be reliably disaggregated by nation. However, localised per capita impacts can be severe, especially in remote rural areas where alternative routes can involve lengthy detours or do not exist.

Assessment of future magnitude of risk

Extreme weather and other climate hazards (e.g., flooding, landslides, erosion) will increase in frequency and magnitude in the future and the impact of future climate on road infrastructure, without adaptation, it is likely to increase. Existing studies often focus on one time period and climate scenario, and there is very limited evidence related to local roads, active mobility and bus services, the changing mobility landscape, and associated infrastructure (e.g., charging stations).

2030s, central warming scenario:

High magnitude with Medium confidence (central estimate). Any changes to the magnitude of the climate hazards or their impact on the changing mobility landscape are likely to remain within the high magnitude band (£ hundreds of millions). Credible adaptation plans are in place for the strategic road networks in England and Scotland, but the level of adaptation across the sector as a whole is unlikely to reduce magnitude score (expert judgment).

2050s, central and high warming scenarios:

High magnitude (central estimate) increasing to Very High magnitude (high estimate), where economic impacts could reach £billions per annum. Confidence is Low given lack of evidence, particularly for Northern Ireland and Wales. Credible adaptation plans are in place for the strategic road networks in England and Scotland, but the level of adaptation across the sector as a whole is unlikely to reduce magnitude score (expert judgment).

2080s, central and high warming scenarios:

Very High magnitude with Low confidence for Low, Medium and High climate scenarios. The impact of extreme weather and emerging risks such as wildfires could reach £billions per annum without effective adaptation. Confidence is Low given lack of evidence, particularly for Northern Ireland and Wales. Credible adaptation plans are in place for the strategic road networks in England and Scotland, but the level of adaptation across the sector as a whole is unlikely to reduce magnitude score (expert judgment).

Level of preparedness for risk

Current standards for road and bridge construction do not adequately account for future climate extremes, although the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) now includes methods for vulnerability assessment and monitoring of climate risks, and addressing increased risk due to climate change, but this is only mandated for motorways and strategic roads. Change of design standards is a major financial and administrative undertaking with inputs from many stakeholders. Assets in poorer condition and/or not designed for current and future climate with long design lives are a key vulnerability. Future ARPs promise to quantify metrics and targets for adaptation, but this is currently not addressed in ARP and regulator reporting.

The most immediate challenge is to increase the climate resilience of vulnerable legacy infrastructure, whether due to in-built design vulnerabilities or maintenance backlog, which accelerates failure. This can take the form of structural adaptation, nature-based solutions or a combination of the two.  Local roads require an urgent investment, especially in flood-prone areas (CIHT, 2024) but local authorities face chronic underfunding resulting in reactive and short-term responses.

Assessment on the evidence base and evidence gaps

The CCC highlights significant evidence gaps that constrain effective policy development and implementation (CCC, 2025a). Key limitations include: insufficient data on the condition of local and unadopted roads; a lack of risk assessments or adaptation planning for private roads, active transport, bus services, and new transport modes and associated infrastructure; and a lack of assessment of the condition/suitability of existing infrastructure (bridges, slopes, tunnels), particularly to emerging climate risks like wildfires and the impacts of higher temperature and rainfall on vegetation growth / management and the prevalence of pests and disease. Existing information on the costs and benefits of adaptation measures versus the “do-nothing” scenario is limited and not presented in a format amenable to strategic decision making (NIC, 2023; OBR, 2024a).

6.2.5.2 England

Current and future magnitude of risk

National Highways report increasing pressure on England’s strategic road infrastructure due to extreme weather events, which are projected to become more frequent and severe (National Highways, 2022). Key hazards include: river and surface water flooding affecting major routes, particularly where routing alternatives are limited; extreme temperatures (e.g., 2022 heatwave, particularly Southern England); and wind (e.g., closures of the Humber bridge in 2020 and 2021 following Storm Ciara and subsequent structural repairs). Under a 4 °C global warming scenario by 2100, temperatures, wind speeds and gusts will exceed operational limits more frequently (Highways England, 2016). Under a GWL of 2 °C, a doubling of the frequency of Very High fire danger levels is projected in summer, rising to a fivefold increase under a GWL of 4 °C (Perry et al., 2022). Three consecutive windstorms in 2022 (Dudley, Eunice, Franklin) led to the closure of three major bridges, the Humber and both Severn Bridges, closed, causing significant disruption to freight (Met Office 2025a).

The evidence base for England is relatively robust for the strategic road network.  In 2024/25, 96.5% of the road surface was reported to be in good condition (National Highways, 2025), though this does not guarantee resilience under extreme weather conditions (NAP2; UK Government, 2018). In 2024, of the 151 eligible local authority returns to DfT on the condition of their roads, 145 included headline data for ‘A’ road and 129 for ‘B’ and ‘C’ roads.  Maintenance shortfalls were identified as 4% for A roads, 7% for B and C roads and 17% for unclassified roads (DfT, 2024c). National Highways has produced detailed, hazard-specific assessments (e.g., for ARP4, see National Highways, 2024), which underpin its approach to adaptation. Adaptation measures are informed by UKCP18 projections and include revised design standards (e.g., DMRB LA114), asset-specific climate risk assessments under high-emissions scenarios (4 °C GWL), and integration of climate resilience into routine operations. Reported climate adaptation actions at identified vulnerable locations span drainage upgrades, geotechnical assessments, research into risks to newly surfaced roads during high temperatures and pavement materials resistant to road surface temperatures exceeding 60 °C, and assessment of heat impacts on expansion joints, bridge bearings and heave failures in concrete roads. The CCC reports a lack of credible, funded adaptation plans for local roads in England (CCC, 2025a). Increased funding for local roads maintenance has been allocated to cover periods 2023 to 2030 (DfT, 2025a; HM Treasury, 2025b). Infrastructure in poor condition/poorly designed, particularly in flood and erosion prone areas, remains a significant challenge.

Evaluation of urgency score

Extreme weather and other climate hazards (e.g., flooding, landslides, erosion) will increase in frequency and magnitude in the future. OBR (2024a) estimated the whole economy costs of the 2007 and 2015-16 floods were £125 million and £287 million respectively (at 2024-25 prices). Using this evidence, the current magnitude is High, and this will raise to Very High for 2050s high scenario, and 2080s given the worsening climate hazards. Confidence is Medium at present and in the 2030’s, falling to Low confidence in 2050’s and 2080’s, given the limited evidence for future scenarios, and for how other factors (e.g., adaptation success, increased electric and autonomous vehicle and active transport uptake) will shape the vulnerability landscape. Adaptation plans as part of the ARP process are in place for the strategic road network but the level of planned adaptation is unlikely to significantly reduce the magnitude score for the sector for any time period; this is based on expert judgment given lack of evidence on the difference that adaptation actions are having on reducing risk.

Table 6.26: Urgency scores for I5 Risks to road transport systems for England. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.5.3 Northern Ireland

Current and future magnitude of risk

Flooding poses a high risk to local roads, exacerbated by their poor overall condition (CCC, 2023a). Projections indicate a significant increase in both moderate and high wildfire risk across Northern Ireland (Perry et al., 2022). Evidence for changing risk specific to Northern Ireland is limited.

As of June 2024, planned and ongoing adaptation projects were being considered for inclusion in Northern Ireland Climate Change Adaptation Programme 2024-2029 (NICCAP3) by DAERA (Climate NI, 2024). NICCAP2 reports slope risk has been assessed on trunk roads, and update of Local Development Plan policies to account for climate change and tree surveys for windthrow risk is ongoing (Climate NI, 2025). There is currently no overarching adaptation strategy for road infrastructure in Northern Ireland. While there has been input into the updated UK Design Manual for Roads and Bridges including adaptation considerations, this does not currently substitute for specific local level planning or preparedness (Robson, 2021; CCC, 2023a).

Evaluation of urgency score

In the absence of substantive information, UK climate risks are considered relevant for roads in Northern Ireland, except for risks relating to higher temperatures affecting the more southerly regions of the UK. As such, extreme weather and other climate hazards (flooding, landslides) will increase in frequency and magnitude in the future. Northern Ireland’s long coastline means high exposure of the road network to coastal flooding and erosion. In general, climate risks to roads are similar to England (excepting temperature) and thus current magnitude is High, and this will raise to Very High for 2050s high scenario, and 2080s. Confidence is Medium at present and in the 2030s, falling to Low confidence in 2050s and 2080s. There is no data indicating adaptation to road infrastructure is taking place in Northern Ireland, thus risk magnitude remains the same after considering adaptation.

Table 6.27: Urgency scores for I5 Risks to road transport systems for Northern Ireland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.5.4 Scotland

Current and future magnitude of risk

Since 2022, flooding has restricted Scotland’s trunk network for approximately 62 days each year as compared to 20 days in 2015-2017 (Transport Scotland, 2025).  Scotland faces distinct environmental risks linked to slope instability, landslides, and coastal erosion, particularly in the Highlands and along the west coast. Remote rural communities in Scotland are particularly vulnerable to road closures because of limited or non-existent alternative routes. In 2023, Storm Babet caused extensive flash flooding in eastern Scotland, highlighting increasing exposure to short duration, high intensity rainfall events. Between 30% and 50% of Scottish coastal roads are in erodible coastal zones, making them highly vulnerable to ongoing erosion and sea level rise (see I3 in the Third Climate Change Risk Assessment – Independent Assessment Technical Report, CCRA3-IA TR). The A83 corridor experienced multiple landslides in 2022, adding to a long history of disruption on this route (Transport Scotland, 2023). Future climate projections also indicate a significant rise in both moderate and high wildfire risk across Scotland (Perry et al., 2022).

The condition of Scotland’s motorways has been improving, though dual and single carriageways have seen slight declines. Landslide mitigation works are in progress at known high risk sites, for example the repeated closures of the A83 due to multiple landslips in 2023 have prompted major investment in protective infrastructure (Transport Scotland, 2024). Recent updates to policies concerning scour, flooding, and high winds, if fully implemented would improve the resilience of transport infrastructure over time. In anticipation of more frequent and extreme heat events, Transport Scotland has developed a thin course road surfacing specification suitable for surface temperatures up to 75 °C It was also noted that Transport Scotland’s “Approach to Climate Change Adaptation & Resilience (ACCAR)” (Transport Scotland, 2023) does not sufficiently address cross-sector dependencies, which may limit systemwide resilience (CCC, 2023a).

The evidence base for Scotland is moderately strong, particularly for the trunk road network. Detailed assessments from Transport Scotland and third-party analysis (RAC Foundation, 2021; CCC, 2023a) provide useful insights into network vulnerabilities and ongoing adaptation actions. However, gaps remain, especially in understanding interdependencies between sectors and within local road infrastructure. While major risks such as landslides and flooding are documented and supported by long-term incident records, information on the condition and resilience of the local road network remains limited and fragmented, complicating the evaluation of systemic preparedness.

Evaluation of urgency score

Extreme weather and other climate hazards (flooding, landslides) will increase in frequency and magnitude in the future. Economic evidence places current damage in the tens of millions (New Civil Engineer, 2023; RAC, 2021; Rennie et al., 2021; Smith et al., 2021), which relates to a High magnitude banding for Scotland. Given worsening of climate hazards this will raise to Very High for 2050s high scenario, and 2080s. Confidence is Medium at present and in the 2030s, falling to Low confidence in 2050s and 2080s, given the limited evidence for local roads and on cross-sectoral interdependencies. At present, the evidence on the effectiveness and level of implementation of adaptation does not support reducing the magnitude score.

Table 6.28: Urgency scores for I5 Risks to road transport systems for Scotland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.5.5 Wales

Current and future magnitude of risk

Flooding and landslips are primary drivers for asset renewal and maintenance, while a growing risk of coastal erosion under climate change has been identified (GOV Wales, 2023). Recent slope failures, such as the incident in Brecon in 2020, highlight growing landslide risk on Welsh trunk roads (St John et al., 2024). Under a GWL of 2 °C, the frequency of very high fire danger levels in summer is projected to double, rising fivefold under GWL 4 °C (Perry et al., 2022). In 2024, 7.3% of the motorway network and 2.6% of the trunk road network required close monitoring of structural condition with an additional 2.3% of the motorway and 1.7% of trunk roads added over the next four years. 0.3% and 10.3% of motorways and trunk roads respectively have “investigatory level” skid resistance (GOV Wales, 2024a).

The independent Roads Review Panel recommends priority and focus for road investment to include climate adaptation of existing road infrastructure (Nugent, 2023; GOV Wales, 2023). The CCC identifies “insufficient progress” in adaptation policies and plans for the Welsh road network (CCC, 2023c). Despite strong high-level policy commitment to transport sector adaptation in their Climate Adaptation Strategy (GOV Wales, 2024b), there are currently no regulatory targets to drive action. Furthermore, adaptation progress for local roads cannot be assessed beyond 2018/19 due to a lack of updates. The evidence base is limited, with significant gaps in current data, particularly for local roads, where monitoring has not been updated in several years (CCC, 2023a). While risk projections and observed incidents (e.g., Brecon 2020 landslide) provide useful insights, the absence of regular, granular condition data limits a comprehensive understanding of current and emerging risks.

Evaluation of urgency score

Extreme weather and climate hazards (e.g., flooding, landslips, landslides) are likely to increase in frequency and magnitude in the future. Current magnitude of risk is High, and this will raise to Very High for 2050s high scenario, and 2080s. Confidence is Medium at present and in the 2030s, falling to Low confidence in 2050s and 2080s, given the limited evidence for local roads. At present, the evidence on the effectiveness of adaptation does not support reducing the magnitude score.

Table 6.29: Urgency scores for I5 Risks to road transport systems for Wales. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.6 Risks to rail transport systems – I6

This risk includes: Great Britain’s (GB) railway network, which is owned, maintained and developed by Network Rail (an arm‘s length body of DfT); passenger and freight services operated by a mix of private and publicly owned companies; the Northern Ireland railway network, which is operated by Northern Ireland Railways (a subsidiary of Translink); Core Valley lines infrastructure, owned and operated by Transport for Wales; London Underground and other rail services operated by Transport for London (TfL); and other systems, including light rail, metro systems outside London, and heritage railways.

Table 6.30: Urgency scores for I6 Risks to rail transport systems. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.
ID	Risk		Present	2030	2050	2080	Urgency
I6	Risks to rail transport systems	UK	H • •	H • •	H • •	VH • •	MAN
		England	H • •	H • •	H • •	VH • •	MAN
		Northern Ireland	M • •	M • •	M • •	H • •	MAN
		Scotland	M • •	M • •	H • •	H • •	MAN
		Wales	M • •	M • •	M • •	H • •	MAN

6.2.6.1 Evidence relevant to the entire United Kingdom

Current and future drivers of risk

The UK railways experience many temperature-, water- and wind-dominated hazards causing damage to infrastructure and service disruptions (Table 6.31; Palin et al. 2021; Network Rail, n.d.). Many such hazards are projected to worsen in future (State of the Climate chapter). For Network Rail, over the period 2006-24, the three hazards with the largest effect on performance were wind, flooding and subsidence. For these, GB-wide 2006-24 delay costs were £382.8 million, £316.2 million, and £144 million respectively (Network Rail, 2024a). Delay costs due to heat have been generally higher in the past 10 years than the previous decade (Network Rail, 2024a).

Table 6.31: Summary of the range of weather hazards that impact railways. Information taken from Palin et al. (2021) and Network Rail (n.d.) except where otherwise stated.

Much of the UK’s railways were built before modern-day design and construction standards, although they are continuously maintained and upgraded (Palin et al., 2021). Some parts of the network are newer (e.g., HS1, Borders Railway in Scotland). HS2 is considering future climate to safeguard resilience (HS2, 2021; HS2, 2024). The railway networks are interdependent with other systems, particularly other transport systems, energy, digital and communication systems (see Section 6.2.1 for I1). Currently 39% of GB’s railway route length is electrified (England: 44%, Scotland: 33%, Wales: 7%; ORR, 2024b).

Assessment of current magnitude of risk

ARP4 reports (Network Rail, 2024b; TfL, 2024b; ArrivaRail London, 2024) quantified climate-related risks, rating some present-day risks as “major” or “severe”. Network Rail’s ARP4 report states that weather-related delays cost £370 million in the last three years (approximately £123 million p.a. on average; Network Rail, 2024b). In addition, £21 million in revenue was estimated to be lost because of the Autumn 2023 storms (GBRTT, 2024). Network Rail plans to invest around £2.8 billion during 2024-2029 (an average of £560 million per year) in “activities and technology that will help the railway cope better with extreme weather and climate change” (Network Rail, 2024a).

The costs to the rail sector of major UK floods in summer 2007 and 2015/16 were £217 million and £158 million respectively (OBR, 2024b). There is a strong correlation between earthworks failure and rainfall, with failure rates increasing with anticipated more intense and higher frequencies of extreme rainfall (Mair et al., 2021). Ilalokhoin et al. (2022) correlated delay impacts with weather events, identifying snow, flooding and wind as major contributors.

Assessment of future magnitude of risk

The information here relates to the evidence base considered as a whole (nation specific information is provided in Sections 6.2.6.2 to 6.2.6.5). In some cases, evidence from similar time horizons has been deemed to apply to the prescribed ones below (e.g., 2070s evidence used for 2080s).

2030s, central warming scenario:

In the absence of any literature for this time horizon, expert judgement deems the risk and confidence levels to be similar to that of the present day.

2050s, central and high warming scenarios:

Generally, evidence sources for the 2050s note either (a) a projected worsening of climate hazard/s, or (b) a worsening of the present-day risk profiles, evaluated via a likelihood-impact assessment (Li et al., 2024; Mulholland and Feyen, 2021; Network Rail, 2021; Network Rail, 2024b). While some quantitative risk assessments for the 2050s exist, there is no information about how future risk ratings translate into potential costs. Evidence is very rarely split out into different scenarios.

2080s, central and high warming scenarios:

Generally, evidence sources for the 2080s note either (a) a projected worsening of climate hazard/s, or (b) a continued worsening of risk profiles, evaluated via a likelihood-impact assessment, between the 2050s and 2080s (Li et al., 2024; Mulholland and Feyen, 2021; Network Rail, 2021; Network Rail, 2024b). While some quantitative risk assessments for the 2080s exist, there is no information about how future risk ratings translate into potential costs. Evidence is very rarely split out into different scenarios.

Level of preparedness for risk

There is a strong “safety-first” culture on UK railways (Network Rail, 2019), which reduces the risk of climate hazards to people. Nonetheless, serious accidents that include a weather/climate-related element do still occur (e.g., fatal landslip derailment near Stonehaven in 2020). Following this accident, Network Rail is delivering on recommendations from two reports (Mair et al., 2021; Slingo et al., 2021) regarding its management of earthworks and drainage assets, and its use of weather data and early warning information in operational decision-making.

Adaptation is recognised as essential by the rail infrastructure sector, and Network Rail and TfL have undertaken comprehensive risk assessments leading to adaptation actions. The fourteen DfT train operating companies (TOCs) are producing their first weather resilience and climate change adaptation (WRCCA) strategies, which are due in early 2026 (RSSB, 2025). The rail sector have standardised a set of climate change scenarios for use by the sector (RSSB, 2024a) to harmonise data and methods and allow industry to develop consistent approaches to assess physical risks. RSSB has also assessed the adaptation maturity of the sector (RSSB, 2024b) and hosts a Climate Change Adaptation Working Group to lead a collaborative approach. The sector has begun to consider interdependencies, for example through a TfL-led project to assess interdependencies for London’s land-based transport sector (TfL, 2024a). Key dependencies are power, drainage and flood management, telecoms, structures and assets (e.g., bridges), vegetation, and banks and slopes. Although London-focused, some of the stated interdependencies, in particular power (HS2, 2024), are relevant for the wider railway system.

Examples of Network Rail’s adaptation initiatives include: assessment of the implications of major power outages (a key upstream dependency); development of location-specific risk assessments; tools and documentation to support climate risk planning; integration of climate change considerations into standards; consideration of weather and climate change in asset management plans; and trialling the application of an “adaptation pathways” approach for some routes. Nature-based solutions (such as protection forests to manage impact of high rainfall on earthworks) are recognised as potential adaptation measures for rail infrastructure (Blackwood et al., 2022), although few studies have investigated their role for rail specifically. Train operators are also beginning to consider adaptation, though to a more limited extent (ArrivaRail London, 2024; Southeastern Railway, 2024). TOCs have shown the greatest improvement in climate change maturity from 2023-24 (RSSB, 2024b) with their WRCCA strategies due in early 2026 as noted above. The Office of Rail and Road (ORR) claims to be taking a “risk-based, proportionate and prioritised approach to [their] regulatory role for climate change adaptation” (ORR, 2024a). The DfT’s Transport Adaptation Strategy (2025b) sets out a range of proposals which support adaptation in the rail sector, including a “climate change adaptation handbook” website of adaptation case studies, and a project to explore metrics for measuring transport system resilience to provide a baseline for adaptation progress in future (DfT, 2024a; DfT, 2024b)

Assessment on the evidence base and evidence gaps

Although evidence exists for Transport for London, as described elsewhere, there is no evidence for operators of other metros, light rail (tram), and heritage rail (Fisher et al., 2024). There is limited information on the magnitude (scale and frequency) of many interacting risks. There is limited evidence on the benefits of adaptation; although plans and actions exist, it is generally too soon to measure their effectiveness.  Little new evidence was found on non-infrastructure risks for rail, such as the physical and mental wellbeing of passengers and staff. For instance, studies have explored thermal comfort in railway stations and on trains in other countries, but only one UK-focused report (on rail passengers’ needs during extreme heat – Transport Focus, 2023) was found.

6.2.6.2 England

Current and future magnitude of risk

Observed impactsaffecting Englandinclude multiple heat-related failures across southern and eastern England in July 2022 when temperatures surpassed the tolerance levels of several aspects of Network Rail’s infrastructure (e.g., overhead lines). Speed restrictions were imposed on some lines out of London in 2025 with track temperatures nearing 60 °C. Wider impacts of the 2022 heatwave included wildfires, falling trees and failure of clay earthworks, due to widespread desiccation (Slingo et al., 2024). A 40-50% drop in train performance and £30 million revenue loss was recorded during one week of this heatwave (Network Rail, 2024a). There are statistical relationships between most delay variables and high temperatures for the London Underground network (Greenham et al., 2020). TfL’s ARP4 report differentiates explicitly between risks affecting surface rail infrastructure and that underground (TfL, 2024b, c) with flooding (both above and below ground) being the only present-day risk rated in the highest risk category of “severe”.  Railway fault numbers show less impact in the West Midlands until specific upper or lower thresholds of weather (temperature, precipitation) are passed (Jia et al., 2024). During January 2024, Storm Henk resulted in speed restrictions and line closures across multiple railway routes in southern England (BBC, 2024a). Structures were damaged, lines flooded, and routes were blocked by fallen trees (New Civil Engineer, 2024). The percentage of the rail network at risk of flooding could rise from 37% today to 54% by 2050 (Environment Agency, 2024).  In London, climate impacts are expected to lead to complex changes to clay earthworks’ behaviour in different seasons (Huang et al., 2024). This may lead to complex impacts for the infrastructure that these earthworks support.

It is assumed that England would make up the bulk of GB-wide cost impacts quoted by Network Rail as passenger numbers are much higher than in Scotland or Wales. Storm damage to the railway at Dawlish in 2014 was estimated to have resulted in a £50m economic loss to the South West (Network Rail, 2024c), while annual weather-related delay costs in the £millions to £tens of millions is estimated for each of Network Rail’s England regions (Network Rail, 2024c,d,e,f; some values estimated from graphs, and Wales disaggregated from the Wales and Western region).

Evaluation of urgency score

Costs in the £100s of millions bracket, and other qualitative evidence of large and pervasive present-day impacts, indicates a current risk magnitude for England as High. There is no literature for the 2030s, so expert judgment deems the magnitude to be similar to the present day (High) with an equivalent level of confidence (Medium), given this is the near future. For the 2050s, the magnitude is scored as High, based on assumed costs remaining in the £100s of millions (cf. current costs above). Evidence sources quote either (a) a projected worsening of climate hazard/s (Greenham et al., 2020; Jia et al., 2024; Slingo et al., 2024; Sasidharan et al., 2023), or (b) a worsening of the present-day risk profiles (evaluated via a likelihood-impact assessment) by the 2050s compared to the present day (e.g., ArrivaRail London, 2024; Mair et al, 2021; Network Rail, 2021, 2024b; TfL, 2021, 2024b, c).

For the 2080s, the risk magnitude is Very High, based on assumed costs in the £billions. Similarly to those for the 2050s, evidence sources quote either (a) a projected worsening of climate hazard/s, or (b) a continued worsening of risk profiles, evaluated via a likelihood-impact assessment, between the 2050s and the 2080s. Based on expert judgement and by comparison with earlier time horizons, it is possible that costs could extend into the £billions by this time horizon. Confidence is Medium for all time horizons, as there are several sources in agreement.

Table 6.32: Urgency scores for I6 Risks to rail transport systems for England. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.6.3 Northern Ireland

Current and future magnitude of risk

The railway network in NI is small in comparison to GB, and evidence specific to Northern Ireland (NI) is sparse with little quantitative evidence on which to base current or future risk assessments. Storms Darragh (December 2024) and Éowyn (January 2025) led to the suspension of NI’s train services by Translink (BBC, 2024b, 2025a) and many lines were blocked by fallen trees and debris (BBC, 2025a). A report prepared for Translink (unavailable online, but quoted by multiple news outlets, e.g., BBC, 2024c) suggests an increase in risk due to future sea level rise. It found that by 2040, seven locations including Londonderry and Larne lines are at high risk of rising seas. A further four are also deemed to be at medium risk by 2040. It also found that by 2100, the number of high-risk locations could rise to 13. High risk locations identified by 2100 include Larne, Derry, Castlerock, the Bann estuary, Glynn, and Ballycarry. It is not known how the assessment of the risk in the report as “medium” or “high” might relate to the Fourth Climate Change Risk Assessment – Independent Assessment Technical Report (CCRA4-IA TR) assessment framework. When assessing the risk magnitude, it is assumed that the 2040 information is equally applicable to the 2030s and 2050s and that 2100 information is representative of the 2080s. The present-day level of risk is not quoted.

Translink (2025) notes that in 2023/24 it experienced a sharp rise in extreme weather events causing delay and disruption to railway services compared to previous years, “almost four times the 3-year average”. It also notes potential infrastructure impacts from projected increases in hazards related to temperature, rainfall and sea level. While cost is not quantified, it is stated that “the level of investment required by Translink will be scalable and comparable to that of other railway companies”.

In 2023, the CCC evaluated adaptation progress (CCC, 2023c). For the outcome “asset and system level reliability of rail network”, a “delivery and implementation” score of “mixed progress” was given, and a “policies and plans” score of “insufficient”. More recently, the Northern Ireland Climate Change Adaptation Programme 2019-2024 (NICCAP2) End of Programme Review examines the extent to which the objectives in NICCAP2 have been achieved (Climate NI, 2025). All five actions directly relevant for rail were “fully achieved” during NICCAP2, although most require ongoing efforts. Identification of rail locations at risk of extreme heat is complete. Geotechnical inspection of embankments for slope failure risk continues, as does a programme of scour risk assessment for bridges and culverts. Translink (2025) describes ongoing investment in several adaptation measures and refers to a forthcoming Climate Change Adaptation Action Strategy to be launched in 2026. This reflects general progress in response to criticisms in Robson (2021) on the lack of management of some aspects of climate related risk for transport infrastructure in NI.

Evaluation of urgency score

Expert judgement has been used to assign the same magnitude score (Medium) for NI as that assigned for Scotland (Section 6.2.6.40) and Wales (Section 6.2.6.5), because:

• – NI railway network is a similar age to that of GB, albeit an order of magnitude smaller than that in either Scotland or Wales (similar vulnerability, lower exposure);
• – Recent numbers of passenger journeys on Scotland, Wales, and NI railways have been of the same order of magnitude (10s of millions of journeys; similar vulnerability and exposure);
• – Recent observed changes to climate in NI are similar to those for Scotland and Wales.

Considering the evidence, the magnitude score for the 2030s and 2050s is deemed similar to that for the present day (Medium), and because the end-of-century risk is demonstrably higher than that for the mid-century, the 2080s magnitude is assumed to increase to High. Confidence is Medium due to two pieces of evidence, which are in agreement. There is some evidence that NI rail adaptation is either planned or taking place. However, there is currently no quantitative evidence that can demonstrate its effectiveness. Accordingly, the urgency score is More action needed.

Table 6.33: Urgency scores for I6 Risks to rail transport systems for Northern Ireland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.6.4 Scotland

Current and future magnitude of risk

Observed impactsin Scotland include a derailment near Stonehaven in 2020, with the loss of three lives. The derailment occurred because the train struck debris washed out from a drainage trench following exceptionally heavy rain (RAIB, 2022). This event occurred during the Covid-19 pandemic, and it was acknowledged that “with normal passenger numbers, the casualty toll would almost certainly have been significantly higher” (RAIB, 2022). During February 2022, three named storms (Dudley, Eunice, and Franklin) occurred during the same week resulting in major transport disruption (Met Office, 2022a). Railway services were stopped across Scotland (as well as other parts of the UK), and an uprooted tree caught fire due to contact with overhead lines (Network Rail, 2022). Red weather warnings for rain issued for Storm Babet (October 2023; Met Office, 2023) prompted cancellation of services on some routes and the use of precautionary speed restrictions. Another storm, Gerrit (December 2023), caused severe disruption to post-Christmas travel. In Scotland, numerous rail services were delayed due to strong winds and speed restrictions, landslips, flooding, and trees on the lines, while a tree hit a train on the Dumbarton line and the Dundee to Glasgow line (Met Office, 2024). All rail services in Scotland were halted by Storm Éowyn (January 2025), and there was extensive damage to the network (Met Office, 2025b). Weather-related delays in Scotland over 18 years reached £145 million, which is approximately £8 million per year on average (Scotland’s Railway, 2024a).

In terms of preparedness for risk, Transport Scotland’s (2023) “Approach to Climate Change Adaptation & Resilience” (ACCAR) describes how it plans to address climate risks relevant to the rail network, and the “Climate Action Plan 2024-2029” (Scotland’s Railway, 2024b) includes “Climate Ready” commitments centred on four outcomes relating to risk, resilience, and adaptation. The CCC evaluated adaptation progress in Scotland (CCC, 2023d). For the outcome “asset and system level reliability of rail network”, a “delivery and implementation” score of “mixed progress” was given, and a “policies and plans” score of “credible”. They noted ACCAR was a missed opportunity to consider interactions between modes and other sectors.

Evaluation of urgency score

The present-day risk is evaluated as Medium, based on quantitative evidence (costs in the £millions, and the event that caused three fatalities), and qualitative evidence (continued evidence of significant weather impacts occurring, and the increase in earthworks failure rates). Future risk for the 2030s is evaluated as Medium magnitude: based on expert judgement, the magnitude and confidence are deemed similar to the present day.

For the 2050s, the risk is evaluated as High magnitude. Evidence sources quote either (a) a projected worsening of climate hazard/s (e.g., Slingo et al., 2024; Mair et al., 2021), or (b) a worsening of the present-day risk profiles by the 2050s compared to the present day (Network Rail, 2024b). Given that the present-day observed costs are approximately £8 million annually, it is likely that a worsening of hazards could push the risk into the £10s of millions (High) magnitude bracket.

For the 2080s, similar logic to that for the 2050s applies. While hazards are projected to worsen, it is not considered likely that annual costs will rise to the extent that they reach £100s of millions, therefore the magnitude remains High. Confidence is Medium for all time periods; there is only a small number of evidence sources for Scotland but they agree on the nature of changes. The urgency score for this risk in Scotland is More action needed for all time horizons. More evidence is urgently needed to fill significant gaps and reduce the uncertainty in the current level of understanding.

Table 6.34: Urgency scores for I6 Risks to rail transport systems for Scotland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.6.5 Wales

Current and future magnitude of risk

Disruption from three named storms (Dudley, Eunice, and Franklin), which occurred during the same week in February 2022, saw all services across Wales suspended for the first time in Network Rail’s history (Met Office, 2022; Network Rail, 2022). Structures and overhead lines were damaged, and debris was blown onto tracks (Network Rail, 2022). Flooding caused major disruption to multiple lines across the Welsh railway network during October 2024 (BBC, 2024d), and in December 2024 Storm Darragh led to the suspension of most rail services in Wales. Weather-related delay costs for Wales amount to approximately £36 million for 2006-22, or £2.25 million per year on average (Network Rail, 2024c).

The focus of Transport for Wales’ (TfW) “Climate Adaptation and Resilience Plan” for rail is largely on the Core Valley Lines (CVL) network (TfW, n.d.). Weather-related delay costs can be estimated from TfW (n.d.) as being approximately £410,000 for the 33-month period Feb 2020 to Oct 2022, or approximately £150,000 annually, on average (assuming these costs are suitably representative). The CCC evaluated adaptation progress in Wales (CCC, 2023c). For the outcome “asset and system level reliability of rail network”, a “delivery and implementation” score of “mixed progress” was given, and a “policies and plans” score of “credible”.

Evaluation of urgency score

In the present day, the risk is deemed to be Medium, based on: quantitative evidence (costs in the £millions); and qualitative evidence (continued evidence of significant weather impacts occurring, and the increase in earthworks failure rates). Future risk for the 2030s is evaluated as Medium magnitude; based on expert judgement, the magnitude is deemed similar to the present day.

For the 2050s, the risk is evaluated as Medium magnitude. The logic is analogous to that used for the evaluation of 2050s risk in Scotland (Section 6.2.6.4). However, given that the present-day observed costs are approximately £2.25 million on average in Wales, it is unlikely that a worsening of hazards could push the risk into the next category (High, £tens of millions). For the 2080s, the logic is once again analogous to that used for evaluating the 2080s risk in Scotland. However, it is possible that by the 2080s, a worsening of hazards could push the risk into the High (£tens of millions) magnitude bracket.

Confidence is Medium for all time periods; although there are few evidence sources for Wales, they agree on the nature of changes. The urgency score for this risk in Wales is More action needed for all time horizons.

Table 6.35: Urgency scores for I6 Risks to rail transport systems for Wales. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.7 Risks to aviation and maritime transport systems – I7

This risk covers infrastructure and operations in the aviation and maritime sectors. The aviation scope includes UK-based airports and airlines. For the purpose of this chapter, maritime transport systems refer to ports, shipping, and inland waterways. Ports and shipping cover the on-sea movement and operation of commercial vessels engaged in the domestic and international maritime transport of freight including their interactions with onshore port infrastructure, port workers and shipping crews, within the jurisdiction of UK statutory harbour authorities. Inland waterways refer to UK rivers and canals.

Table 6.36: Urgency scores for I7 Risks to aviation and maritime transport systems. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.
ID	Risk		Present	2030	2050	2080	Urgency
I7	Risks to aviation and maritime transport systems	UK	H •	H •	H •	H •	CI
		England	H • • •	H • •	H •	H •	CI
		Northern Ireland	H • •	H •	H •	H •	CI
		Scotland	H • • •	H •	H •	H •	CI
		Wales	H •	H •	H •	H •	CI

6.2.7.1 Evidence relevant to the entire United Kingdom

Current and future drivers of risk

There are three main hazards driving climate risks in UK aviation sector:

• Increased flood risk from surface water, or in coastal areas due to extreme rainfall, storm surges, and sea level rise (Challinor and Benton, 2021).
• Multiple ARP4 reports identify that increases in average and extreme temperatures, particularly above 40 °C could cause: overheating of terminals, staff and passenger discomfort and health issues; impeded cargo storage; structural damage to runways and aprons; and damage to digital communications infrastructure. Higher temperatures may also reduce the maximum take-off weight of aircrafts due to reduced air density and lift generation. This can affect short runway airports (e.g., Orkney Islands, London City Airport) because payload can be reduced (Gratton et al., 2022).
• Extreme wind can damage key assets including air bridges and remote radar equipment, and the frequency and severity of clear air turbulence is projected to increase, particularly for flight routes near the north polar jet stream (Prosser et al.,2023). Clear air turbulence is also projected to increase in regions that have high air traffic with Europe including over the North Atlantic, North Pacific, East Asia, and North Africa (Foudad et al.,2024). This could increase the frequency and severity of delays, cancellations, and diversions for UK aviation, as well as increased fuel consumption and aircraft and passenger safety incidents (Foudad et al.,2024). In addition, future changes to wind speed and direction can impact the take-off and landing performance of aircraft (Gratton et al.,2022).

Increased seasonal average temperatures may change bird migration patterns, potentially leading to increased bird strikes with aircraft (CAA, 2024a). In addition, the changing prevalence of tropical diseases may increase staff absence, impacting operations, due to changes in temperature, rainfall, humidity, and the frequency and severity of extreme weather events (Tidman et al., 2021).

There are four key hazards driving climate risk for the ports and shipping sectors in the UK:

• Sea level rise can damage infrastructure and impact navigation; however, the rate and magnitude of sea level rise beyond 2050 is uncertain (Toimil et al., 2020). Impacts will vary across the UK; England and Wales could experience 60% and 30% higher sea level rise compared to Scotland under the low emissions RCP2.6 and high emissions RCP8.5 climate scenarios respectively, and the south-east coast of England is the most exposed region to rising sea levels (Perks et al., 2023). Increases in wave height and storm surges can accelerate the deterioration of port walls and buildings, damage berths, gates and vessels, and impact operations due to safety concerns (Port of Dover, 2024).Coastal ports are primarily affected by coastal flooding due to sea level rise and storm surges, as well as pluvial flooding. Inland ports can be affected by fluvial and pluvial flooding, and estuarine ports by coastal, fluvial, and pluvial flooding (Verschuur et al., 2023). Multiple ARP4 reports note flooding can reduce clearance under bridges, and may limit port access for vessels, limiting access for maintenance and repairs, and accelerating infrastructure degradation and damage.
• Temperatures above 40 °C can create unsafe conditions for port workers and shipping crews, and warmer water temperatures can corrode submerged structures (Port of Dover, 2024). Southern UK ports have greater exposure to increased temperature extremes compared to northern ports (Poo et al., 2021).
• Increased wind loading can put stress on quay, yard, and tower cranes, increasing their vulnerability to accelerated deterioration or damage (Port of London Authority, 2021).

Across the UK, inland waterways transport 15% of total domestic freight. In London, the River Thames transports 56% of inland waterway traffic (including waste – see I10) due to congestion in other transport modes (Wiegmans, 2018). Flooding and droughts are the two main climate hazards driving climate risk for inland waterways (Christodoulou et al., 2020):

• Flooding can reduce navigability, and increased erosion can damage infrastructure such as locks, bridges, and banks (Murphy and Grainger, 2023).
• Multi-season droughts can reduce canal water levels, creating navigational issues (Canal & River Trust, 2024a).

The aviation, ports and shipping sectors are closely linked through global trade and passenger flows which increases their vulnerability to climate hazards that occur around the world. For example, climate change is projected to increase the speeds of upper-level jet stream winds in the Southern and Northern Hemisphere extratropics under the mid-range SSP2-4.5 and high-end SSP5-8.5 climate scenarios by 2050 (Shaw and Miyawaki, 2024). An increase in high-altitude windspeeds, at airline cruising height, could significantly shorten eastbound flight times and significantly lengthen westbound flights in all seasons, and also lead to increased clear-air turbulence (Williams, 2016). These changes may disrupt scheduling and cargo delivery via air which could have implications for inland waterways that are reliant on air freight connections (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, 2023).

Climate disruptions to maritime transport and ports internationally could affect the supply and delivery of goods via shipping to the UK and around the world, for example due to droughts, hurricanes, typhoons, and earthquakes (Tran et al.,2025). For example, the Suez Canal was blocked for six days in March 2021 due to the ‘Ever Given’ containership becoming grounded. This is estimated to have incurred total losses of over $88 million and demonstrates the vulnerability of international maritime supply chains to disruptions (Tran et al.,2025). In addition, changes in storm patterns and near-surface wind regimes (such as shifts in prevailing westerlies and increased frequency of intense low-pressure systems bringing stronger surface winds) may have significant implications for international shipping and local inshore operations.  These include pilotage activities, berthing, and vessel handling in constrained waters (Associated British Ports, 2021).

An ice-free Arctic in the 2050s could create new shipping routes, including opening the Transpolar Sea Route (Bennett et al., 2020). This may provide shorter shipping routes and allow the UK to be a key hub for Arctic shipping; however, there are operational risks including limited satellite coverage for navigation (Lynch et al., 2022). It is important to note that international shipping, and its adaptation strategies, are largely beyond UK control. The UK Adaptation Reporting Power (ARP) process focuses on ports and shipping within the jurisdiction of statutory harbour authorities, which has limited ability to influence shipping practices (Defra, 2023). This is because shipping operates on global routes under international regulations, and therefore UK statutory harbour authorities can only manage activities within their own harbour limits.

Assessment of current magnitude of risk

Storms can increase distance flown and cause delays and cancellations. Three consecutive windstorms in 2022 (Dudley, Eunice, Franklin) led to the cancellation of flights across the UK (Met Office, 2025a).   In 2019, over 1 million extra kilometres were flown throughout Europe to avoid stormy weather, causing delays estimated to cost €2.2 million (EUROCONTROL, 2021). Recent impacts to airport operations can provide indicative costs for climate-related events and demonstrate interdependencies between aviation and other infrastructure systems. For example, the National Air Traffic Services (NATS) flight planning system failure in August 2023 affected over 700,000 passengers over a series of days. A software error meant that flight plan data needed to be processed manually, reducing capacity from 800 flight plans per hour, to 60 per hour. This cost airlines £65 million, with additional costs of up to £100 million incurred by passengers, airports, tour operators and insurers (CAA, 2024b). In another example, an electrical substation fire at Heathrow Airport in March 2025 resulted in more than 1,300 flights being disrupted and over 270,000 passengers affected due to the airport being shut down for one day (Comerford, 2025; Mackintosh, 2025). This disruption was estimated to cost airlines and suppliers £20 million for halted operations for a day (Taaffe-Maguire, 2025). Whilst not driven by climatic factors, these isolated  examples reflect potential disruption that could result from extreme weather events in the future, either due to the failure of infrastructure itself or supporting utilities and systems.

Assessment of future magnitude of risk

The aviation industry faces increasing climate risks. Extreme weather is projected to cause increased disruption, especially in peak travel seasons (Yesudian and Dawson, 2021). For example, by 2090, under the high-end RCP8.5 warming scenario, across the more than 270 coastal and low-lying airports in the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) region, which includes the United Kingdom, a one-day closure due to “full” flooding could cost medium-sized airports up to €3 million each, and major hubs up to €18 million each, due to delayed and cancelled flights (EUROCONTROL, 2021, p.10). This demonstrates the scale of costs that could be incurred due to increasing climate risks associated with other emissions scenarios and time horizons; however, the specific costs to UK airports due to climate change have not been quantified within existing literature.

A modelling study that used a global mean temperature rise of 2 °C showed some airports (e.g., London City Airport) falling below mean sea level, and that by 2100 under the high-end RCP8.5 warming scenario, airport flooding caused by sea level rise could increase annual route disruptions by a factor of 69 (Yesudian and Dawson, 2021).

For ports, the impact of sea level rise is difficult to assess beyond 2050 due to the potential melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets with consequences for low-lying ports (Met Office, 2018). Nevertheless, ARP4 reports identify that future sea level rise could make it difficult to access lighthouses and ports, submerge areas of land mass, and compromise quays and sea defences (Groveport, 2024; Northern Lighthouse Board, 2024).

ARP4 reports also identify future risks to port infrastructure under the mid-range RCP4.5 and high-end RCP8.5 climate scenarios up to 2100 from extreme heat, including increased costs due to the accelerated degradation of assets and increased heat stress inside container handling cranes and warehouses, creating unsafe conditions for port workers and crew (Van Houtven et al., 2022).

2030s, central warming scenario:

This magnitude is considered the same as the present day (High), due to no significant differences to today for airports, ports and inland waterways, with no significant change in climate hazards or adaptation across aviation, ports and shipping, and inland waterways. There is limited quantitative evidence for time periods and warming scenarios outside of England, thus confidence is Medium for England, and Low elsewhere.

2050s, central and high warming scenarios:

Climate projections indicate that the main climate hazards and risks will be intensified in the 2050s. ARP4 reports for airports and ports show that under the mid-range RCP4.5 and high-end RCP8.5 climate scenarios, without adaptation, there is an increased risk from higher temperatures and flooding exacerbated by sea level rise for infrastructure and operations. Increased risk will remain in the High magnitude band; confidence is Low due to limited evidence.

2080s, central and high warming scenarios:

Climate projections indicate that the main climate hazards and risks will be further intensified in the 2080s. ARP4 reports for airports and ports show that under the mid-range RCP4.5 and high-end RCP8.5 climate scenarios, without adaptation the increased risks and opportunities as presented for the 2050s will likely be intensified in the 2080s. Similarly, ARP4 reports for inland waterways show that under the high-end RCP8.5 climate scenario, the increased risks presented for the 2050s will likely also be intensified in the 2080s if there is not further adaptation but remaining in the High magnitude band. Confidence is Low due to limited evidence.

Level of preparedness for risk

Adaptation actions are being developed by infrastructure authorities, regulators, and operators. For example,   Department for Transport (DfT) Climate Adaptation Strategy for Transport directs the CAA to develop climate adaptation guidance and analysis (DfT, 2025b).

Adaptation actions referenced in ARP4 reports from airports (e.g., Edinburgh, Glasgow, Heathrow) include risk assessments, drainage surveys, climate standards for construction and asset replacement, and runway resurfacing to reduce flood risk. For example, the latest ARP report from Gatwick Airport (2024) provided progress updates on actions included in previous ARP reports, including publishing a Flood Risk Management Strategy to create a coordinated action plan across the airport, and progressing of the Northern Runway Project to reduce surface water flooding with alleviation ponds. Although most ARP4 reports outline progress on previously identified adaptation measures, some also detail planned adaptation actions for the next five years, such as progressing the use of more heat resistant materials for runways and reviews of wildfire mitigation measures (e.g., Gatwick Airport, 2024). Gatwick Airport is also improving its natural flood management through restoration of the upper River Mole catchment alongside the South East Rivers Trust, increasing the number of ponds, wetlands and trees, whilst reducing peak flooding during storms (South East Rivers Trust, 2025).

Other airports have embedded climate change adaptation into key organisational processes and strategies, developed heatwave wellbeing procedures for airport staff and passengers, and undertaken research into the potential impacts of changes to wind speed on future aircraft technology (e.g., London Luton Airport, 2024). Heathrow Airport’s (2024) ARP4 report includes detail of significant adaptation action that was taken to respond to surface water accumulation across the airport in June 2023, including modelling the on-airport drainage system and analysing the impacts of rainfall on existing infrastructure.

There are limited adaptation policies for ports, with resilience standards left to individual port operators (CCC, 2025a), and there is no single authority or regulator to drive adaptation. DfT’s Climate Adaptation Strategy for Transport includes a targeted intervention for ports in England to trial regular monitoring of climate change disruptions, including extreme weather-related impacts (DfT, 2025b).

ARP4 reports in the ports and shipping sectors show adaptation investment is being made mostly in modelling, monitoring, or research projects, such as feasibility studies (Port of London Authority, 2024). Larger-scale adaptation measures include marsh restoration and raising quay walls in Dover (Port of Dover, 2024). ARP4 reports often recommend future action but do not tend to report implemented actions to-date.

Assessment on the evidence base and evidence gaps

There are several academic and non-academic sources of high-quality independent evidence, with a notable degree of agreement. The evidence base includes comprehensive peer-reviewed studies on climate change impacts, detailed assessments of sector-specific vulnerabilities, and adaptation plans and policies. ARP4 reports typically assess the likelihood and consequence of climate hazards in risk assessments. However, ARP4 reports typically do not report on the impacts of implemented adaptation actions in the aviation, ports and shipping, and inland waterways sectors. These reports are produced primarily for larger asset owners and operators rather than comprehensively covering all sites or sectors, meaning smaller facilities and regional operations may not be included (Defra, 2022). Monitoring, evaluation, learning and reporting on adaptation is required to track the effectiveness and impacts of actions at a national level in the UK (CCC, 2025a).

Infrastructure interdependencies for the aviation, ports and shipping sectors are relatively understudied when compared to road and rail infrastructure (Steen et al., 2022). The CCC (2025a) identified that most ARP4 submissions from reporting organisations across all modes of transport qualitatively identify their interdependencies with infrastructure sectors, particularly energy, water, telecoms, ICT, and other modes of transport. However, the CCC reported only limited evidence of adaptation action that has been taken to date to manage interdependent risks.

6.2.7.2 England

Current and future magnitude of risk

In July 2022, a heatwave caused a surface defect on the runway at London Luton Airport, suspending all flights for an afternoon (London Luton Airport, 2024). The Canal & River Trust (2024b) reported an increase in inland waterway maintenance in England and Wales in 2023/24 partly due to increasing pressures of climate change. Three consecutive windstorms in 2022 (Dudley, Eunice, Franklin) led to the closure of Port of Dover (Met Office 2025). Climate impacts at the port of London is expected to increase from less than $300 million in the present day to more than $750 million by 2050 (Port of London Authority, 2024).

Flooding from Storm Ciara in February 2020 led to damage to the Figure of Three Locks on the Calder & Hebble Navigation inland waterway, which cost around £3 million to repair (Canal & River Trust, 2024b). The Canal and River Trust (2024a) are increasing asset resilience, including strengthening their ten most critical culverts.

Evaluation of urgency score

The High current magnitude score for England is based on multiple sources confirming the impact of extreme weather events and long-term climate hazards on airports, ports, and inland waterways. The current confidence score is High because the evidence is robust, and there is strong consensus among experts, including multiple ARP4 reports.

Magnitude remains High in future periods based on evidence in peer-reviewed literature and ARP4 reports. Confidence in the 2030s is scored Medium because evidence is more limited or uncertain, but there is still general agreement on the conclusion. ARP4 reports typically contain adaptation plans for the aviation and ports sector; however, there is limited evidence about the implementation and anticipated effectiveness of adaptation action in the future thus the magnitude of risk is not reduced for any time period or scenario. Confidence is Low in the 2050s and 2080s because adaptation plans are focused on shorter timeframes and thus evidence for the farther future is limited.

Table 6.37: Urgency scores for I7 Risks to aviation and maritime transport systems for England. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.7.3 Northern Ireland

Current and future magnitude of risk

In 2024, the Department for Infrastructure’s ((DfI), 2025a, 2025b) Belfast Tidal Flood Alleviation Scheme from Belfast Harbour to Stranmillis Weir was completed. This scheme considered the impacts of flooding in 2080 due to climate change on Belfast Harbour, and adaptations included installing glass flood walls and stoplogs to be deployed during flood events (DfI, 2018, DfI, 2025b). Belfast Harbour have also used Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) and a digital twin to model the impacts of climate change on assets under different climate scenarios (Climate Northern Ireland, 2024b). Excepting this, there was no further information available about the level of risk and adaptation planning for airports and ports in Northern Ireland. Currently, airport and port operators in Northern Ireland are not required to report via the Adaptation Reporting Power.

There are five commercial ports in Northern Ireland, each of which is critical for handling external trade and enabling tourism. The small number of assets drives risk because there is not sufficient capacity to absorb the impacts of climate-related delays or closures at existing ports or airports. Although climate risk assessments of these ports are not available, the evidence reviewed in Section 6.2.7.1 highlights that Northern Ireland is vulnerable to UK-wide climate hazards, in particular coastal hazards including storm surges and sea level rise.

Evaluation of urgency score

The magnitude score is High for the current and future time horizons and is based on the evidence presented above and expert judgement that evidence on climate hazards from England and Scotland can be transposed to Northern Ireland due to broadly aligned climate trends for all parts of the UK (Slingo, 2021). The exposure of ports and airports to climate hazards means that the risks associated with climate change are increased because of these critical, single points of failure. Confidence is Medium for present day, as there is some evidence from the maritime sector combined with expert judgment. Expert judgment is used primarily for future time periods, thus confidence is Low.

The CCC’s evaluation of the second Northern Ireland Climate Change Adaptation Programme (NICCAP2) 2019-2024 identified that adaptation planning was only in its early stages across sectors, and that there was very limited evidence for the delivery and implementation of climate adaptation in the aviation, ports and shipping sectors (CCC, 2023b). The CCC was ‘unable to evaluate’ the asset and system level reliability of airport and port operations in Northern Ireland in the face of climate change (CCC, 2023b), however this would not have taken into account the above flood alleviation developments noted above for Belfast Harbour. This is supported by the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs’ (DAERA, 2025) evaluation of NICCAP2, which identified that Belfast City Airport had made some adaptation progress by considering its climate risks from sea level rise, but that the Airport would need to continue this work into NICCAP3.  NICCAP3 is currently under development and will be informed by evidence of adaptation actions across sectors in Northern Ireland submitted by a range of stakeholders including academia, local government, and businesses (Climate Northern Ireland, 2024a). At present, adaptation does not reduce the magnitude of risk.

Table 6.38: Urgency scores for I7 Risks to aviation and maritime transport systems for Northern Ireland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.7.4 Scotland

Current and future magnitude of risk

In Scotland, island communities are particularly reliant on ferry services and are therefore vulnerable to these services being disrupted. In recent years, ferry services have become increasingly unreliable and cancellations were mainly due to weather (CCC, 2023d). The small number of assets drives risk because there is not sufficient capacity to absorb the impacts of climate-related delays or closures at existing ports.

There are commitments to replace and upgrade port facilities, including a priority to adapt ferry services to be resilient to the impacts of climate change (Transport Scotland, 2023, 2024; Scottish Government, 2024). However, there is limited evidence available on the progress and implementation of adaptation commitments for airports (CCC, 2023d). Adaptation of inland waterways at the government-level may occur via environmental restoration of waterways that improves navigability, biodiversity and supports communities (SEPA, 2021; Scottish Canals, 2023).

Evaluation of urgency score

The risk magnitude is considered High for current and future time horizons based on current impacts, evidence from ARP4 reports, and adaptation actions. Confidence is High for the present day given the evidence in ARP4 reports. In the future, confidence is scored Low as the evidence is limited or conflicting, leading to weaker consensus. The CCC was ‘unable to evaluate’ the asset and system level reliability of airport operations in Scotland (CCC, 2023d); thus, risk magnitude is not reduced after considering adaptation.

Table 6.39: Urgency scores for I7 Risks to aviation and maritime transport systems for Scotland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.7.5 Wales

Current and future magnitude of risk

The Welsh Government’s Climate Adaptation Strategy (2024) includes climate adaptation outcomes for increasing the resilience of airports and ports to extreme weather events (Welsh Government, 2024a). However, the CCC’s latest evaluation of adaptation policy in Wales identified that there is limited information on the implementation and effectiveness of adaptation actions for the aviation, shipping, and inland waterways sectors (CCC, 2023c).

Although Cardiff Airport reported under ARP3, the report is not publicly available and a report was not submitted under ARP4. This highlights the criticality of understanding climate change risks to the region, particularly for the only major airport in Wales. The small number of assets drives risk because there is not sufficient capacity to absorb the impacts of climate-related delays or closures at other airports.

Evaluation of urgency score

The magnitude score is High for the future time horizons and is based on the expert judgement that evidence from England and Scotland can be transposed to Wales because hazards, exposure and vulnerability are consistent, in part due to broadly aligned climate trends for all parts of the UK (Slingo, 2021). Confidence is Low due to limited data on the climate impacts to operations at Cardiff Airport, which informed the CCC’s assessment of being ‘unable to evaluate’ adaptation progress for the asset and system level reliability of airport operations (CCC, 2023c). Thus, magnitude of risk was not reduced after considering adaptation.

Table 6.40: Urgency scores for I7 Risks to aviation and maritime transport systems for Wales. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.8 Risks to digital and communications systems – I8

Digital and communications systems considers risks to a range of infrastructure, including data centres, telephone masts, telegraph poles, fibre optic cables, and all other assets related to phone and internet connectivity.

Table 6.41: Urgency scores for I8 Risks to digital and communications systems. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.
ID	Risk		Present	2030	2050	2080	Urgency
I8	Risks to digital and communications systems	UK	M •	M •	M •	H •	FI
		England	M •	M •	M •	H •	FI
		Northern Ireland	M •	M •	M •	H •	FI
		Scotland	M •	M •	M •	H •	FI
		Wales	M •	M •	M •	H •	FI

6.2.8.1 Evidence relevant to the entire United Kingdom

Current and future drivers of risk

There are two main types of digital infrastructure: data centres; and telecommunications networks, including telephone masts, telegraph poles, fibre optic cables, and all other assets related to phone and internet connectivity. Data centres face climate hazards such as flooding, drought, and overheating. Data centre owners and operators identified water stress and high temperatures/heatwaves the hazards of most concern, due to the consequences for cooling systems in terms of operational failure or increased energy costs (techUK, 2024). For example, the July 2022 heatwave led to internal data centre outages across the Guy’s and St. Thomas’s NHS Trust, taking out most of its clinical information technology systems, and taking several weeks before complete restoration (NHS, 2023). Moreover, the UK data centre sector is heavily clustered, with around 80% of UK data centres located around the M25 motorway, and a second cluster in Manchester. Where data centres are clustered, there is the potential for a single extreme weather event to impact multiple data centres simultaneously.

For telecommunications networks, Ofcom (2024a) report that some firms identify flooding as a principal risk, as well as high winds and lightning, particularly for fixed and mobile infrastructure, including cell towers. For example, storms Isha and Jocelyn (Jan 2024) caused system-level disruption of broadband provision to 5,200 Fibrus customers (BBC, 2024e). Storm Arwen in November 2021 and Storm Éowyn in January 2025 affected phone and broadband connections across the country. Storm Arwen brought a wind direction (north to north-easterly) that infrastructure is not typically exposed to (Scottish Government, 2022), and Storm Éowyn led to physical damage to telegraph poles from both the storm itself and from the impacts of falling trees (Openreach, 2025). Storm Darragh in December 2024 led to telegraph poles and overhead cable damage, with some customers in Wales without phone and broadband connection for over two weeks (BBC, 2024f).

The technological development of telecommunications infrastructure, and the replacement, renewal of existing infrastructure can both drive and reduce climate risks. Generally, the rapid pace of technological advancements and innovation in parts of the sector (ISPA UK and INCA, 2024; techUK, 2024) means some assets are short-lived, inexpensive, and are quickly replaced or updated, reducing vulnerabilities. The deployment of Fibre to the Premises (FTTP) is enhancing infrastructure resilience, as fibre-optic cables are more resistant to temperature changes (DSIT, 2024a). As of July 2024, full-fibre coverage has reached 69% of UK households – up from 57% in September 2023 (Ofcom, 2024b). The Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) is currently undergoing closure and replacement by Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP). The closure of PSTN and replacement with VoIP places greater focus on the reliability of mobile networks and fixed broadband for PSTN uses an alternative power supply thereby enabling communication during local power outages that may affect mobile and broadband networks. Following Storms Arwen and Eunice in winter 2021/22 where extended power outages impacted telecommunication provision, the switch-off of the PSTN has been delayed until January 2027 out of concerns for vulnerable customers (CCC, 2025a).

Growing societal and infrastructure reliance on digital systems enhances connectivity, access, and efficiency in daily life (Gajjar, 2024) and helps build climate resilience via improved and increase monitoring systems (e.g., rail temperatures) and early warning system capabilities (e.g., for flooding). However, increased use and dependence on digital and communications systems means the extent or severity of its failure can be greater and impact essential services, e.g., Guy’s and St. Thomas’s NHS Trust (NHS, 2023). Increased digital dependence also exacerbates the digital divide. Those who cannot afford digital technologies, and older people, who typically use the digital technologies less could become more vulnerable, for example because they cannot access digital warning systems. Indeed, approximately a quarter of UK households (26%) had difficulty affording communications services in May 2025 (Ofcom, 2025). Digital and communications systems are also highly dependent on power systems (see I2 and I3).

Assessment of current magnitude of risk

The current magnitude of risk for digital and communications systems is Medium. Across the UK, there have been a range of reported incidents demonstrating how extreme weather events such as heatwaves and storms have led to network outages, which can cause localised severe disruption.

Assessment of future magnitude of risk

Future risk for digital and communications systems are generally scored as Medium, with the possibility of becoming High in the longer-term due to the pace of digitalisation and growing dependency on such systems in future. There is general consensus among network providers and the data centre industry that climate risks will increase in the future (e.g., Ofcom, 2024a; techUK, 2024; BT Group, 2025; Vodafone Group, 2023). Some of the consequences described include increased operational costs, and lower productivity from labour hours lost through heat stress.

2030s, central warming scenario:

Risk in the 2030s risk will be like present day, as the sector landscape and climate impacts are likely to be similar. The risk magnitude is therefore Medium (expert judgement).

2050s, central and high warming scenarios:

While extreme weather events may increase, the sector landscape may have changed (e.g., more new and more resilient infrastructure). This may result in impacts across the sector remaining similar to the present day in a central warming scenario, so the magnitude would remain as Medium. However, in the high warming scenario, weather events would be more extreme in terms of frequency, severity, and extent, and therefore would likely lead to greater impacts for the sector in terms of disruption scale or extent, justifying changing the magnitude risk to High (expert judgement).

2080s, central and high warming scenarios:

Both the central and high warming scenarios would bring more extreme weather events in terms of frequency, severity, and extent. This would likely lead to greater impacts for the sector in terms of disruption scale or extent, justifying changing the magnitude risk to High (expert judgement).

Level of preparedness for risk

Governance of digital and communications systems is reserved – decision-making is set out by UK Parliament for this infrastructure and therefore has an effect across all devolved nations.

Recent legislative reforms included some recognition of climate risk through the lens of broader resilience. For instance, upgrades are underway throughout the UK, underpinned by the need for advanced, high quality, and reliable communications infrastructure and provisions for clusters or networks of knowledge and data-driven, creative or high-technology industries, per the National Planning Policy Framework (MHCLG, 2024). Full-fibre rollout, for example, is a major upgrade for the sector and will help maintain internet connectivity as it is not affected by flooding unless power is also affected, also requiring less cabinet infrastructure (Ofcom, 2024a). As of September 2024, data centres are categorised as Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) alongside energy and water systems – the first CNI designation in over a decade (DSIT, 2024b). The intent of doing this is to enable greater government support in recovering from and anticipating critical incidents, which includes adverse weather or energy supply interruptions.

The digital and communications sector currently provides no substantive reporting on climate risk (Ofcom, 2024a) and this is largely justified by: “resilience by default” design of infrastructure that extends beyond climate risks in accordance with site selection, design and build, and operation (techUK, 2024); and existing telecommunications guidance underpinning resilient networks and services (Ofcom, 2024a). This assumption of resilience and lack of quantitative climate risk assessments may lead to the sector being insufficiently prepared for future climate impacts.

Assessment on the evidence base and evidence gaps

The confidence level for risks to digital and communications systems is Low. While there is some evidence and recent reports of extreme weather already impacting this sector in various ways, there are some conflicting perspectives across industry in the UK, leading to a weaker consensus.

Additionally, the evidence base regarding future climate impacts to digital and communication systems is limited. Although there was an increase in submissions from ARP3 to ARP4, future risk assessments in these and other similar publications were typically high level and qualitative (e.g., Ofcom, 2024a; ISPA UK and INCA, 2024; techUK, 2024; BT Group, 2025). There is also an evidence gap regarding longer-term time horizons, as these risk assessments often only considered a timeframe up to 2050 (e.g., BT Group, 2025; Vodafone Group, 2023).

6.2.8.2 England

Current and future magnitude of risk

The climate risk for this sector is broadly UK-wide, and therefore the devolved nations will experience similar current and future drivers of risk; current and future magnitude of risk; and levels of preparedness of risk. Specific considerations in England include the clustering of data centres in southeast England, which is projected to experience the greatest increase in summer temperatures, and where water scarcity is high risk (techUK, 2024; Section 6.2.9 for Risk I9).

Evaluation of urgency score

The examples presented here demonstrate that climate impacts on digital and communications infrastructure can be impactful but are usually localised. For present day, the limited evidence indicates climate impacts are likely to cause moderate annual damage and disruption or foregone opportunities, thus presenting a Medium level of risk. Changes to the sector landscape, or increased impacts associated with climate change are unlikely to raise the level of risk in the near term 2030s (expert judgment). Looking to the 2050s and 2080s, rapid infrastructure development, which is considered “resilient by design” across the sector, plus UK Government support in the sector from a broader resilience perspective (e.g., cyber security), means that the sector is expected to withstand future climate hazards; it is important to note there is limited evidence to substantiate this expectation. However, increasing dependency on the sector is increasing vulnerability, and individual weather events could result in farther-reaching and substantial impacts and consequences in future. After consideration of these factors, the intensification of climate change under the 2050s High scenario, and the 2080s Medium and High scenarios are expected to cause major annual disruption, thus raising the risk level to High (expert Judgment). Confidence is scored as Low for all time horizons due to limited evidence. Thus, the urgency assessment for England is Further investigation.

Table 6.42: Urgency scores for I8 Risks to digital and communications systems for England. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.8.3 Northern Ireland

Current and future magnitude of risk

The climate risk for this sector is broadly UK-wide, and therefore the devolved nations will experience similar current and future drivers of risk; current and future magnitude of risk; and levels of preparedness of risk. Specific considerations in Northern Ireland include storms, particularly with high winds. Some of the windiest parts of Northern Ireland correlate with high population density, especially in and around Belfast and towards the southeast. Northern Ireland has the greatest percentage of population with access to full fibre internet at 91% as of January 2024. This is one third higher than England, which is the next highest (Uswitch, 2024). Nevertheless, Storm Éowyn, for example, still impacted phone and broadband connection across the country due to wind damage to electricity and telecoms infrastructure (BBC, 2025b).

Evaluation of urgency score

The examples presented here demonstrate that climate impacts on digital and communications infrastructure can be impactful but are usually localised. For present day, the limited evidence indicates climate impacts are likely to cause moderate annual damage and disruption or foregone opportunities, thus presenting a Medium level of risk. Changes to the sector landscape, or increased impacts associated with climate change are unlikely to raise the level of risk in the near term 2030s (expert judgment). Looking to the 2050s and 2080s, rapid infrastructure development, which is considered “resilient by design” across the sector, plus UK Government support in the sector from a broader resilience perspective (e.g., cyber security), means that the sector is expected to withstand future climate hazards; it is important to note there is limited evidence to substantiate this expectation. However, increasing dependency on the sector is increasing vulnerability, and individual weather events could result in farther-reaching and substantial impacts and consequences in future. After consideration of these factors, the intensification of climate change under the 2050s High scenario, and the 2080s Medium and High scenarios are expected to cause major annual disruption, thus raising the risk level to High (expert Judgment. Confidence is scored as Low for all time horizons due to limited evidence. Thus, the urgency assessment for Northern Ireland is Further investigation in line with the remainder of the UK as expected.

Table 6.43: Urgency scores for I8 Risks to digital and communications systems for Northern Ireland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.8.4 Scotland

Current and future magnitude of risk

The climate risk for this sector is broadly UK-wide, and therefore the devolved nations will experience similar current and future drivers of risk; current and future magnitude of risk; and levels of preparedness of risk. Specific considerations in Scotland for digital and communications systems risk would be storms, particularly with high winds, as Scotland has some of the windiest regions in the UK. For example, Storm Arwen in November 2021 and Storm Éowyn in January 2025 affected phone and broadband connections across the country.

Evaluation of urgency score

The examples presented here demonstrate that climate impacts on digital and communications infrastructure can be impactful but are usually localised. For present day, the limited evidence indicates climate impacts are likely to cause moderate annual damage and disruption or foregone opportunities, thus presenting a Medium level of risk. Changes to the sector landscape, or increased impacts associated with climate change are unlikely to raise the level of risk in the near term 2030s (expert judgment). Looking to the 2050s and 2080s, rapid infrastructure development, which is considered “resilient by design” across the sector, plus UK Government support in the sector from a broader resilience perspective (e.g., cyber security), means that the sector is expected to withstand future climate hazards; it is important to note there is limited evidence to substantiate this expectation. However, increasing dependency on the sector is increasing vulnerability, and individual weather events could result in farther-reaching and substantial impacts and consequences in future. After consideration of these factors, the intensification of climate change under the 2050s High scenario, and the 2080s Medium and High scenarios are expected to cause major annual disruption, thus raising the risk level to High (expert Judgment. Confidence is scored as Low for all time horizons due to limited evidence. Thus, the urgency assessment for Scotland is Further investigation in line with the remainder of the UK as expected.

Table 6.44: Urgency scores for I8 Risks to digital and communications systems for Scotland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.8.5 Wales

Current and future magnitude of risk

The climate risk for this sector is broadly UK-wide, and therefore the devolved nations will experience similar current and future drivers of risk; current and future magnitude of risk; and levels of preparedness of risk. Specific considerations in Wales for digital and communications systems risk would be storms, particularly with high winds, as Wales has some windier regions in the west.

Evaluation of urgency score

The examples presented here demonstrate that climate impacts on digital and communications infrastructure can be impactful but are usually localised. For present day, the limited evidence indicates climate impacts are likely to cause moderate annual damage and disruption or foregone opportunities, thus presenting a Medium level of risk. Changes to the sector landscape, or increased impacts associated with climate change are unlikely to raise the level of risk in the near term 2030s (expert judgment). Looking to the 2050s and 2080s, rapid infrastructure development, which is considered “resilient by design” across the sector, plus UK Government support in the sector from a broader resilience perspective (e.g., cyber security), means that the sector is expected to withstand future climate hazards; it is important to note there is limited evidence to substantiate this expectation. However, increasing dependency on the sector is increasing vulnerability, and individual weather events could result in farther-reaching and substantial impacts and consequences in future. After consideration of these factors, the intensification of climate change under the 2050s High scenario, and the 2080s Medium and High scenarios are expected to cause major annual disruption, thus raising the risk level to High (expert judgment). Confidence is scored as Low for all time horizons due to limited evidence. Thus, the urgency assessment for Wales is Further investigation, in line with the remainder of the UK as expected.

Table 6.45: Urgency scores for I8 Risks to digital and communications systems for Wales. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.9 Risks to water supply and wastewater systems– I9

This risk covers risks to water supply and wastewater infrastructure and services. This includes services provided by utilities, whether privately owned (as in England and Wales) or fully government owned (as in Scotland and Northern Ireland), as well as non-utility supply, commonly known as private supplies.

Table 6.46: Urgency scores for I9 Risks to water supply and wastewater systems. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.
ID	Risk		Present	2030	2050	2080	Urgency
I9	Risks to water supply and wastewater systems	UK	H • • •	H • •	H • •	H •	MAN
		England	H • • •	H • •	H • •	H •	MAN
		Northern Ireland	H • •	H • •	H • •	H •	MAN
		Scotland	H • • •	H • •	H • •	H •	MAN
		Wales	H • •	H • •	H • •	H •	MAN

6.2.9.1 Evidence relevant to the entire United Kingdom

Current and future drivers of risk

Climate change will increase the risk to water supply and wastewater services in the UK. Changes to rainfall patterns increase the risk from droughts and floods (see State of Climate chapter). All these risks are important, but drought will remain the principal threat to water and wastewater services. Figure 6.3 shows the impact of a changing climate on water and wastewater services.

Figure 6.3: The climate wheel of impacts on water and wastewater services

Drought, floods, wildfire, and increasing temperatures degrade water quality at source, within supply systems, and in receiving waters. Storms represent a risk to ancillary services (power, telecoms, roads) that are essential for water and wastewater system functionality. Reduced water availability during hot, dry periods places a strain on public water supplies, affecting water quantity and quality. Low water availability often coincides with increased domestic demand, exacerbating strain on supply, and may lead to service interruptions.

Fluvial and pluvial flooding impact water supply and wastewater treatment sites. Wastewater facilities tend to be more vulnerable than water supplies due to their low-lying locations. Much of the UK sewer network carries both sewage and runoff from rain events in combined sewers. This increases both the risk of overflow spills from wastewater treatment works and direct flooding from overloaded sewers. Coastal flooding and erosion also present significant risks, especially to wastewater treatment sites located near coastlines (see also BE2).

Wildfires threaten catchments and critical infrastructure, and in future may change hydrology and raw water quality (Raoelison et al., 2023; Moazeni and Cerda, 2024). Windstorms create challenges for interdependencies such as power, telecoms, and roads. Storm Arwen in 2021 demonstrated that rural water supplies are vulnerable to damage to the national power grid (Valero et al., 2023). Private water supplies, used by at least 2.5% of the Scottish population (DWQR, 2024), are particularly vulnerable.

Demographic changes will increase risk. Population growth will be highest in the southeast and east of England, where drought risks are highest and increasing (State of the Climate chapter). Population growth in the other nations is projected to be lower but regional variations are pertinent. For instance, population growth in Scotland is expected to be highest within commuting distance to Edinburgh (Scottish Government, 2021), which coincides with increasing drought hazards in east Scotland (State of the Climate chapter). The UK population is aging, which increases vulnerability when water services are disrupted because of difficulty in accessing alternative supply and potential risks from waterborne and hygiene-related pathogens. UK water and wastewater infrastructure is aging, increasing its vulnerability to damage or disruption from climate risks.

Other risk drivers include growth in high water demand industries, aging water infrastructure and energy generation. Increasing investment in data centres may increase demand for water, which in other countries has been shown to be substantial (Mytton, 2021; Watkowski et al., 2025; Liu et al., 2025). Where this investment coincides with areas of highest population growth and existing water stress (e.g., southeast and east of England), this may create new challenges in sustainable supply. Aging wastewater infrastructure which requires to deal with increasing numbers of direct discharges, as well as intensifying storm conditions add to the risk drivers (RAEng, 2024).

Deteriorating water quality with climate change is leading to increasing threats to human health from exposure via consumption of drinking water and from recreational uses of water (UKHSA, 2023). The very young, the old, and people with co-morbidities most vulnerable (see also H4)

Increasing water temperatures, more frequent low flow events, floods, and discharge of untreated sewage will contribute to harmful algal blooms that impact water supplies (Bussi and Whitehead, 2020; Reid et al., 2024; RAEng, 2024). Changes in climate may also encourage further spread of invasive non-native species, which are already noted as exerting significant costs to utilities, including water utilities (Eschen et al. 2023). Drought conditions often create higher concentrations of chemicals in water and may lead to release of contaminants in the bottom waters and sediments in reservoirs, increasing exposure to chemical ‘cocktails’ (UK Parliament, 2022). Floods degrade water quality in water bodies with sudden increases in suspended solids and chemical pollution, including from direct runoff and combined sewer overflows. The persistence of water-borne pathogens within the environment is expected to change with changes in climate presenting new challenges (Colston et al., 2022).

Assessment of current magnitude of risk

Evidence from multiple high-quality sources along with adaptation plans and strategies prepared by water companies, indicates there is currently a high risk from climate change. Risks to wastewater treatment systems, including damage to treatment facilities by flooding, including saltwater flooding, continue to exist (Hyde-Smith et al., 2022) and increasing pollutant loads can overwhelm treatment capacity in treatment plants during flood events. Water scarcity is a significant threat to municipal water supply most notably in eastern parts of the UK, with private water supplies particularly vulnerable (Visser-Quinn et al., 2021; Reyniers et al., 2023).

Current levels of pollution combined with increasing water temperatures and more frequent periods of drought and flood are increasing the risks of harmful algal blooms across the UK (Reid et al., 2024; RAEng, 2024.; Perry et al., 2024). Harmful algal blooms present a potential risk to health from the release of toxins and cause problems for water treatment (UKHSA, 2023). There is evidence that periods of low flows and drought increase risks of chemical contamination of water, including concentrations of pharmaceuticals and micro-plastics (Niemi et al. 2022; Wilson and Worrall, 2021) and discharge of untreated sewage after storm events causes chemical contamination, including from emerging contaminants (Petrie, 2021; see H2). Dissolved organic carbon is already of concern given the substantial proportion of UK catchments containing peatlands. Current maximum dissolved organic carbon concentrations in source waters already exceed treatment capacity and these will increase in the future (Xu et al., 2020). Wildfire may further contribute to raised dissolved organic carbon and may increase soil erosion and increased suspended solids and nutrients downstream. However, wildfire impacts on water supply remains under-studied in the UK.

Treatment of drinking water by water utilities is currently considered excellent across the UK. However, vulnerability to extreme weather prevails. For wastewater there is abundant evidence that water companies are not managing wastewater well and that combined sewer overflow spills occur at an unacceptable level (RAEng, 2024; Perry et al., 2024). Water quality in private supplies is of concern (Rivington et al., 2022; DWI, 2023a, b) and this is expected to worsen (Boca et al., 2022). There is little evidence that actions are being taken to manage water quality in these supplies.

Assessment of future magnitude of risk

There is consensus that drought poses the principal threat to future water supply across the UK (Boca et al., 2022; Murgatroyd et al., 2022). However, assessments of future risk indicate potential hotspots in all nations where periods of hydrological extremes may be exacerbated, such as northeast and southwest Scotland (Visser-Quinn et al., 2021) and southeast and eastern England (State of the Climate chapter). Future flood risk is significant in all four nations. Risk of increased summer flooding will change the dynamics of water storage patterns, affect water quality and increase operation and maintenance costs. Increased flooding may trigger a cascading risk as aging infrastructure performance declines, e.g., through catastrophic dam failure (Michalis and Sentenac, 2021).

2030s, central warming scenario:

The risk for the 2030s is assessed as being high, based on several sources of high-quality evidence (medium confidence), with risks remaining high after considering adaptations by water companies as these do not comprehensively cover all climate threats. Drought will pose the principal threat to water supply in the future across the UK (Boca et al., 2022; Murgatroyd et al., 2022). Strategic water resource options, if implemented, can provide resilience to a 1-in-500-year drought, but without these investments, deficits will occur (Murgatroyd et al., 2022). Reuse schemes show the greatest resilience to future changes in climate and demand, followed by reservoirs and finally transfers and the greatest benefit of strategic resource options is observed in the London water resource zone (Murgatroyd et al., 2022). As part of the strategic water resource options, inter-basin transfers can be considered between non-adjacent water resources zones (i.e., from water rich to water poor zones) but in some cases may only be viable in the winter if deficits in the supplying zone are to be avoided (Dobson et al., 2020; Khadem et al., 2021). The published modelling studies have focused on supply with little assessment of the changing demand from water-intensive industries. Water quality will continue to decline (Xu et al., 2020; Adey et al., 2022; RAEng, 2024) as algal blooms, dissolved organic carbon, and chemical contamination continue, and combined sewer overflow events remain frequent. The deterioration in source water quality will pose risks for water treatment. Risks from wildfires and threats to ancillary services will increase and are an emerging and evolving threat which require further research.

2050s, central and high warming scenarios:

The level of overall risk is high. Risks of drought continue with concerns that plans to meet the regulatory requirement to be resilient to a 1-in-500-year drought event are not sufficient, unless all strategic resource options are implemented (Murgatroyd et al., 2022). Co-occurrence of significant drought in adjacent water resource zones reduces the ability of water companies to transfer water between supply zones (Murgatroyd et al., 2022). There will be increasing threats from floods impacting both water supply and wastewater management. There will be ongoing threats from combined sewer overflow contamination (Adey et al., 2022; RAEng, 2024). The deterioration in water quality will increase the challenges for water treatment and ultimately water safety (Dobson et al., 2020; UKHSA, 2023).

The residual risk accounting for planned adaptations remains high. Given the increasing uncertainty in hydrology (Milly et al., 2008), the occurrence of droughts that have a magnitude greater than a 1-in-500-year event cannot be discounted. There are efforts underway to adapt water supply infrastructure to flooding, but there is limited information on flood risk management, particularly for fluvial flooding, for critical points in drinking water infrastructure, despite previous evidence of its importance (Pitt, 2007).

Whether the increasing threat of water quality deterioration will be managed is hard to assess so far in the future. Experience shows that water treatment developments can occur rapidly in response to observed threats. The current water company adaptation reports include plans for upgrading water treatment works. If a substantial programme of research is instigated, treatment improvements may keep pace with emerging challenges. The lack of actions on wildfire suggests these risks may not be well managed.

2080s, central and high warming scenarios:

For the scenarios in the 2080s, the risk is assessed as very high based on expert judgment. Floods, drought, wildfires, and storms are all expected to be more frequent and intense. The residual risk accounting for adaptation remains high. While adaptation plans have been developed, it is unclear whether the actions proposed will be sufficient to cope with anticipated changes, and some risks (e.g., wildfire) have largely been ignored. There is medium confidence in the management of drought risk given the requirement, at least in England and Wales, to provide resilience up to a 1-in-500-year drought. However, severe drought and co-occurrence of drought in adjacent water resource zones may challenge the resilience of supplies.

Level of preparedness for risk

The quality of adaptation plans varies. All water companies recognise some level of risk, but strategies contain limited evidence on quantitative measures of success, or in investment strategies there is limited detail, particularly for the 2080s. Some water companies link review of adaptation plans to the periodic pricing reviews thus strategic interventions beyond the five-year period are not assured. Ofwat sets targets for water companies in England and Wales to support resilience. However, as noted in Ofwat’s fourth climate adaptation report, most resilience targets were missed in the price review PR19 period, in some cases by a very considerable margin. Similar targets are established in Northern Ireland and Scotland by water regulators, however there is no unified water regulator reporting across the UK to ensure a consistent approach. Water companies in all nations recognise the climate risks and vulnerabilities (Boca et al., 2022; Rivington et al., 2020).

Demand management and behavioural change considerations are less clear in the adaptation plans (Xenochristou et al., 2020). Emerging risks from wildfire are poorly considered. Some water companies note these could increase peak demand, but not their impact on the catchment. Only some (e.g., Severn-Trent) set out plans for tackling these threats.

Assessment on the evidence base and evidence gaps

There remains an urgent need for more research and improved modelling of how climate changes will affect water supplies, particularly compound risks such as heavy rain events following a period of extended drought affecting both water flows and water quality. The interplay of wildfire, drought and flood risks require more integrated modelling. Consideration of complex chemical cocktails and the remobilisation of historical pollutants and their metabolites is important because the effects on human and ecosystem health remain unknown. There is a UK fire season (Perry et al., 2022), but there is a dearth of research on wildfire impacts on water supplies both in terms of single and repeated events’ effects on hydrology and on water quality and supply. The adaptation plans developed by water companies across the UK lack granular detail and have limited plans for evaluation. More robust periodic quantitative evaluation of effectiveness is needed to provide greater confidence in both current adaptation plans and to ensure that there is adequate flexibility in forward planning to accommodate currently unanticipated changes. Within this, a common approach across all four nations that accounts for different models of ownership and regulatory regimes would be beneficial.

6.2.9.2 England

Current and future magnitude of risk

Drought is the major climate hazard of concern in England (Dobson et al., 2020; Murgatroyd et al., 2022; Welbank, 2021), with floods an increasing threat to both water and wastewater services (RAEng, 2024). Modelling by Murgatroyd et al. (2022) concluded that resilience to a 1-in-500-year drought was achievable if identified strategic resource options are used, and abstraction of water is reduced. They note that achieving this target will be easier if more action is taken to reduce and manage demand. The southeast of England is the region most severely at risk from drought (State of the Climate chapter).

The water industry has not stated explicitly whether the announcements on expanded water storage in England include allocations for new water-intensive industries. It is acknowledged that modelling assessments undertaken by the water industry exist but are not in the public domain. The current and planned construction of expanded storage and inter-basin transfers and the potential for a transfer from Kielder Water to the South Eastsco has been modelled (Khadem et al., 2021). The study did not consider demand management but noted that water transfer was only feasible during winter months to avoid water shortages and ecological harm in the Kielder catchment.

Evaluation of urgency score

Evidence from multiple high-quality sources along with adaptation plans and strategies prepared by water companies indicates with High confidence that climate impacts current water supply and water quality with a High magnitude risk. In the 2030 near future, risk remains High, but with Medium confidence is lower given lower levels of evidence. For the 2050s and 2080s, the severity of climate impacts (floods, droughts, water quality) will increase, exacerbated by population growth and shift, and water-intensive industries, particularly in southeast England. For 2050s, although climate risks are projected to increase, expert judgment and available literature indicates that the level of impact will not exceed that within the High magnitude banding. For 2080s, the magnitude of impact is likely to be Very High, based largely on expert judgment, with Low confidence. However, planned adaptation actions by water companies reduces the magnitude to High.

Table 6.47: Urgency scores for I9 Risks to water supply and wastewater systems for England. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.9.3 Northern Ireland

Current and future magnitude of risk

The water scarcity deep dive report, for CCRA4-IA TR, provides evidence of both current and future water scarcity in industry and power in NI. There is good quality evidence for harmful algal blooms do occur even on large water bodies, with studies identifying algal mats containing a number of human pathogens and toxins (Reid et al., 024). The NI Water Climate Change Strategy includes modelling of medium and high climate scenarios (RCPs 4.5 and 8.5). There is some evidence for adaptation actions e.g., targets for reducing the area of impermeable surfaces (Utility Regulator, 2024) and funding to protect vulnerable wastewater assets from the impact of climate change (NI Water, 2024).

Evaluation of urgency score

UK and Northern Ireland specific evidence indicates a High magnitude of current risk, but with a Medium level of confidence to reflect the more limited evidence base. For the 2050s and 2080s, there is limited evidence on the impact of future climate impacts. Expert judgment expects the severity of climate impacts to increase; for 2050s, the level of impact will not exceed the upper bound of the High magnitude band, but for 2080s, the magnitude of impact is likely to be Very High (Low confidence). After considering the NI Water Climate Change Strategy and current planned actions, the risk magnitude is reduced to High (expert judgment).

Table 6.48: Urgency scores for I9 Risks to water supply and wastewater systems for Northern Ireland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.9.4 Scotland

Current and future magnitude of risk

Projections of hydro-hotspots (areas prone to compound flood and drought events) in Scotland highlight the critical need for more research on the effect of climate change on groundwater availability and quantity given its importance for private supplies, already at elevated risk from climate change, and irrigation (Boca et al. 2022). Also, Visser-Quinn et al., (2021) identify two hotspots of both drought and abstraction in the rivers Spey and Tay and note that by the 2080s (Central estimate), the frequency of drought events could see a two or three-fold increase with abstraction exacerbating the pressure to water supplies. Moreover, extreme meteorological drought events may increase in frequency from an average of one event every 20 years (current day) to one event every 3 years by 2040.

Private water supplies, which serve at least 2.5% of the population in Scotland (DWQR, 2024), are particularly exposed to water scarcity as there is limited redundancy in the supply system. The Drinking Water Quality Regulator notes that the true number of people served by private water supplies in Scotland is likely to be higher. A key challenge for Scotland is the national messaging around climate change impacts to water resources, and future increasing water scarcity (McClymont and Beevers, 2022).

Evaluation of urgency score

Evidence from multiple high-quality sources along with adaptation plans and strategies prepared by water companies indicates with High confidence that climate impacts current water supply and water quality with a High magnitude risk. In the 2030 near future, risk remains High, but with Medium confidence is lower given lower levels of evidence. For the 2050s and 2080s, the severity of climate impacts (floods, droughts, water quality) will increase, particularly in hotspots noted above. For 2050s, although climate risks are projected to increase, expert judgment and available literature indicates that the level of impact will remain in the High magnitude band. For 2080s, the magnitude of impact is likely to be Very High based largely on expert judgment with some information on specific risks and regions (Visser-Quinn et al., 2021), with Low confidence. However, planned adaptation actions by water companies reduces the magnitude to High.

Table 6.49: Urgency scores for I9 Risks to water supply and wastewater systems for Scotland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.9.5 Wales

Current and future magnitude of risk

Dallison et al. (2021) report that, for their study of two catchments in Wales under a range of climate scenarios, streamflow decrease would result in unmet demand in absence of upstream reservoirs with problems greater in near term. As noted above, water companies in Wales (and England) are required to ensure resilience up to a 1-in-500-year drought.

Evaluation of urgency score

UK level evidence, combined with evidence from Wales, indicates a High magnitude of current risk, but with a Medium level of confidence to reflect the more limited evidence base. For the 2030s the urgency score will be similar to present day. For the 2050s and 2080s, there is Medium confidence that the severity of climate impacts (floods, droughts, water quality) will increase; for the 2050s, evidence and expert judgment indicates this will not exceed the High magnitude banding (Medium confidence). For 2080s, the magnitude of climate impacts is likely to be Very High, based largely on expert judgment. However, planned adaptation actions by water companies reduces the magnitude to High. Confidence is Low for 2080s due to limited evidence.

Table 6.50: Urgency scores for I9 Risks to water supply and wastewater systems for Wales. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.10 Risks to waste management systems, excluding wastewater systems – I10

Waste management systems (excluding wastewater systems), here referred to as waste infrastructure, include: (i) nuclear, i.e., nuclear waste and decommissioned /decommissioning power station sites; (ii) mining and extraction, specifically coal spoil tips; and, (iii) general waste management, i.e., landfill sites (active and historic), waste incinerators, thermal treatment plants, household waste recycling centres, transfer stations, and material recovery facilities.

Table 6.51: Urgency scores for I10 Risks to waste management systems, excluding wastewater systems. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.
ID	Risk		Present	2030	2050	2080	Urgency
I10	Risks to waste management systems, excluding wastewater systems	UK	H •	M •	M •	M •	CI
		England	L •	L •	L •	L •	FI
		Northern Ireland	L •	L •	L •	L •	FI
		Scotland	L •	L •	L •	L •	FI
		Wales	H •	M •	M •	M •	CI

6.2.10.1 Evidence relevant to the entire United Kingdom

Current and future drivers of risk

The evidence of climate impacts on waste infrastructure is limited. Concerning nuclear, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) estate has 17 sites across Great Britain that are planned for or undergoing decommissioning, most which are near the coast. ONR and the relevant environment agency regulate nuclear sites, including nuclear waste and decommissioning sites, ONR’s Safety Assessment Principles (ONR, 2020) set out the expectation for duty holders in the nuclear industry to consider the impacts of external hazards and the potential effects of climate change as part of hazard analysis. All nuclear licensed sites undergo periodic safety reviews every 10 years. Although decommissioning will lead to fewer active sites, nuclear waste will need to be managed into the future.

Waste disposal sites were historically located in coastal areas close to industrial and commercial sites. In some locations, erosion has released landfill waste onto the beaches and waters (BBC, 2024g), and land, subtidal, and intertidal sediments may be contaminated from landfill and other historical unmanaged waste disposal (Bardos et al., 2020). Where these sites are exposed to increased erosion due to sea-level rise or coastal flooding and storm surges, the level of impact is expected to remain the same or increase – however, there are some emerging concerns regarding the potential release of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) which can be persistent and toxic at very low concentrations (Brand and Spencer, 2024). Active, closed, and historic landfills can release hazardous substances into the environment following floods or drought (Environment Agency, 2023b; Brand and Spencer, 2024; Weber et al., 2025), although highly developed flood-prone areas typically have extensive defences in place to lower risk (Nicholls et al., 2021). Future warmer summer temperatures could lead to an increase in hot waste, such as barbeque disposal, which can lead to waste fires (Environment Agency, 2023b). Wildfires may also be exacerbated or intensified if landfill sites are nearby due to them being a significant combustion source (Ibrahim et al., 2020). There are no reports of climate impacts on household recycling centres, waste incinerators (including those for energy generation), or other waste infrastructure. Local authority ARP reports include risks to waste collections services or waste disposal infrastructure caused by extreme weather (Blackpool), potential impacts on waste collections teams working outdoors (Colchester), and climate impacts on roads impacting waste collection (Warwickshire).

Waste infrastructure is changing; waste to landfill is decreasing, recycling and Waste to Energy generation is increasing (Defra, 2025). Future population growth may increase waste generation, but this increase could be offset by increased waste recycling or waste prevention. These changes will change the location and amount of waste infrastructure and the sector’s exposure to climate risk. Whether risk increases will depend on what infrastructure is needed, where it is located, and whether it is designed for future weather and climate. Local vulnerabilities, such as prioritised collection for medical waste customers, should also be considered.

A tipping point regarding waste infrastructure would be extreme sea level rise, e.g., the complete loss of ice sheets. Sea level rise that completely inundates low-lying coastal sites (e.g., nuclear waste treatment and storage infrastructure) could have substantial human and environmental impacts, given that the infrastructure is likely to exist beyond 2100. Coastal landfill sites could also be impacted in a similar way. For nuclear sites, it is likely that the radiological hazard will reduce over time, as sites undergo decommissioning. All nuclear licensed sites undergo periodic safety reviews usually every 10 years (ONR, 2020).

Assessment of current magnitude of risk

The current magnitude of risk for waste infrastructure is considered Low. ONR and Environment Agency recently considered the GB nuclear industry’s resilience to climate change, as part of the Chief Nuclear Inspector’s Themes Inspection on Climate Change (ONR, 2025). Nuclear assets are considered highly resilient to the near-term potential effects of climate change, but the long-term impacts are less understood (ONR, 2024).  Excepting Wales there are no reported impacts from mining and extraction waste (see section 6.2.10.5). Climate impacts on waste infrastructure such as erosion of historic landfill sites are reported, but local in scale.

Assessment of future magnitude of risk

ONR and the relevant environment agency regulate nuclear sites, including nuclear waste and decommissioning sites. ONR’s Safety Assessment Principles (ONR, 2020) set out the expectations for duty holders in the nuclear industry to consider the impacts of external hazards and the potential effects of climate change as part of hazard analysis. Some academic studies consider future climate risks to waste infrastructure, such as:

• Future changes in temperature, groundwater chemistry, flow rates, and sea salinity on geological repositories for nuclear waste are implied (Pizarro and Sainsbury, 2023),
• Coastal erosion and flooding of landfills, and the need for further analysis to understand future change in geomorphology and the local-level impacts on sites (Nicholls et al., 2021),
• The future erosion and release of solid waste considered more of a threat than flooding and leachate release from landfills (Beaven et al., 2020).

There are no studies that quantify the climate impacts on waste infrastructure for specific time periods or climate. Expert judgment discusses these qualitatively below.

2030s, central warming scenario:

In the near-term, climate risks may be similar, albeit with some shifts in intensity. However, the waste infrastructure landscape is likely to be similar to present, with a small potential increase in risk in locations where population growth demands an increase in waste facilities. Erosion of costal landfill sites is likely to continue without remediation. As such, any climate impacts are likely to be local in scale, and the magnitude of risk is likely to overall remain similar to the present day, i.e., Low in England, Scotland, and Northen Ireland, but High in Wales due to the potential for coal tip failures (See Section 6.2.10.5). Confidence is Low given the limited evidence.

2050s, central and high warming scenarios:

In the 2050s, the frequency and magnitude of heavy rainfall events and hot summer temperatures will increase. Heavier rainfall may lead to flooding, and in coastal areas this may be exacerbated by sea level rise, which may increase erosion of historic landfill sites where defences are currently insufficient (BBC, 2024g). Heavier rainfall will increase the potential for coal tip landslides in Wales. High temperature events, especially those coupled with periods of drought, may lead to wildfires at landfills or wildfires being exacerbated by nearby combustive waste. Nuclear decommissioning will be continuing, which will reduce the overall radiological hazard. ONR and the relevant environment agencies will continue to regulate nuclear sites through decommissioning including ensuring climate change effects are appropriately considered within safety cases. Waste reduction initiatives should be well established in reducing landfilling, although population growth may increase waste streams and recycling, as well as more legacy landfills to manage. New municipal waste sites should have been built with climate risk, particularly flooding in mind; older sites may continue to be protected by existing defences. It is likely that extreme weather and costal erosion will impact existing and future waste infrastructure, and risk may increase as climate events increase in frequency and magnitude. However, impacts are expected to be localised and Low magnitude (see Section 6.2.10.5 for mining waste in Wales). Confidence is Low given the limited evidence.

2080s, central and high warming scenarios:

In the 2080s, the frequency and magnitude of heavy rainfall events and hot summer temperatures is likely to have increased since the 2050s. Heavier rainfall may lead to flooding, and in coastal areas this may be exacerbated by far higher levels of sea level rise. High temperature events, especially those coupled with periods of drought may lead to wildfires at landfills, or wildfires being exacerbated by nearby combustive waste. Nuclear decommissioning will be continuing. Historic landfill sites will remain, but waste management and infrastructure are expected to have changed significantly from present day. New infrastructure should have been designed with climate change in mind given the anticipated increase in adaptive capacity across with time. As per previous time periods, any impacts on waste infrastructure (excepting coal tip failures) are likely to be local in scale and Low magnitude. Confidence is Low given the limited evidence.

Level of preparedness for risk

ONR and the relevant environment agency regulate nuclear sites, including nuclear waste and decommissioning sites. ONR’s Safety Assessment Principles (ONR, 2020) set out the expectations for duty holders in the nuclear industry to consider the impacts of external hazards and the potential effects of climate change as part of hazard analysis.  Other waste infrastructure is typically the responsibility of local authorities, who develop their own strategy for their region, and waste management authorities, who are responsible for their own assets. Historically, local authority climate adaptation has lagged some national infrastructure providers; however, 11 local authorities contributed to the ARP process for the first time in 2024 and three local authorities mentioned climate risks, with two providing high-level adaptation actions (Blackpool, Warwickshire). Waste infrastructure facilities are required to adhere to national planning frameworks within the devolved nations. Regulation of waste is devolved by nation. The UK Government provides guidance on integrating climate change adaptation into management (Environment Agency, 2023c) under an environmental permit (as part of the system for England; although the guidelines are relevant UK-wide), but uptake and oversight of this in any nation is unclear. In general, most of the climate risk for this sector is UK-wide, and therefore the devolved nations will experience similar current and future drivers of risk; current and future magnitude of risk; and levels of preparedness of risk. However, it is important to note that site-specific factors are what drive key vulnerabilities across the sector (Environment Agency, 2023d).

Assessment on the evidence base and evidence gaps

Evidence is limited in comparison to other infrastructure sectors. Waste infrastructure owners and operators were not invited to submit to the ARP process and have not done so. However, high-level information on climate risks to waste is mentioned in three local authority adaptation plans. Academic peer review papers tend to focus on flood risk or coastal erosion to landfills (e.g., Brand and Spencer, 2024; Nicholls et al., 2021). Waste statistics are available online (Defra, 2025), but these do not include climate risks. ONR and the EA recently considered the GB nuclear industry’s resilience to climate change, as part of the Chief Nuclear Inspector’s Themed Inspection on Climate Change (ONR, 2025). Nuclear assets are considered highly resilient to the near-term potential effects of climate change, but the long-term impacts are less understood (ONR, 2024).

6.2.10.2 England

Current and future magnitude of risk

There are currently just over 500 operational landfills across England (Environment Agency, 2025). Since 2023, England is the only devolved nation where climate change adaptation is considered as part of permitting and compliance activities for the majority of EPR permits for significant infrastructure such as waste, power generation etc (Environment Agency, 2023d).

There are over 20,000 closed or historic landfills in England (UKHSA, 2024), and nearly 4,000 of these do not have flood defences and are located within areas where there is greater than 1% annual probability of fluvial flooding and/or greater than 0.5% annual probability of flooding from the sea. However, highly developed flood-prone areas like the Thames Estuary have high and extensive defences in place, protecting most landfills (and presumably, other waste infrastructure) within the protected area (Nicholls et al., 2021).

Any new waste facilities are required to adhere to the National Planning Policy Framework (MHCLG, 2024), which states that development should be avoided in areas of highest flood risk and that development should consider climate risk.

There are 11 nuclear decommissioning sites in England (of 17 total for the UK). ONR and the EA recently considered the GB nuclear industry’s resilience to climate change, including nuclear decommissioning sites, as part of the Chief Nuclear Inspector’s Themed Inspection on Climate Change (ONR, 2025). Nuclear assets are highly resilient to the near-term potential effects of climate change, but the long-term impacts are less understood (ONR, 2024).  Most coal spoil tips in England are located across the West Midlands and the Northwest, although there is no central record of the locations of all these in England (DESNZ, 2024b). The Mining Remediation Authority inspects seven of these sites (MRA, 2024). There are no recent reports of landslips due to flooding or heavy rainfall located around coal spoil tips in England.

Evaluation of urgency score

The available evidence indicates that any climate impacts are likely to be local in scale, therefore Low magnitude. In the 2030s, the sector landscape and present-day weather-related impacts are likely to be similar. In the 2050s and 2080s, although the issues related to historic landfills are likely to continue, new waste infrastructure is likely to be different to present day. Climate risks may increase as climate change intensifies, but newer waste infrastructure should be designed with climate change in mind, and impacts are still likely to be local in scale. Confidence is Low, and scoring relies predominantly on expert judgment.

Table 6.52: Urgency scores for I10 Risks to waste management systems, excluding wastewater systems for England. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.10.3 Northern Ireland

Current and future magnitude of risk

There currently 38 permitted landfills in Northern Ireland (Department of Finance, 2023). There is no nuclear infrastructure in Northern Ireland. There is no information on coal spoil tips (as the Mining Remediation Authority does not cover Northern Ireland), though abandoned mines are monitored by the Department for the Economy. Potential climate impacts related to household waste infrastructure are likely to be similar to those outlined for the UK, such as localised pollution following flooding or erosion of landfill site, or disruption to waste management processes due to extreme weather that temporarily prevents operations. The Strategic Planning Policy Statement (Department of the Environment, 2015) specifies that development should be avoided in areas vulnerable to the effects of climate change.

Evaluation of urgency score

The available evidence indicates that any climate impacts are likely to be local in scale, therefore Low magnitude. In the 2030s, the sector landscape and present-day weather-related impacts are likely to be similar. In the 2050s and 2080s, although the issues related to historic landfills are likely to continue, new waste infrastructure is likely to be different to present day. Climate risks may increase as climate change intensifies, but newer waste infrastructure should be designed with climate change in mind, and impacts are still likely to be local in scale. Confidence is Low, and scoring relies predominantly on expert judgment.

Table 6.53: Urgency scores for I10 Risks to waste management systems, excluding wastewater systems for Northern Ireland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.10.4 Scotland

Current and future magnitude of risk

Scotland has 41 permitted landfill sites (SEPA, 2024). ONR and the EA recently considered the GB nuclear industry’s resilience to climate change, including nuclear decommissioning sites, as part of the Chief Nuclear Inspector’s Themed Inspection on Climate Change (ONR, 2025). Nuclear assets are highly resilient to the near-term potential effects of climate change, but the long-term impacts are less understood (ONR, 2024).  There are fewer coal spoil tips than England and Wales although there is no central record of them all in Scotland (DESNZ, 2024b). Five tips are inspected by the Mining Remediation Authority (MRA, 2024). Under the National Planning Framework, new waste infrastructure in Scotland must take climate risks into account (Scottish Government, 2023) and there is specific planning guidance for climate adaptation (Scottish Government, 2025).

Evaluation of urgency score

The available evidence indicates that any climate impacts are likely to be local in scale, therefore Low magnitude. In the 2030s, the sector landscape and present-day weather-related impacts are likely to be similar. In the 2050s and 2080s, although the issues related to historic landfills are likely to continue, new waste infrastructure is likely to be different to present day. Climate risks may increase as climate change intensifies, but newer waste infrastructure should be designed with climate change in mind, and impacts are still likely to be local in scale. Confidence is Low, and scoring relies predominantly on expert judgment.

Table 6.54: Urgency scores for I10 Risks to waste management systems, excluding wastewater systems for Scotland. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.2.10.5 Wales

Current and future magnitude of risk

In Wales, the risk associated with coal mine tips (see next paragraph) is high and consequently increases the overall magnitude of risk for Wales to High (with no additional adaptation). There are approximately 20 operational landfills in Wales (Natural Resources Wales, 2024). While there are fewer active and historic landfills than England, many historic landfills in Wales are in coastal zones, and six of these may become exposed and a potential source of pollution at the current erosion rates in future without defences in place (Irfan et al., 2019). There are also two nuclear decommissioning sites. ONR and the EA recently considered the GB nuclear industry’s resilience to climate change, including nuclear decommissioning sites, as part of the Chief Nuclear Inspector’s Themed Inspection on Climate Change (ONR, 2025). Nuclear assets are highly resilient to the near-term potential effects of climate change, but the long-term impacts are less understood (ONR, 2024).

Coal spoil tip collapses are more prevalent in Wales. Landslides can occur in these locations when the water table rises following heavy rain (He et al., 2024). There are over 5,000 coal spoil tips in the UK; 2,590 of these are in Wales. Of these, 368 are considered high risk, meaning that they could endanger life or property (Welsh Government, 2025). More coal spoil tips are inspected by the Mining Remediation Authority in Wales (24) than in other devolved nations (MRA, 2024). However, many tips are otherwise privately or commercially owned (BBC, 2023) but the MRA can provide inspection and management services for these. The Welsh Government estimates that the cost of managing coal spoil tips in Wales could be around £500m over the next decade (Ground Engineering, 2022).

The Government response to coal spoil tip risk may reduce risk in the future. In 2020, extreme rainfall in South Wales led to a coal spoil tip landslip. While no homes were destroyed or lost, the landslip blocked the river, buried a water main, and broke a sewer (Law Commission, 2022). This led to a review of coal spoil tip safety law, resulting in the Disused Mine and Quarry Tips (Wales) Bill, introduced in 2024 (Welsh Government, 2024b). The bill proposes a new public body, the Disused Tip Authority for Wales, aiming to prevent coal spoil tips through assessment, registration, monitoring, and management. This additional adaptation would reduce risk, and therefore future magnitude scores for Wales are Medium, rather than high, when this proposed future adaptation is included.

Evaluation of urgency score

The risk of coal spoil tip slope failure due to heavy rain and storms is considered High magnitude for the present day, and the 2030s, where extreme weather is considered similar to present day. In the 2050s and 2080s, heavy rainfall events are expected to increase, increasing climate risk, however the scale of the impacts is not sufficient to move into the Very High banding. After considering the adaptation policies in place, risk magnitude is reduced to Medium. The impacts from other waste infrastructure are likely to be local in scale (e.g., local scale pollution following coastal erosion of landfill site) for all time periods, not changing the magnitude score. Confidence is Low, and scoring relies predominantly on expert judgment.

Table 6.55: Urgency scores for I10 Risks to waste management systems, excluding wastewater systems for Wales. Details of how the scores in this table were calculated are in the Methods Chapter.

6.3 Interdependencies between risks

This section considers the connections between risks in this chapter, and in other chapters (see Figure 6.4). Infrastructure is located within the natural environment. Risks from the natural environment, such as wildfire, flooding or coastal erosion impact infrastructure, hence the whole sector has an upstream functional dependency on terrestrial and coastal ecosystems (N1). There is a specific upstream functional interdependency between the natural environment and water supply and wastewater systems (I9) for the quality of freshwater ecosystems (N2) and soil ecosystems (N4) underpins water supply.

Infrastructure is a system of systems, and a failure in one system can lead to downstream failures in other infrastructure systems, or in other sectors, such as built environment, economy, and health. Within the infrastructure sector, these downstream interdependencies are considered a risk in themselves, Risks to the delivery of infrastructure services from interdependencies with other infrastructure systems (I1). All infrastructure systems have a functional upstream dependency on the energy sector (electricity transmission and distribution (I3), electricity generation (I2) and fuel supply (I4)). Technological advancement in the digital and communications sector in recent years has led to a rapid and deepening upstream dependency between all infrastructure systems and digital and communications systems (I8).

Infrastructure underpins modern society, hence there is downstream dependency between all systems and the UK macroeconomic performance and stability (E1). The need to adapt is a downstream opportunity to UK businesses to deliver adaptation goods and services (E8). Other downstream dependencies from specific infrastructure sectors include:

• Risks and opportunities to households from changing energy demand (BE9) is a downstream functional dependency of electricity generation (I2) and fuel supply (I4).
• Risks to building and communities from heat (H1) can be exacerbated if electricity loss (I3) prevents cooling and/or provision of health services, particularly for vulnerable groups. There is risk to health from lack of heating due loss of fuel (I4) or electricity supply (I3) during cold temperatures.
• Risks to facilities delivering public services, excluding health and social care (BE7), Risks to local resilience planning and emergency service response capabilities (BE8), and Risks to health and social care delivery (H6) are downstream functional dependencies of several infrastructure systems. Firstly, there is a dependence on supply of electricity (I3) and digital and communications systems (I8). Secondly, in the event of power loss, there is a dependency on back-up generation, for example from diesel generators (I2). Thirdly, road infrastructure (I5) is crucial for the delivery of emergency response and delivery of public services (BE7), including those for health (H6).
• There is a downstream functional dependency between Risks to domestic and international supply chains and resource inputs of UK businesses (E3) and aviation and maritime transport systems (I7), and road (I5) and rail (I6) infrastructure.
• Water pollution because of the impacts of extreme weather on wastewater systems (I9; e.g., sewage overflows during heavy rainfall, or environmental degradation after wildfires) or because of impacts on waste infrastructure (I10; e.g., erosion of coastal landfill) are Risks to people from extreme weather, excluding heat (H2). Water pollution (I9 and I10) as a consequence of extreme weather is a downstream risk to terrestrial and coastal ecosystems (N1), freshwater ecosystems (N2), marine ecosystems (N3) and soil ecosystems (N4).
• Flooding from surcharging wastewater network (I9) is a downstream interdependency with Risks to buildings and communities from flooding (BE2). Health and social care (BE7) also depend on water supply.

Figure 6.4: Schematic showing the connections between risks. Risks are coloured by chapter. The grey dashed box groups all infrastructure risks. The arrows show the direction of the interdependencies. Purple arrows denote an economic interdependency. Details are provided in the text.

6.4 References

Abdelaziz, S., Sparrow, S.N., Hua, W. and Wallom, D.C., 2024: Assessing long-term future climate change impacts on extreme low wind events for offshore wind turbines in the UK exclusive economic zone. Applied Energy, 354, p.122218. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.122218

Adey, B.T. et al. 2022: Investing in water supply resilience considering uncertainty and management flexibility. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Smart Infrastructure and Construction, 175(3): 104–115, doi:10.1680/jsmic.21.00005.  

APA, 2021. Climate change adaptation report: 2021 update (Issue 2). https://research.historicengland.org.uk/Report.aspx?i=15500&ru=%2FResults.aspx%3Fp%3D1%26n%3D10%26a%3D4827%26ns%3D1%0Afile:///C:/Users/DGMac/OneDrive/Documents/AAA Phd/Bibliographic Downloads/ClimateChangeAdaptationReport.pdf

ArrivaRail London, 2024: Arriva Rail London Climate Risk Assessment (ARP4). Supplied to the Climate Change Committee – not available online. 

ARUP 2023: Future of Great Britain’s Gas Networks Report for National Infrastructure Commission and Ofgem. Final report. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20241208110322/https:/nic.org.uk/app/uploads/Arup-Future-of-UK-Gas-Networks-18-October-2023.pdf (Accessed 27th February 2026).

Associated British Ports, 2021: Climate Change Adaptation Report (ARP3). Available at: www.abports.co.uk/media/jq2gxtyk/associated-british-ports-climate-change-adaptation-report-update-2021.pdf (Accessed 21 January  2026).

Bärwolff, M. and Gerike, R., 2024: Pedestrian’s travel distances and risk of falls in snowy and icy conditions in German cities. Traffic Safety Research, 6: e000059. doi:10.55329/tled9982. 

​Bardos, P. et al., 2020: Integrated and Sustainable Management of Post-industrial Coasts. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 8:86, doi:10.3389/fenvs.2020.00086.

BBC, 2023: Coal tips in Wales: New maps reveal 350 sites most at risk. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-67408183.

BBC, 2024a: Storm Henk batters UK leading to power outages, travel disruption and flooding. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67861206.  

BBC, 2024b: Storm Darragh causes havoc in Northern Ireland. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cn4xx3yj01wt.  

BBC, 2024c: Rising sea levels ‘a risk’ to NI rail network. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c72g71y7j82o.  

BBC, 2024d: Heavy rain brings widespread travel disruption. Available at:  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdrj7ynrn14o.  

BBC, 2024e: Fibrus: Storm-damaged broadband repairs may take a week. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-68087534. 

BBC, 2024f: Some still without phone or internet since Darragh. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1wqlqprqr8o.

BBC, 2024g: Landfill waste enters beaches and sea – scientists. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cl40ml5yyz5o 

BBC, 2025a: Storm Éowyn brought record breaking winds to Ireland. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gz8x1j0v2o.  

BBC, 2025b: Fibrus customers to get compensation after storm. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c778vpk8ee1o. 

Beaven, R.P. et al., 2020: Future challenges of coastal landfills exacerbated by sea level rise. Waste Management, 105, pp.92-101, doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2020.01.027.

BEIS (Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy), 2022a. Appendix I: Electricity Networks Modelling. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6690f4320808eaf43b50ce42/electricity-networks-strategic-framework-appendix-1.pdf (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

BEIS (Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy), 2022b. Energy Emergencies Executive Committee Storm Arwen Review: Final Report. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/629fa8b1d3bf7f0371a9b0ca/storm-arwen-review-final-report.pdf

Belcher, S. et al., 2023: How well do we understand the impacts of weather conditions on the UK’s renewable wind and solar energy supplies? Office for Science. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/renewable-energy-and-the-effects-of-wind-and-solar-droughts/how-well-do-we-understand-the-impacts-of-weather-conditions-on-the-uks-renewable-wind-and-solar-energy-supplies-html

Bennett, M.M. et al., 2020: ‘The opening of the Transpolar Sea Route: Logistical, geopolitical, environmental, and socioeconomic impacts’, Marine Policy, 121, p. 104178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104178  

Blackwood, L., Renaud, F.G. and Gillespie, S., 2022: Nature-based solutions as climate change adaptation measures for rail infrastructure. Nature-Based Solutions, 2, 100013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbsj.2022.100013  

Bloomfield, H., 2025: Reasonable worst-case stress-test scenarios for the UK energy sector in the context of the changing climate. Available at: https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Reasonable-worst-case-stress-test-scenarios-for-the-UK-energy-sector-in-the-context-of-the-changing-climate-Bloomfield.pdf

Boca, A.-D. et al. 2022: A review of the risks to water resources in Scotland in response to climate change. CD2021_02. Centre of Expertise for Waters (CREW), Available from: https:www.crew.ac.uk/publications   

Brand, J. H., and Spencer, K. L., 2024: Potential pollution risks of historic landfills in England: Further analysis of climate change impacts. WIREs Water, 11(3), e1706. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1706

BT Group, 2025. Annual Report 2024. Available at: https://www.bt.com/bt-plc/assets/documents/investors/financial-reporting-and-news/annual-reports/2024/2024-bt-group-plc-annual-report.pdf. 

Bussi, G., and Whitehead, P. G., 2020: Impacts of droughts on low flows and water quality near power stations. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 65(6), 898–913. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2020.1724295

Byers, E.A., Coxon, G., Freer, J. and Hall, J.W., 2020: Drought and climate change impacts on cooling water shortages and electricity prices in Great Britain. Nature communications, 11(1), p.2239. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-16012-2

Cadent Gas, 2024. Climate Change Adaptation Report: Fourth Round Response.

Cambridge Cycling Campaign, 2023. Pothole repairs should prioritise cycling safety. Available at: https://www.camcycle.org.uk/blog/2023/12/pothole-repairs-should-prioritise-cycling-safety/ (Accessed: 3 June 2025). 

Cambridge Economic Policy Associates (CEPA), 2024. RIIO-ET3: Economic Lives of Electricity Transmission Network Assets. Available at: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2024-07/RIIO-ET3_CEPA_Economic_Lives.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Canal & River Trust, 2024a. Our Climate Adaptation Report 2024: Developed in response to the Adaptation Reporting Power Fourth Round (ARP4). Available at: https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/media/document/9sF8Fnsx2FfJTdvD12MqRQ/5E8S_lO9D5Tvd6JeQ7lDlIwakma8078MVR34oIzriKg/aHR0cHM6Ly9jcnRwcm9kY21zdWtzMDEuYmxvYi5jb3JlLndpbmRvd3MubmV0L2RvY3VtZW50Lw/0193f91a-461f-73f8-8c04-63e27b5d48ba.pdf (Accessed: 17 July 2025). 

Canal & River Trust, 2024b. Annual Report & Accounts 2022/2023. Available at: https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/media/document/F-aFX6SJ2McT-GvZk5WMNw/gApEONXqPujp713-3XM0_Y8ssHNMiT8WT7NnSWnP-t4/aHR0cHM6Ly9jcnRwcm9kY21zdWtzMDEuYmxvYi5jb3JlLndpbmRvd3MubmV0L2RvY3VtZW50Lw/018accef-a67e-72ca-9f8f-1a2bf8dd78ee.pdf  

CDOIF (Chemical and Downstream Oil Industries Forum) 2024 Chemical and Downstream Oil Industries Forum Guideline Adapting to Climate Change. Available at: http://www.p-s-f2.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/CDOIF-Guidance-CCA-NaTech-v1.0.pdf

Challinor, A. and Benton, T.G., 2021: ‘International Dimensions’, in R.A. Betts, A.B. Haward, and K.V. Pearson (eds) The Third UK Climate Change Risk Assessment Technical Report. London: Prepared for the Climate Change Committee. Available at: https://www.ukclimaterisk.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CCRA3-Chapter-7-FINAL.pdf  

Chartered Institution of Highways and Transportation (CIHT), 2024: Delivering a resilient transport network. Maintaining and future proofing highway infrastructure from extreme weather events. Available at: https://www.ciht.org.uk/media/up2dv2em/delivering-a-resilient-transport-network-full-report.pdf (Accessed: 11 September 2025)

Christodoulou, A., Christidis, P. and Bisselink, B., 2020: ‘Forecasting the impacts of climate change on inland waterways’, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 82, p. 102159. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2019.10.012. 

Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), 2024a. ARP4 Climate Change Adaptation Report. Available at: https://www.caa.co.uk/publication/download/23526  

Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), 2024b. Independent Review of NATS (En Route) Plc’s Flight Planning System Failure on 28 August 2023. Available at: https://www.caa.co.uk/publication/download/23337  

Civil Contingencies Act, 2004. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/36/contents (Accessed: 7 August 2025)

Climate Change Committee (CCC), 2023a. Progress in adapting to climate change. Available at: https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/progress-in-adapting-to-climate-change-2023-report-to-parliament (Accessed: 9 June 2025)

Climate Change Committee (CCC), 2023b. Adapting to climate change – Progress in Northern Ireland. Available at: https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/adapting-to-climate-change-progress-in-northern-ireland/

Climate Change Committee (CCC), 2023c. Adapting to climate change progress in Wales. Available at: https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/adapting-to-climate-change-progress-in-wales/

Climate Change Committee (CCC), 2023d. Adapting to climate change progress in Scotland. Available at: https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/adapting-to-climate-change-progress-in-scotland/

Climate Change Committee (CCC), 2025a. Progress in adapting to climate change 2025 report to Parliament. Available at:  https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/progress-in-adapting-to-climate-change-2025/ (Accessed: 11 September 2025)

Climate Change Committee (CCC), 2025b. The Seventh Carbon Budget – Advice for the UK Government. Available at: https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/The-Seventh-Carbon-Budget.pdf 

Climate Change Committee (CCC), 2025c. Northern Ireland’s Fourth Carbon Budget. Available at: https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/northern-irelands-fourth-carbon-budget/

Climate Change Committee (CCC), 2025d. Scotland’s Fourth Carbon Budget. Available at: https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/scotlands-carbon-budgets/

Climate Northern Ireland 2024a: Northern Ireland Climate Change Adaptation Programme 2024–2029 (NICCAP3). Available at: https://climatenorthernireland.org.uk/projects/niccap3/ (Accessed: 29 May 2025). 

Climate Northern Ireland 2024b: LiDAR Modelling to Map Risk and Response. Available at: Case Study 3 – Belfast Harbour (Accessed 13/01/2026)

Colston, J.M., Zaitchik, B.F., Badr, H.S., Burnett, E., Ali, S.A., Rayamajhi, A., Satter, S.M., Eibach, D., Krumkamp, R., May, J. and Chilengi, R., 2022. Associations between eight earth observation‐derived climate variables and enteropathogen infection: an independent participant data meta‐analysis of surveillance studies with broad spectrum nucleic acid diagnostics. Geohealth, 6(1), p.e2021GH000452. 

Comerford, R., 2025: ‘Heathrow airport closure: What we know so far’, BBC News, 21 March. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1jp1dg7g45o (Accessed: 6 June 2025). 

Craig, M.T., Wohland, J., Stoop, L.P., Kies, A., Pickering, B., Bloomfield, H.C., Browell, J., De Felice, M., Dent, C.J., Deroubaix, A. and Frischmuth, F., 2022: Overcoming the disconnect between energy system and climate modeling. Joule, 6(7), pp.1405-1417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2022.05.010

CRE (Commission de régulation de l’énergie) 2023: Avenir des infrastructures gazières aux horizons 2030 et 2050, dans un contexte d’atteinte de la neutralité carbone. Avril. Available at: https://www.cre.fr/fileadmin/Documents/Rapports_et_etudes/import/Rapport_avenir_des_infras_gazieres.pdf

Czyzak, P., 2025: Heat and power: Impacts of the 2025 heatwave in Europe Ember Energy, London UK. Available at: https://ember-energy.org/app/uploads/2025/07/Ember-Report-Heat-and-Power-Impacts-of-the-2025-heatwave-in-Europe.pdf (Accessed: 11 Sept 2025).

DAERA (Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs) 2025: Northern Ireland Climate Change Adaptation Programme 2019-2024: End of Programme Report. Available at: https://www.northernireland.gov.uk/publications/northern-ireland-climate-change-adaptation-programme-2019-2024-end-programme-report (Accessed: 29 May 2025).

Dallison, R et., al. 2021: Impacts of climate change on future water availability for hydropower and public water supply in Wales, UK, Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies, 36. doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2021.100866.  

Dallison, R.J. and Patil, S.D., 2023: Run-of-river hydropower in the UK and Ireland: the case for abstraction licences based on future flows. Environmental Research: Infrastructure and Sustainability, 3(4), p.045005. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2634-4505/ad064c/pdf

de Abreu, V.H.S., Santos, A.S. and Monteiro, T.G.M., 2022: Climate Change Impacts on the Road Transport Infrastructure: A Systematic Review on Adaptation Measures. Sustainability, 14 (14): 8864. doi:10.3390/su14148864. 

Deeming, H. and Lamb, J., 2024: Integrated emergency management of ‘lifeline’ highway networks: lessons for interoperability. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Civil Engineering, 177 (5): 3–10. doi:10.1680/jcien.23.00096. 

Dent CJ, Sanchez N, Shevni A, Smith JQ, Wilson AL, Yu X, 2024: Resource adequacy and capacity Procurement: Metrics and decision support analysis. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy. 239(1):199-209. doi:10.1177/09576509241292100

Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ), 2024a. Electricity generation and supply in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and England, 2019 to 2023. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6762e82fe6ff7c8a1fde9b2a/Electricity_generation_and_supply_in_Scotland_Wales_Northern_Ireland___England_2019_to_2023.pdf

Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ), 2024b. Spoil Heaps: Coal. Question for Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, UIN HL3121, tabled on 2 December 2024. Available at: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-12-02/HL3121.

Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ), 2025a. Capacity of, generation from renewable sources and shares of total generation (DUKES 6.2). Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/688a195a6478525675739026/DUKES_6.2.xlsx

Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ), 2025b. DUKES 2025 Chapter 5: Electricity. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/688a28656478525675739051/DUKES_2025_Chapter_5.pdf

Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ), 2025c. DUKES 2025 Chapter 6: Renewable Sources of Energy. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/688a193f6478525675739024/DUKES_2025_Chapter_6.pdf

Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ), 2025d.Plant installed capacity by connection – United Kingdom (DUKES 5.12). https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/688a2908e1a850d72c40924f/DUKES_5.12.xlsx

Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ), 2025e. Clean Power 2030 Action Plan: A new era of clean electricity – main report. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/clean-power-2030-action-plan (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ), 2025f. Hydrogen economic regulatory framework: developing an effective market framework for 100% hydrogen pipeline networks. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/hydrogen-economic-regulatory-framework-developing-an-effective-framework-for-pipeline-networks/hydrogen-economic-regulatory-framework-developing-an-effective-market-framework-for-100-hydrogen-pipeline-networks-accessible-webpage

Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ), 2025g. Future Network Strategy for CO2 Transport and Storage. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/688a3a9ea11f8599944092a8/ccus-future-network-strategy-call-for-evidence.pdf

Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment (DETINI), 2008: Paper to ETI committee on development of the natural gas industry in Northern Ireland. Available at: https://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/committees/2007-2011/eti/motions/rising-energy/deti_paper_on_development_of_gas_industry_in_ni.pdf

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), 2022: Strategy for the Fourth Round of Climate Adaptation Reporting. Available at: https://consult.defra.gov.uk/climate-change-adaptation/fourth-round-adaptation-reporting-power/supporting_documents/Final%20Consultation%20Document%20%20Fourth%20round%20of%20climate%20adaptation%20reporting.pdf

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), 2023: The Third National Adaptation Programme (NAP3) and the Fourth Strategy for Climate Adaptation Reporting. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/64ba74102059dc00125d27a7/The_Third_National_Adaptation_Programme.pdf

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), 2025: Official Statistics: UK statistics on waste, updated 26 September 2024. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-waste-data/uk-statistics-on-waste.

Department of the Environment, 2015. Strategic Planning Policy Statement for Northern Ireland (SPPS) Available at https://www.infrastructure-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/infrastructure/SPPS.pdf

Department of Finance, 2023: Landfill Site and Royalties (Non Domestic Valuation practice notes). Available at: https://www.finance-ni.gov.uk/articles/landfill-site-and-royalties-non-domestic-valuation-practice-notes

Department for Infrastructure 2018: Belfast Tidal Flood Alleviation Scheme – Climate change flood map. Available at: Belfast Tidal Flood Alleviation Scheme – Climate change flood map | Department for Infrastructure (Accessed 12 January 2026)

Department for Infrastructure 2025a: Belfast Tidal Flood Alleviation Scheme – Newsletter Issue 6. Available at: Belfast Tidal Flood Alleviation Scheme Newsletter – Issue 6 (Accessed 12 January 2026)

Department for Infrastructure 2025b: Belfast Tidal Flood Alleviation Scheme. Available at: Belfast Tidal Flood Alleviation Scheme (Accessed 12 January 2026)

Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), 2024a. Guidance: UK transition from analogue to digital landlines. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/uk-transition-from-analogue-to-digital-landlines. 

Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), 2024b. Press release: Data centres to be given massive boost and protections from cyber criminals and IT blackouts. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/data-centres-to-be-given-massive-boost-and-protections-from-cyber-criminals-and-it-blackouts. 

Department for Transport (DfT), 2024a: Fit for a changing climate? Adapting the UK’s transport system. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66152059c4c84de468346aea/dft-transport-adaptation-strategy-consultation.pdf.   

Department for Transport (DfT), 2024b: Adapting the UK’s transport system to the impacts of climate change: summary of responses. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/adapting-the-uks-transport-system-to-the-impacts-of-climate-change/public-feedback/adapting-the-uks-transport-system-to-the-impacts-of-climate-change-summary-of-responses.   

Department for Transport (DfT), 2024c: Official Statistics – Road conditions in England to March 2024. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/road-conditions-in-england-to-march-2024/road-conditions-in-england-to-march-2024 (Accessed: January 15, 2026)

Department for Transport (DfT), 2025a: Highways maintenance block: formula allocations 2025 to 2026. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/highways-maintenance-funding-allocations/highways-maintenance-block-formula-allocations-2025-to-2026 (Accessed: September 29, 2025).

Department for Transport (DfT), 2025b: Climate adaptation strategy for transport. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/climate-adaptation-strategy-for-transport/climate-adaptation-strategy-for-transport (Accessed January 20, 2026)

Dobson, B. et al. 2020: The spatial dynamics of droughts and water scarcity in England and Wales. Water Resources Research, 56, e2020WR027187, doi:10.1029/2020WR027187.  

Donaldson, D.L., Ferranti, E.J.S., Quinn, A.D., Jayaweera, D., Peasley, T., Mercer, M., 2023: Enhancing power distribution network operational resilience to extreme wind events. Meteorological Applications 30, e2127. https://doi.org/10.1002/met.2127

​Doubleday, A., Choe, Y., Busch Isaksen, T.M., et al., 2021: Urban bike and pedestrian activity impacts from wildfire smoke events in Seattle, WA. Journal of Transport & Health, 21: 101033. doi:10.1016/j.jth.2021.101033. 

Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI), 2023a. Drinking Water 2023: Private water supplies in England. Available at: https://www.dwi.gov.uk/what-we-do/annual-report/drinking-water-2023/ (Accessed: 12 September 2025)

Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI), 2023b. Drinking Water 2023: Private water supplies in Wales. Available at: https://www.dwi.gov.uk/what-we-do/annual-report/drinking-water-2023/ (Accessed: 12 September 2025)

Drinking Water Quality Regulator for Scotland, 2024. Drinking Water Quality in Scotland 2024 DWQR Annual Report Private Water Supplies. https://dwqr.scot/information/annual-report/2024-annual-reports/ (accessed 15 December 2025).

EirGrid and SONI, 2025: All-Island Resource Adequacy Assessment. Available at: https://cms.soni.ltd.uk/sites/default/files/publications/AIRAA-2025-2034-Methodology.pdf

EDF Energy, 2025: Torness achieves significant generation milestone. Available at: https://www.edfenergy.com/media-centre/torness-achieves-significant-generation-milestone (Accessed: 18 September 2025)

Energy Networks Association (ENA), 2016. ETR 132 – Improving resilience of overhead networks under abnormal weather conditions using a risk based methodology. Available at: https://www.ena-eng.org/ena-docs/D0C3XTRACT/ENA_ET_132_Extract_180902050423.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Energy Networks Association (ENA), 2018. ETR 138 ANNEX – Resilience to Flooding of Grid and Primary Substations. Available at: https://www.ena-eng.org/ena-docs/D0C3XTRACT/ENA_ET_138_-_Annex_Extract_180902050351.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Energy Networks Association (ENA), 2021. Third Round Climate Change Adaptation Report: Gas & Electricity Transmission and Distribution Network Companies. Available at: https://www.energynetworks.org/assets/images/CCRA3%20report%20v1.0%20final.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Energy Networks Association (ENA), 2024a. Gas & Electricity Transmission and Distribution Network Companies 4th Round Climate Change Adaptation Report. Available at: https://www.energynetworks.org/assets/images/Publications/2024/241218ccar4-report-.pdf?1742996142 (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Energy Networks Association (ENA), 2024b. Storm Darragh. Available at: https://www.energynetworks.org/newsroom/storm-darragh-latest-from-energy-networks (Accessed: 9 June 2025)

Energy Networks Association (ENA), 2025a. Storm Éowyn power cut information. Available at: https://www.energynetworks.org/newsroom/storm-eowyn-power-cut-information (Accessed: 9 June 2025)

Energy Networks Association (ENA), 2025b. Who’s my electricity network operator? Available at: https://www.energynetworks.org/customers/find-my-network-operator (Accessed: 9 June 2025)

Energy Networks Association (ENA), 2025c. Energy networks explained. Available at: https://www.energynetworks.org/energy-networks-explained/ (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

Energy Networks Association (ENA) 2025d. Open Networks. Available at: https://www.energynetworks.org/work/open-networks/ (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

Energy Systems Integration Group, 2023. Weather Dataset Needs for Planning and Analyzing Modern Power Systems (Full Report). A Report of the Weather Datasets Project Team. Reston, VA. Available at: https://www.esig.energy/weather-data-for-power-system-planning

Energy UK, 2021: Climate Change Risks & Adaptation Responses for UK Electricity Generation: A Sector Overview 2021. Energy UK: London, UK. Available at: https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/EnergyUKClimateRisksAdaptationReport_08.07.21-FINAL.pdf

Energy UK (EUK), Renewable UK (RUK), and Solar Energy UK (SEUK), 2025: Climate Change Risks & Adaptation Responses for UK Electricity Generation: A Sector Overview 2024. Energy UK: London, UK. Available at: https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/ARP4-EUK-RUK-SEUK-report.pdf

Environment Agency (EA), 2022. Environmental Capacity for Industrial Clusters: Humber Pathfinder Project. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65f6f5d250397e72ccc75592/ea-industrial-clusters-environmental-capacity-phase-1.pdf

Environment Agency (EA), 2023a. Environmental Capacity for Industrial Clusters Phase 2 (Issue March). Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/environmental-capacity-for-industrial-clusters (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Environment Agency (EA), 2023b: Guidance: Landfill for hazardous or non-hazardous waste: examples for your adapting to climate change risk assessment. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/adapting-to-climate-change-industry-sector-examples-for-your-risk-assessment/landfill-for-hazardous-or-non-hazardous-waste-examples-for-your-adapting-to-climate-change-risk-assessment

Environment Agency (EA), 2023c: Climate change: risk assessment and adaptation planning in your management system. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/climate-change-risk-assessment-and-adaptation-planning-in-your-management-system (Accessed: 9 January 2026)

Environment Agency (EA), 2023d: Regulatory considerations of climate change impacts and adaptation for waste deposit, landfill and land contamination. Summary derived from WSP project no. 70091084.

Environment Agency (EA), 2024: National assessment of flood and coastal erosion risk in England 2024. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-assessment-of-flood-and-coastal-erosion-risk-in-england-2024/national-assessment-of-flood-and-coastal-erosion-risk-in-england-2024  

Environment Agency (EA), 2025: Remaining Landfill Capacity (England). Available at: https://www.data.gov.uk/dataset/237825cb-dc10-4c53-8446-1bcd35614c12/remaining-landfill-capacity1#:~:text=There%20are%20only%20around%20500%20operational%20landfills%20in%20England%20and%20Wales.

Eschen, R., Kadzamira, M., Stutz, S. et al. 2023. An updated assessment of the direct costs of invasive non-native species to the United Kingdom. Biological Invasions 25, 3265–3276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-023-03107-2

EUROCONTROL, 2021: Climate Change Risks for European Aviation – Summary report. Available at: https://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/2021-09/eurocontrol-study-climate-change-risk-european-aviation-summary-report-2021.pdf  

European Environment Agency, 2025: Climate ADAPT – Sharing adaptation knowledge for a climate-resilient Europe: Energy. Available at: https://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/en/cca-events/sharing-knowledge-for-a-climate-resilient-europe (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

Fares, M.Y., Albdour, A. and Lanotte, M., 2024: Evaluation of potential electric vehicles load-induced damage on flexible pavements. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 136: 104475. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2024.104475.

Farid, A., Alam, M.K., Goli, V.S.N.S., et al., 2024: A Review of the Occurrence and Causes for Wildfires and Their Impacts on the Geoenvironment. Fire, 7 (8): 295. doi:10.3390/fire7080295. 

​Ferranti, E., Chapman, L. and Whyatt, D., 2017: A Perfect Storm? The collapse of Lancaster’s critical infrastructure networks following intense rainfall on 4/5 December 2015. Weather, 72(1), pp.3-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/wea.2907

Fisher, R., Ferranti, E., Greenham, S. and Quinn, A., 2024: Climate change resilience beyond the mainline railway: a review. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Civil Engineering, 177(5), 20-26. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1680/jcien.23.00101  

Foudad, M., Sanchez-Gomez, E., Jaravel, T., Rochoux, M. C., Terray, L, 2024. Past and future trends in clear-air turbulence over the northern hemisphere. Journal of Geophysical Research:Atmospheres. 129, e2023JD040261. https://doi.org/10.1029/2023JD040261

Gatwick Airport, 2024: Climate Change Adaptation Progress Report: Fourth Round of Reporting. Available at: https://www.gatwickairport.com/on/demandware.static/-/Sites-Gatwick-Library/default/dwc2f4a3bf/images/Corporate-PDFs/Sustainability/Sustainability-Reports-Other/Gatwick-Airport-CCAR-2024.pdf (Accessed: 6 June 2025). 

Gajjar, 2024. Horizon scanning: Digitalisation within and across UK infrastructure. Available at: https://post.parliament.uk/digitalisation-within-and-across-uk-infrastructure/. 

Gkyrtis K. 2025: The Impact of Weight Distribution in Heavy Battery Electric Vehicles on Pavement Performance: A Preliminary Study. World Electric Vehicle Journal. 16(9):520. https://doi.org/10.3390/wevj16090520

Golgojan, A.D., White, C.J. and Bertram, D., 2024: Future impacts of river flow on hydropower generation in Great Britain. Journal of Water and Climate Change, 15(9), pp.4840-4861. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2166/wcc.2024.355

Gordon, S.J., McGarry, C. and Bell, K., 2021, March. The growth of distributed generation in Great Britain and associated challenges. In The 9th Renewable Power Generation Conference (RPG Dublin Online 2021) (Vol. 2021, pp. 318-323). IET. Available at: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9582898 

Gösling, S., Neger, C., Steiger, R., et al., 2023: Weather, climate change, and transport: a review. Natural Hazards, 118 (2): 1341–1360. doi:10.1007/s11069-023-06054-2. 

​GOV Wales, 2023: The future of road investment in Wales. Available at: https://www.gov.wales/future-road-investment-wales (Accessed: 29 May 2025). 

GOV Wales, 2024a: Road lengths and conditions: April 2023 to March 2024. Available at: https://www.gov.wales/road-lengths-and-conditions-april-2023-march-2024-html#152542 (Accessed: 29 May 2025). 

GOV Wales, 2024b: Climate  Adaptation  Strategy  for Wales. Available at: https://www.gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2024-10/climate-adaptation-strategy-for-wales-2024.pdf (Accessed: 29 May 2025). 

Gratton, G.B. et al., 2022: ‘Reviewing the impacts of climate change on air transport operations’, The Aeronautical Journal, 126(1295), pp. 209–221. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2021.109. 

Great British Railways Transition Team (GBRTT), 2024: Autumn storms cost railway £21 million in lost revenue. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20250119003305/https://media.gbrtt.co.uk/news/autumn-storms-cost-railway-gbp-21-million-in-lost-revenue. 

Greenham, S., Ferranti, E., Quinn, A. and Drayson, K., 2020: The impact of high temperatures and extreme heat to delays on the London Underground rail network: An empirical study. Meteorological Applications, 27, e1910. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/met.1910.  

Ground Engineering, 2022: Managing spoil tip risks. Available at: https://www.geplus.co.uk/opinion/managing-spoil-tip-risks-10-02-2022/.

Groveport, 2024: Groveport ARP4 Submission. 

Guddanti, K.P., A. K. Bharati, S. Nekkalapu, J. Mcwherter and S. L. Morris, 2025. A Comprehensive Review: Impacts of Extreme Temperatures Due to Climate Change on Power Grid Infrastructure and Operation. EEE Access, vol. 13, pp. 49375-49415. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3548531.

Hansom, J.D., Fitton, J.M. and Rennie, A.F., 2017: Dynamic Coast – National Coastal Change Assessment: National Overview (Report No. CRW2014/2). Available at: https://www.dynamiccoast.com/files/reports/NCCA%20-%20National%20Overview.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025).

Hawker, G., Bell, K., Bialek, J., MacIver, C., 2024. Management of extreme weather impacts on electricity grids: an international review. Progress in Energy 6 032005 doi:10.1088/2516-1083/ad3f6a

He, L. et al., 2024: Modelling the Control of Groundwater on the Development of Colliery Spoil Tip Failures in Wales. Land, 13(8):1311, doi:10.3390/land13081311.

Health and Safety Executives (HSE), 2025. Enforcement policy for the iron mains risk reduction programme 2021 to 2026. https://www.hse.gov.uk/gas/supply/mainsreplacement/enforcement-policy-2021-2026.htm#:~:text=Background,fatalities and damage to buildings.

Heathrow Airport, 2024: Climate Adaptation Report – Fourth Round. Available at: https://www.heathrow.com/content/dam/heathrow/web/common/documents/company/heathrow-2-0-sustainability/reports/Heathrow-Climate-Adaptation-Report-(ARP4).pdf (Accessed: 16 July 2025). 

​Hernandez, J., Jayme, A., Cardenas Huaman, J.J. and Al-Qadi, I.L., 2025. Effect of heavy-duty electric vehicles on tire–pavement contact forces. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 151(1), p.04024104.

Highways England, 2016: Climate adaptation reporting second round: Highways England (ARP2). Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7f660ded915d74e622a37c/climate-adrep-highways-england.pdf (Accessed: 21 May 2025). 

HM Treasury, 2025a: UK Infrastructure: A 10 Year Strategy (Issue June).  https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-infrastructure-a-10-year-strategy

HM Treasury, 2025b: Policy paper – Spending Review 2025 (HTML). Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/spending-review-2025-document/spending-review-2025-html (Accessed: September 29, 2025).

HS2, 2021: Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience. Adaptation Reporting Power (ARP) Report. Available at: https://assets.hs2.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/HS2-Climate-Adaptation-ARP-Report.pdf.  

HS2, 2024: Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience. Adaptation Reporting Power Fourth Round. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/67655e353229e84d9bbde95f/CS2666_1124_HS2_ClimateChangeReport_v9_Final.pdf. 

Huang, W., Loveridge, F.A., Briggs, K.M., Smethurst, J.A., Saffari, N. and Thomson, F., 2023: Forecast climate change impact on porewater pressure regimes for the design and assessment of clay earthworks. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 57(1). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1144/qjegh2023-015. 

​Hyde-Smith, L. et al., 2022: Climate Change Impacts on Urban Sanitation: A Systematic Review and Failure Mode Analysis, Environmental Science & Technology, 56 (9), 5306-5321, doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c07424  

Ibrahim, M.A., et al., 2020: Risk of spontaneous and anthropogenic fires in waste management chain and hazards of secondary fires. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 159:104852, doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104852.

Ilalokhoin, O., Pant, R. and Hall, J.W., 2022: A multi-track rail model for estimating journey impacts from extreme weather events: a case study of Great Britain’s rail network. International Journal of Rail Transportation, 10(2), 133-158. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/23248378.2021.1891582.  

Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE), 2023: ICE policy position statement: How can  the UK’s infrastructure system be  made more climate resilient? Available at: https://www.ice.org.uk/media/i0bbkeia/ice-policy-position-statement-uk-infrastructure-system-climate-resilience.pdf (Accessed: 11 September 2025).

Internet Services Providers’ Association (ISPA) UK & Independent Networks Cooperative Association (INCA), 2024: Climate adaptation in the telecommunications sector: Fourth Adaptation Reporting Power (ARP4) report. Available at: https://www.ispa.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/ARP4_telecoms-sectoral-overview-response.pdf. 

Irfan, M. et al., 2019: GIS-based investigation of historic landfill sites in the coastal zones of Wales (UK). Euro-Mediterranean Journal for Environmental Integration, 4:26, doi:10.1007/s41207-019-0116-y.

Jia, Z., Ferranti, E. and Donaldson, D., 2024: Weather-related fragility modelling of critical infrastructure: a power and railway case study. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Civil Engineering 177(5), 50-58. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1680/jcien.23.00115.  

Juhola S., Laurila A-G., Groundstroem F., et al., 2024: Climate risks to the renewable energy sector: assessment and adaptation within energy companies. Bus Strat Env.;33(3):1906–1919. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3580.

Kapica, J., Jurasz, J., Canales, F.A., Bloomfield, H., Guezgouz, M., De Felice, M. and Kobus, Z., 2024. The potential impact of climate change on European renewable energy droughts. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 189, p.114011. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2023.114011

Kaushal, S. S., Shelton, S. A., Mayer, P. M., Kellmayer, B., Utz, R. M., Reimer, J. E., Baljunas, J., Bhide, S. V., Mon, A., Rodriguez-Cardona, B. M., Grant, S. B., Newcomer-Johnson, T. A., Malin, J. T., Shatkay, R. R., Collison, D. C., Papageorgiou, K., Escobar, J., Rippy, M. A., Likens, G. E., Najjar, R. G., … Chant, R. J., 2025. Freshwater faces a warmer and saltier future from headwaters to coasts: climate risks, saltwater intrusion, and biogeochemical chain reactions. Biogeochemistry, 168(2), 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-025-01219-6

Kay, G., Dunstone, N.J., Maidens, A., Scaife, A.A., Smith, D.M., Thornton, H.E., Dawkins, L. and Belcher, S.E., 2023: Variability in North Sea wind energy and the potential for prolonged winter wind drought. Atmospheric Science Letters, 24(6), p.e1158. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/asl.1158

Kendon. E., Short, C., Cotterill, D., Pirret, J., Chan, S., Pope, J. 2023 UK Climate Projections: UKCP Local (2.2km) Transient Projections. March 2023. Available at: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/binaries/content/assets/metofficegovuk/pdf/research/ukcp/ukcp_local_report_2023.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Kendon, M., Doherty, A., Hollis, D., Carlisle, E., Packman, S., McCarthy, M., Jevrejeva, S., Matthews, A., Williams, J., Garforth, J., Sparks, T., 2024. State of the UK Climate 2023. International Journal of Climatology 44, 1–117. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.8553

Kendon, M., Doherty, A., Hollis, D., Carlisle, E., Packman, S., Jevrejeva, S., Matthews, A., Williams, J., Garforth, J., Sparks, T., 2025. State of the UK Climate 2024. International Journal of Climatology. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.70010.

Khadem, M. et al., 2021: The feasibility of inter-basin water transfers to manage climate risk in England. Climate Risk Management, 33, 100322, doi:10.1016/j.crm.2021.100322.  

Klaver, N.R., Dijkstra, T.A., Barkwith, A., et al., 2024: Mass movement hazard & global climate change: Physical-deterministic modelling study of the rest and be thankful pass, Scotland UK Geomorphology, 446: 108979. doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2023.108979. 

Kuriakose, K., Martinez, E.A., and Wood, R., 2025: Assessing climate risks to Net Zero power system in Great Britain, Carbon Management, 16:1, 2525932, Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2025.2525932

Law Commission, 2022: Regulating Coal Tip Safety in Wales: Summary of the Report. Available at: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20250109102126mp_/https://cloud-platform-e218f50a4812967ba1215eaecede923f.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/sites/30/2022/03/Regulating-Coal-Tip-Safety-in-Wales-Summary-of-Report.pdf.

Laybourn L, Abrams JF, Buxton J, 2024: ‘Written evidence submitted by the Global Systems Institute, University of Exeter’, Environmental Audit Committee, UK Parliament. Available at: https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/130040/pdf/

Lenton TM, Armstrong McKay DI, Loriani S, Abrams JF, Lade SJ, Donges JF, Milkoreit M, Powell T, Smith SR, Zimm C, Buxton JE, Laybourn L, Ghadiali A, Dyke JG (eds), 2023: The Global Tipping Points Report 2023, University of Exeter. Available at: https://report-2023.global-tipping-points.org/

Li, Q., Punzo, G., Robson, C., Arbabi, H. and Mayfield, M., 2024: A systematic approach to climate resilience assessment of infrastructure networks. IEEE Systems Journal, 18(1), 24-35. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2023.3329765.  

Lißner, S., von Harten, M., Francke, A., et al., 2023: Safe cycling in winter: Results of a case study on the role of de-icing in the city of Hamburg, Germany. Journal of Safety Research, 87: 244–256. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2023.09.020. 

Liu, F.H.M., Lai, K.P.Y., Seah, B. et al., 2025: Decarbonising digital infrastructure and urban sustainability in the case of data centres. npj Urban Sustain 5, 15 https://doi.org/10.1038/s42949-025-00203-1   

​London Luton Airport, 2024: Climate Change Adaptation Report (CCAR) 2024 Revision. Available at: https://eu-assets.contentstack.com/v3/assets/blt4d5e17844b60f82b/blt045c73f700a9c6eb/67658c73f995794a6b0075ab/LONDON_LUTON_AIRPORT_OPERATIONS_LIMITED_-_Climate_Change_Adaptation_Report_-_2024_Revision_-_V1.pdf (Accessed: 12 May 2025). 

Lücke, L.J., Dent, C.J., Hegerl, G.C., Wilson, A.L. and Schurer, A.P., 2024: Severe compound events of low wind and cold temperature for the British power system. Meteorological Applications, 31(4), p.e2219. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/met.2219

Lynch, A.H., Norchi, C.H. and Li, X., 2022: ‘The interaction of ice and law in Arctic marine accessibility’, Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences, 119(26). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2202720119. 

Lyttek, E., Lal, P., Oberle, B., Dubey, R.S., Forgoston, E., 2024. Impact of Fraxinus snag fall on electric distribution and infrastructure stability: An empirical analysis. Ecological Economics 225, 108323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108323

Mackintosh, T., 2025: ‘Heathrow shutdown cause still unknown, report says’, BBC News, 8 May. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6283577llqo (Accessed: 6 June 2025). 

Mair, R., Hight, D. and McGinnity, B., 2021: A review of earthworks management. Available at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Network-Rail-Earthworks-Review-Final-Report.pdf  

Mallick, R.B., M. Tao. and M. K. Nivedya, 2018: Impact of Flooding on Roadways. Developments in Geotechnical Engineering Geotechnics for Natural and Engineered Sustainable Technologies, pp. 385–397. doi:10.1007/978-981-10-7721-0_23. 

Manning, C., Kendon, E.J., Fowler, H.J., Roberts, N.M., 2023a. Projected increase in windstorm severity and contribution from sting jets over the UK and Ireland. Weather Clim Extrem 40, 100562.

Manning, C., Wilkinson, S., Fowler, H., and Dunn, S., 2023b. Enhancing Resilience in UK Energy Networks – What are the future weather and climate risks to energy network infrastructure? Final Report – Part One. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6825b75685c0250741b014a2/CS-N0W-part-1-future-weather-and-climate-risks-to-energy-networks.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Manning, C., Kendon, E.J., Fowler, H.J., Catto, J.L., Chan, S.C., Sansom, P.G., 2024. Compound wind and rainfall extremes: Drivers and future changes over the UK and Ireland. Weather Clim Extrem 44, 100673.

Manning, C., Wilkinson, S., Fowler, H.J., and Kendon, E.J., 2025. Antecedent rainfall, wind direction and seasonal effects may amplify the risk of wind-driven power outages in the UK. Communications Earth & Environment 6 (1), 217. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-025-02176-6

Mair et al., 2021: A Review of Earthworks Management Prepared by a Task Force led by Professor Lord Robert Mair CBE FREng FICE FR. Network Rail. https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Network-Rail-Earthworks-Review-Final-Report.pdf

Maroni, A., Tubaldi, E., Val, D. V, et al., 2021: Using Bayesian networks for the assessment of underwater scour for road and railway bridges. Structural Health Monitoring, 20 (5): 2446–2460. doi:10.1177/1475921720956579. 

​Maroni, A., Tubaldi, E., McDonald, H., et al., 2023: Monitoring-based adaptive water level thresholds for bridge scour risk management. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 238: 109473. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2023.109473. 

Marot, A., Kelly, A., Naglic, M., Barbesant, V., Cremer, J., Stefanov, A. and Viebahn, J., 2022. Perspectives on future power system control centers for energy transition. Journal of Modern Power Systems and Clean Energy, 10(2), pp.328-344.

Matthews, B., Cartmell, K., Jones, C., and Newbold, E., 2025: Data Infrastructure for National Infrastructure. A UK Research Data Cloud Pilot: Final Report (Issue April). Available from: https://epubs.stfc.ac.uk/work/61441110 (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Mattinzioli, T., Butt, A.A. and Harvey, J., 2023: Literature review on pavements and electric vehicle interaction: A research roadmap. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 122: 103886. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2023.103886.

McClymont, K. and Beevers, L. 2022. Understanding the social factors influencing resilience to drought exposure in Scotland: CREW Policy Note. CRW2020_19 CREW Policy Fellowships Programme: Scotland’s Centre of Expertise for Waters (CREW). Available from: https://www.crew.ac.uk/publications 

McGuire, C. et al., 2025: Impacts on energy assets from extreme heat and heatwaves. Climate Services for a Net Zero Resilience World WP8. Prepared for Department of Energy Security and Net Zero, London, UK. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/680b9d79521c5b6f2883cca1/impacts-on-energy-assets-from-extreme-heat-and-heatwaves.pdf

Met Office, 2018. UKCP18 Fact Sheet: Sea level rise and storm surge. Available at: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/binaries/content/assets/metofficegovuk/pdf/research/ukcp/ukcp18-fact-sheet-sea-level-rise-and-storm-surge.pdf (Accessed: 10 June 2025). 

Met Office, 2022a. Storms Dudley, Eunice and Franklin, February 2022. Available at: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/binaries/content/assets/metofficegovuk/pdf/weather/learn-about/uk-past-events/interesting/2022/2022_01_storms_dudley_eunice_franklin_r1.pdf (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

Met Office, 2022b. Unprecedented extreme heatwave, July 2022. Available at: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/binaries/content/assets/metofficegovuk/pdf/weather/learn-about/uk-past-events/interesting/2022/2022_03_july_heatwave_v1.pdf (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

Met Office, 2023: Storm Babet, 18 to 21 October 2023 Available at: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/binaries/content/assets/metofficegovuk/pdf/weather/learn-about/uk-past-events/interesting/2023/2023_08_storm_babet.pdf. (Accessed: 12 September 2025)

Met Office, 2024: Storm Gerrit, 27 to 28 December 2023. Available at: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/binaries/content/assets/metofficegovuk/pdf/weather/learn-about/uk-past-events/interesting/2023/2023_12_storm_gerrit.pdf. (Accessed: 12 September 2025)

Met Office, 2025a: Storms. Transport hazard summary series. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/68bab60dcc8356c3c882ab3a/dft-transport-hazard-summary-storms.pdf (Accessed: 23 January 2025)

Met Office, 2025b: Storm Éowyn, 24 January 2025. Available at: https://weather.metoffice.gov.uk/binaries/content/assets/metofficegovuk/pdf/weather/learn-about/uk-past-events/interesting/2025/2025_02_storm_eowyn.pdf. (Accessed: 12 September 2025)

Michalis, P. and Sentenac, P, 2021. Subsurface condition assessment of critical dam infrastructure with non-invasive geophysical sensing. Environmental Earth Sciences, 80, 556 doi:10.1007/s12665-021-09841-x  

Milly, P.C.D., Betancourt, J., Falkenmark, M., Hirsch, R.M., Kundzewicz, Z.W., Lettenmaier, D.L., Stouffer R.J. 2008. Stationarity Is Dead: Whither Water Management? Science, 319, 573-574, doi:10.1126/science.1151915. 

Mining Remediation Authority (MRA), 2024: Maps: Colliery tips owned and inspected by the Mining Remediation Authority. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/disused-colliery-tips-owned-and-inspected-by-the-coal-authority.

Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), 2024: National Planning Policy Framework. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/67aafe8f3b41f783cca46251/NPPF_December_2024.pdf.

Moazeni, S. and Cerdà, A. 2024. The impacts of forest fires on watershed hydrological response. A review, Trees, Forests and People,18, 100707, doi:10.1016/j.tfp.2024.100707.  

Mulholland, E. and Feyen, L., 2021: Increased risk of extreme heat to European roads and railways with global warming. Climate Risk Management, 34: 100365. doi:10.1016/j.crm.2021.100365. 

Murgatroyd, A.., Gavin, H., Becher, O., Coxon, G., Hunt, D., Fallon E., Wilson, J., Cuceloglu, G. and Hall, J.W., 2022: Strategic analysis of the drought resilience of water supply systems. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A, 380: 20210292, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2021.0292. 

Murphy, C. and Grainger, S., 2023: CROSSDRO: Cross-sectoral Drought Impacts in Complex European Basins. Available at: https://www.epa.ie/publications/research/water/Research-Report-446.pdf (Accessed: 6 June 2025). 

Mytton, D. 2021. Data centre water consumption. npj Clean Water 4:11, doi: 10.1038/s41545-021-00101-w.  

National Air Traffic Services, 2024: NATS climate risk and adaptation progress report: Report to Defra on the fourth round of the climate change adaptation reporting power (ARP4). Available at: https://www.nats.aero/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/NATS-2024-ARP4-Climate-risk-and-adaptation-progress-report-FINAL.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

National Energy System Operator (NESO), 2019. Technical Report on the events of 9 August 2019. National Energy System Operator. September 2019. Available at https://www.neso.energy/document/152346/download

National Energy System Operator (NESO), 2024a. Clean Power 2030: Advice on achieving clean power for Great Britain by 2030. Available at: https://www.neso.energy/document/346651/download

National Energy System Operator (NESO), 2024b. Winter Outlook Report: Helping to inform the electricity industry and prepare for the winter ahead. Available at: https://www.neso.energy/document/330221/download

National Energy System Operator (NESO), 2024c. Great Britain’s Connections Reform: Overview Document. Available at: https://www.neso.energy/document/346816/download (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

National Energy System Operator (NESO), 2025a. Energy Security Modelling: Resource Adequacy in the 2030s. Available at: https://www.neso.energy/document/364016/download

National Energy System Operator (NESO), 2025b. Electricity Markets Explained. Available at: https://www.neso.energy/what-we-do/energy-markets/electricity-markets-explained (Accessed: 10 June 2025)

National Energy System Operator (NESO), 2025c. Future Energy Scenarios: Pathways to Net Zero. November 2025. V5. Available at:  https://www.neso.energy/document/364541/download

National Gas, 2024. Adapting to change, fit for the future. Our Climate Change Adaptation Report 2024. National Gas Transmission plc, December 2024. Available at: https://www.nationalgas.com/sites/default/files/documents/National%20Gas%20adaptation%20reporting%202024%20LOW.pdf (Accessed 23^rd February 2026).

National Grid, 2024a. National Grid Electricity Transmission. Available at: https://www.nationalgrid.com/electricity-transmission (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

National Grid, 2024b. Electricity Transmission Heat Effects, Resilience Measures to Manage Asset Lifecycles (THERMAL). Available at: https://smarter.energynetworks.org/projects/nia2_nget0054/ (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

National Grid Electricity Transmission, 2024. Climate change adaptation report: fourth round. Available at: https://www.nationalgrid.com/document/357171/download (Accessed: 23 September 2025)

National Grid Ventures, 2024. Climate change adaptation report (ARP4). Available at: https://www.nationalgrid.com/document/558616/download (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

National Highways, 2022: Preparing for climate change on the strategic road network: Third adaptation reporting power under the Climate Change Act (ARP3). Available at: https://nationalhighways.co.uk/media/rtuexeu4/preparing-for-climate-change-on-the-strategic-road-network.pdf (Accessed: 20 May 2025). 

​National Highways, 2024: Climate change and the strategic road network Fourth round adaptation reporting power. Available at: https://nationalhighways.co.uk/media/4vlbyhgm/national-highways-arp4.pdf (Accessed: 21 May 2025). 

National Highways, 2025. National Highways  Operational Metrics Manual December 2025. Available at:  https://nationalhighways.co.uk/media/t1wpkpsi/omm-is-period-2025-26.pdf (Accessed 19 January 2026).

National Infrastructure Commission (NIC), 2022: https://nic.org.uk/studies-reports/national-infrastructure-assessment/second-nia/#tab-resilience

National Infrastructure Commission (NIC), 2023. Second National Infrastructure Assessment: Baseline Report (NIA2). Available at: https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/second-national-infrastructure-assessment-baseline-report/ (Accessed: 21 May 2025). 

National Infrastructure Commission (NIC), 2024: https://nic.org.uk/app/uploads/NIC-Resilience-Standards-Report-Final-190924.pdf  

National Infrastructure Commission (NIC), 2025. Electricity distribution networks: Creating capacity for the future.

Natural Resources Wales, 2024: Remaining Landfill Void in Wales. Available at: https://datamap.gov.wales/documents/3249.

Network Rail, 2019: Our approach to safety.Available at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/our-approach-to-safety/.  

Network Rail, 2021: Network Rail third adaptation report – quantitative risk assessment. https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Appendix-i-Risk-assessment.xlsx.  

Network Rail, 2022: Nine things that happened during the storms. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20240803103149/https://www.networkrail.co.uk/stories/nine-things-that-happened-during-the-storms/.  

Network Rail, 2024a: Weather Resilience and Climate Change Adaptation (WRCCA). Summary of Regional plans for 2024–2029. Available at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/CP7-WRCCA-Plans-combined-summary-of-all-regions-April-2024.pdf.   

Network Rail, 2024b: Network Rail fourth adaptation report. Available at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Network-Rail-4th-Adaptation-Report-Dec-2024.pdf.  

Network Rail, 2024c: Wales and Western Weather Resilience and Climate Change Adaptation Plan Control Period 7 2024-2029. Available at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Wales-Western-CP7-WRCCA.pdf.  

Network Rail, 2024d: Eastern Region Managing Weather and Climate Change 2024-2029. Available at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Eastern-CP7-WRCCA-Plan.pdf.  

Network Rail, 2024e: Southern Region Weather Resilience & Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2024 – 2029. Available at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Southern-CP7-WRCCA-Plan.pdf. 

Network Rail, 2024f: North West & Central Region Weather Resilience & Climate Change Adaptation Plan. Available at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/NWC-CP7-WRCCA-Plan.pdf.  

Network Rail (n.d.) Delays explained. Available at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/looking-after-the-railway/delays-explained/.  

New Civil Engineer, 2023: Transport Scotland has spent over £11M clearing landslides from A83 Rest and Be Thankful since 2014. https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/transport-scotland-has-spent-over-11m-clearing-landslides-from-a83-rest-and-be-thankful-since-2014-13-11-2023/

New Civil Engineer, 2024: Storm Henk: Railways and roads impacted across southern and western England. Available at: https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/storm-henk-railways-and-roads-impacted-across-southern-and-western-england-03-01-2024/.   

NHS, 2023: Review of the Guy’s and St. Thomas’ IT critical incident final report from the Deputy Chief Executive Officer January 2023. Available at: https://www.guysandstthomas.nhs.uk/sites/default/files/2023-01/IT-critical-incident-review.pdf. 

Nicholls, R.J. et al., 2021: Coastal Landfills and Rising Sea Levels: A Challenge for the 21st Century. Frontiers in Marine Science, 8:710342, doi:10.3389/fmars.2021.710342.

Niemi, L. et al. 2022. Spatiotemporal trends and annual fluxes of pharmaceuticals in a Scottish priority catchment, Environmental Pollution, 292 Part A, 118295, doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2021.118295.  

Northern Gas Networks (NGN), 2024. Climate Change Adaptation Reporting Power Round 4 Report, December 2024. Available at: https://www.northerngasnetworks.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/NGN-CCAR-Round-4-Report_Final.pdf

Northern Ireland Electricity Networks, 2015. NIE Briefing on Grid Capacity in Northern Ireland In the Context of Enabling Economic Growth. Available at: https://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/enterprise-trade-and-investment/inquiry—corp-tax/written-submissions/20150503-response-to-the-inquiry-from-nie.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Northern Ireland Electricity Networks, 2025. Restoration efforts draw to a close following Storm Éowyn. Available at: https://www.nienetworks.co.uk/news/article/2025/storm-eowyn-update (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

Northern Ireland Water (NI Water) 2024: Northern Ireland’s Wastewater System. Available at: https://www.niwater.com/media/b45br0kt/northernirelandswastewatersystemmay2024.pdf Accessed

Northern Lighthouse Board, 2024: Adaptation for Climate Change Progress Report. Available at: https://www.nlb.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Adaptation-for-Climate-Change-Progress-Report-2024-FINAL.pdf (Accessed: 24 July 2025). 

Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), 2020: NDA Strategy: Integrated Impact Assessment Report Volume 3: Baseline Report and Policy and Legislative Context Review. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5f364a7d8fa8f5174082627e/2021_-_IIA_Volume_3_-_ENE_FINAL_Aug_2020.pdf.

Nugent, K., 2023: Why One Country Wants to Stop Building Roads to Fight Climate Change. Time.com, February. Available at: https://time.com/6255769/wales-roads-building-projects-climate-change/ (Accessed: 29 May 2025). 

Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), 2024a. Estimating current and future adaptation costs to the UK. Available at:

Estimating current and future adaptation costs to the UK

Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), 2024b. Fiscal risks and sustainability.Available at:https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/Fiscal-risks-and-sustainability-report-September-2024-1.pdf.  

Ofcom, 2024a. Resilience to climate change in the telecoms sector (ARP4). Available at: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/phones-telecoms-and-internet/information-for-industry/resilience-to-climate-change-in-the-telecoms-sector/climate-adaptation-report-2024.pdf?v=38977. 

Ofcom, 2024b. Connected Nations: UK Report 2024. Available at: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/research-and-data/multi-sector/infrastructure-research/connected-nations-2024/connected-nations-uk-report-2024.pdf. 

Ofcom, 2025: Around a quarter of UK households (26%) had difficulty affording communications services in May 2025. Available at: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/phones-and-broadband/saving-money/affordability-tracker  

Ofgem, 2020. 9 August 2019 power outage report. Available at: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/docs/9_august_2019_power_outage_report.pdf

Ofgem, 2021. RIIO-ED2: Network price controls and performance (2021-2028) [WWW Document]. Available at: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/energy-policy-and-regulation/policy-and-regulatory-programmes/network-price-controls-2021-2028-riio-2 (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

Ofgem, 2022a. Final report on the review into the networks’ response to Storm Arwen. Available at: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2022-06/Final%20report%20on%20the%20review%20into%20the%20networks%27%20response%20to%20Storm%20Arwen.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Ofgem, 2022b. RIIO-ED1 Network Performance Summary 2021-22. Available at: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2023-03/RIIO-ED1%20Network%20Performance%20Summary%202021-22.pdf (Accessed 22 September 2025)

Ofgem, 2022c. Electricity Networks Strategic Framework: Enabling a secure, net zero energy system Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6690f4220808eaf43b50ce41/electricity-networks-strategic-framework-report.pdf (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

Ofgem, 2024. RIIO-2 Re-opener Applications 2024 Final Determinations – ED Annex. Available at: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2024-12/RIIO-2_Re-opener_Applications_2024_FDs_Annex_ED.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Ofgem, 2025a: Climate resilience report – fourth round climate adaptation reporting. Available at: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-04/Ofgem-climate-resilience-report-ARP4.pdf

Ofgem, 2025b. ED3 Framework Decision. Available at: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-04/ED3-Framework-Decision.pdf (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

Offshore-Energy, 2025: North Sea FPSO production restart on the cards next month following storm-induced damage. Available at: https://www.offshore-energy.biz/north-sea-fpso-production-restart-on-the-cards-next-month-following-storm-induced-damage/

Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR), 2020. Safety Assessment Principles (SAPs) for Nuclear Facilities – 2014 Edition (Revision 1), January 2020. Available: https://www.onr.org.uk/saps/saps2014.pdf

Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR), 2024. ONR’s response to the fourth round of climate adaptation reporting in accordance with the Adaptation Reporting Power (ARP). Available at: https://www.onr.org.uk/publications/regulatory-reports/regulatory-policy/onr-s-response-to-the-fourth-round-of-climate-adaptation-reporting-in-accordance-with-the-adaptation-reporting-power-arp

​Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR), 2025. ONR Report: Chief Nuclear Inspector’s Themed Inspection on Climate Change – Summary Report. Available at: https://www.onr.org.uk/publications/regulatory-reports/chief-nuclear-inspectors-themed-inspections

Office of Rail and Road (ORR), 2020: Report following railway power disruption  on 9th August 2019. Office of Road and Rail.  3rd January 2020. https://www.orr.gov.uk/media/10752/download

Office of Rail and Road (ORR), 2024a. Climate Change Adaptation at the Office of Rail and Road. Available at: http://www.orr.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-02/climate-change-adaptation-report.pdf.  

Office of Rail and Road (ORR), 2024b. Rail infrastructure and assets April 2023 to March 2024. Available at: https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/gcdkwb0v/infrastructure-and-assets-2023-24.pdf.  

Openreach, 2025. Storm Eowyn. Available at: https://www.openreach.com/news/storm-eowyn/. 

Palin, E.J., Stipanovic Oslakovic, I., Gavin, K. and Quinn, A.D., 2021: Implications of climate change for railway infrastructure. WIRES Climate Change, 12(5), e728. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.728  

Perks, R.J., Bernie, D., Lowe, J. et al., 2023. The influence of future weather pattern changes and projected sea-level rise on coastal flood impacts around the UK. Climatic Change 176, 25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-023-03496-2

Perry, M.C. et al. 2022. Past and future trends in fire weather for the UK. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science, 22, 559–575, doi:10.5194/nhess-22-559-2022.  

Perry, W.B. et al. 2024. Addressing the challenges of combined sewer overflows. Environmental Pollution, 343,123225, doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123225  

Petrie, B. 2021. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28:32095–32110, doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-14103-1.  

Phoenix Energy, 2025.Responsible Business Report 2025: Reporting on 2024 activity. Belfast: Phoenix Energy. Available at: https://phoenixenergyni.com/assets/general/Phoenix-Energy-Responsible-Business-Report-2025.pdf

Pitcher, G. 2015 Storm Desmond | Bridges Damaged. New Civil Engineer. Available at: https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/storm-desmond-bridges-damaged-07-12-2015/ (Accessed 18 January 2026).

Pitt, M. 2007 Learning lessons from the 2007 floods. Cabinet Office. Archive content, available at: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20100807034701/http:/archive.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/pittreview/_/media/assets/www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/flooding_review/pitt_review_full%20pdf.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Pizarro, J. and Sainsbury, B. 2023: Climate adaptation in the spent fuel storage and disposal facilities: A literature review. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 192:109954, doi:10.1016/j.anucene.2023.109954

Poo, M.C.-P. et al., 2021: ‘Climate Change Risk Indicators (CCRI) for seaports in the United Kingdom’, Ocean & Coastal Management, 205, p. 105580. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2021.105580. 

Port of Dover, 2024: Climate Change Adaptation Report: Round 4. Available at: https://www.portofdover.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Climate-Change-Adaptation-Report-2024.pdf (Accessed: 6 June 2025). 

Port of London Authority, 2021: Climate Change Adaptation Report – Third Round Update. Available at: https://pla.co.uk/sites/default/files/2024-02/adaptingtoclimatechangesubmissionfinal.pdf. 

Port of London Authority, 2024: Climate Change Adaptation Report Fourth Round Update. Available at: https://pla.co.uk/sites/default/files/2024-12/Climate-Change-Adaptation-Report-2024.pdf (Accessed: 6 June 2025). 

Postill, H., Helm, P.R., Dixon, N., El-Hamalawi, A., Glendinning, S. and Take, W.A., 2023. Strength parameter selection framework for evaluating the design life of clay cut slopes. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Geotechnical Engineering, 176(3), pp.254-273.

Preece, J., Little, K., Kettridge, N., Ferranti, E. and Donaldson, D., 2025: Exploring the Impact of Fires on Network Rail Infrastructure. Technical report for Network Rail. 

Prosser, M. C., Williams, P. D., Marlton, G. J., and Harrison, R. G., 2023. Evidence for large increases in clear-air turbulence over the past four decades. Geophysical Research Letters,50, e2023GL103814, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023GL103814

RAC Foundation, 2021: Substandard road bridges in Great Britain – 2021 data. Available at: https://www.racfoundation.org/research/economy/substandard-road-bridges-in-great-britain (Accessed: 22 May 2025). 

​RAC Foundation, 2023: Proportion of substandard road bridges falls. Available at: https://www.racfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/RAC_Foundation_Bridge_Maintenance_Regions_2022.pdf (Accessed: 21 May 2025). 

Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB), 2022: Synopsis – Derailment of a passenger train at Carmont, Aberdeenshire – 12^th August 2020. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/62274faa8fa8f526def96f5c/R022022_220310_Carmont_Synopsis.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025).

Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) [S. Jones], 2024a: Good Practice Guide – Climate Change Scenarios. Available at: https://www.rssb.co.uk/-/media/Project/RSSB/RssbWebsite/Documents/Public/Public-content/Sustainability/Climate-Change-Scenarios-Good-Practice-Guide.pdf.  

Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) [D. Black and S. Jones], 2024b: Climate adaptation maturity in GB rail: 2024. Available at: https://www.rssb.co.uk/-/media/Project/RSSB/RssbWebsite/Documents/Public/Public-content/Sustainability/rssb_maturity-matrix-report-2024-v2-final-draft-ss1.pdf  

​Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB), 2025: Building resilience to climate change. Available at: https://www.rssb.co.uk/sustainability/prepared-for-a-changing-climate/building-resilience-to-climate-change

Raoelison, O.D. et al. 2023. Wildfire impacts on surface water quality parameters: Cause of data variability and reporting needs, Environmental Pollution, 317, 120713, doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2022.120713.  

Reid, N. et al., 2024. Unprecedented Harmful algal bloom in the UK and Ireland’s largest lake associated with gastrointestinal bacteria, microcystins and anabaenopeptins presenting an environmental and public health risk. Environment International, 90, 108934, doi:10.1016/j.envint.2024.108934.  

Reppas, N., Xia, X., Sharifi, S., Faramarzi, A., Metje, N., Hannah, D., Cole, S., Yensri, P., Mashhadi, A., Li, Q., Kay, A., Griffin, A., Wells, S., and Hughes, A., 2025: Climate Resilience Assessment of Buried Pipelines: Evaluating Soil Moisture Variability Impacts Across the UK.SGN, 2024. Climate change adaptation report: 4th round. https://research.historicengland.org.uk/Report.aspx?i=15500&ru=%2FResults.aspx%3Fp%3D1%26n%3D10%26a%3D4827%26ns%3D1%0Afile:///C:/Users/DGMac/OneDrive/Documents/AAA Phd/Bibliographic Downloads/ClimateChangeAdaptationReport.pdf

Rennie, A.F. et al.,2021. Dynamic Coast: Erosion Enhanced Flooding (2021). Available at: https://www.dynamiccoast.com/files/dc2/_DC2_WS1a_Flooding_FINAL.pdf (Accessed: September 29, 2025).

Reyniers, N., Osborn, T. J., Addor, N., and Darch, G., 2023: Projected changes in droughts and extreme droughts in Great Britain strongly influenced by the choice of drought index, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 1151–1171, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-1151-2023

Rivington, M. 2020. Private Water Supplies and Climate Change The likely impacts of climate change (amount, frequency and distribution of precipitation), and the resilience of private water supplies. CREW Report CRW2018_05. ISBN number: 978-0-902701-77-9, https://www.crew.ac.uk/publications    

​RTE (Raidió Teilifís Éireann), 2023: 2022 Electricity Review Full Report. Available at: https://assets.rte-france.com/analyse-et-donnees/2023-08/Bilan%20%C3%A9lectrique%202022%20rapport%20GB_version_finale%20(2).pdf

Robson, E., 2021: Climate change risks to transport infrastructure. [Research paper for Northern Ireland Assembly, NIAR 227-2021]. Available at: https://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/raise/publications/2017-2022/2021/infrastructure/7421.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

​Rouainia, M., Helm, P., Davies, O., et al., 2020: Deterioration of an infrastructure cutting subjected to climate change. Acta Geotechnica, 15 (10): 2997–3016. doi:10.1007/s11440-020-00965-1. 

Royal Academy of Engineering (RAEng), 2024: Testing the waters: Priorities for mitigating health risks from wastewater pollution. National Engineering Policy Centre.  Available at: https://nepc.raeng.org.uk/media/qi2eyivp/testing-the-waters-priorities-for-mitigating-health-risks-from-wastewater-pollution.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2025)

Sasidharan, M., Parlikad, A.K., Schooling, J., Hadjidemetriou, G.M., Hamer, M., Kirwan, A. and Roffe, S., 2023: A bridge scour risk management approach to deal with uncertain climate future. Transportation Research Part D – Transport and Environment, 114, 103567. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103567.   

Saxena, A., Kumar, R., Sagade, A.A., Singh, D.B., Tyagi, V.V., Cuce, E. and Goel, V., 2024: A state-of-art review on photovoltaic systems: Design, performance, and progress. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 190, pp.1324-1354. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2024.07.111

Sanchez, N., Dent, C.J. and Wilson, A., 2023. Statistical modelling of dependence between net demands and deficits in two area power systems. Sustainable Energy, Grids and Networks, 36, p.101151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.segan.2023.101151

Sayers, P.B., et. al., 2020: Climate Change Risk Assessment 2022: Projections of future flood risk in the UK. Research undertaken by Sayers and Partners for the Committee on Climate Change. Published by Committee on Climate Change, London. Available at: https://www.ukclimaterisk.org/publications/projections-of-future-flood-risk/

Scotia Gas Network (SGN), 2024: climate adaptation report fourth round. Available at: https://sgn.co.uk/sites/default/files/media-entities/documents/2024-12/SGN-CCAR4-SGN_Dec-2024-FINAL.pdf

Scotland’s Railway, 2024a: Climate Ready Plan 2024-29. Available at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Scotlands-Railway-CP7-Climate-Ready-WRCCA-Plan.pdf.  

Scotland’s Railway, 2024b: Climate Action Plan 2024-29. Available at: https://scotlandsrailway.com/assets/site/Climate-Action-Plan/Network-Rail-Scotland-Climate-Action-Plan-2024.pdf.  

Scottish Canals, 2023: Better lives by water: Corporate Plan 2023-2028. Available at: https://d1hxd0sho1wxko.cloudfront.net/production/general/Scottish-Canals-Corporate-Plan-2023-28-Final-C_2023-08-02-131322_oavf.pdf (Accessed: 18 March 2025). 

Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA), 2021: The River Basin Management Plan for Scotland 2021-2027. Available at: https://www.sepa.org.uk/media/594088/211222-final-rbmp3-scotland.pdf (Accessed: 18 March 2025). 

Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA), 2024: Waste Landfilled in Scotland 2023. Available at: https://data.gov.scot/sepa/waste/landfilled.html.

Scottish Government, 2021. A Scotland for the Future: the opportunities and challenges of Scotland’s changing population. ISBN: 978-1-80004-522-4. Available at: https://www.gov.scot/publications/scotland-future-opportunities-challenges-scotlands-changing-population/ (Accessed: 22 September 2025) 

Scottish Government, 2022. Storm Arwen review. Available at: https://www.gov.scot/publications/storm-arwen-review/. 

Scottish Government, 2023. National Planning Framework 4 (NFP4). Available at: https://www.gov.scot/publications/national-planning-framework-4/pages/3/(Accessed: 23 September 2025) 

Scottish Government, 2024: Scottish National Adaptation Plan 2024-2029. Available at: https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/strategy-plan/2024/09/scottish-national-adaptation-plan-2024-2029-2/documents/scottish-national-adaptation-plan-2024-2029/scottish-national-adaptation-plan-2024-2029/govscot%3Adocument/s. 

Scottish Government, 2025: NPF4 planning guidance: policy 2 – climate mitigation and adaptation. Available at: https://www.gov.scot/publications/npf4-planning-guidance-policy-2-climate-mitigation-adaptation/pages/5/ (Accessed: 23 September 2025) 

Scottish & Southern Electricity Networks (SSEN) – Transmission, 2016. Scottish Hydro Electric Transmission’s £1 billion investment in the north of Scotland. Available at: https://www.ssen-transmission.co.uk/news/news–views/2016/5/scottish-hydro-electric-transmissions-1-billion-investment-in-the-north-of-scotland/ (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

Scottish & Southern Electricity Networks (SSEN) – Distribution, 2024. Climate Change Adaptation Report – Fourth Round. Available at: https://www.ssen.co.uk/globalassets/library/climate-change-adaptation-docs/ssen-distribution-fourth-climate-change-adaptation-report.pdf (Accessed: 23 September 2025)

Shaw, T.A. and Miyawaki, O., 2024: Fast upper-level jet stream winds get faster under climate change.Available at: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-023-01884-1

Slingo, J., 2021: Latest scientific evidence for observed and projected climate change, in UK Climate Risk Independent Assessment (CCRA3). Available at: https://www.ukclimaterisk.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CCRA3-Chapter-1-FINAL.pdf

Slingo, J., Davies, P., Fowler, H., 2021: Network Rail Weather Advisory Task Force Final Report. Available at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Network-Rail-Weather-Advisory-Task-Force-Final-Report.pdf  

Slingo, J., Davies, P., Lowe, J. and Eastman, M., 2024: EHTF Weather and Climate Change Report: March 2023. Available at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Extreme-Heat-Task-Force-Weather-and-Climate-Change-Report.pdf.  

Smith, A.W., Argyroudis, S.A., Winter, M.G. and Mitoulis, S.A., 2021, December. Economic impact of bridge functionality loss from a resilience perspective: Queensferry Crossing, UK. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Bridge Engineering (Vol. 174, No. 4, pp. 254-264).

Smith, C. et al., 2023: Large-scale electricity storage. Royal Society, London. Available at: https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/projects/large-scale-electricity-storage/large-scale-electricity-storage-report.pdf

SONI, 2024: Winter Outlook 2024/25. Available at: https://cms.soni.ltd.uk/sites/default/files/media/documents/SONI-Winter-Outlook-2024-25.pdf

SONI, 2025: Addendum to the Winter Outlook 2024/25. Available at: https://cms.soni.ltd.uk/sites/default/files/publications/250116-SONI-Addendum-to-the-Winter-Outlook-2024.pdf?utm

SONI, 2026: Our Strategy. Available at: https://www.soni.ltd.uk/about-us/our-strategy

Southeastern Railway, 2024: Southeastern Railway ARP4. Supplied to the Climate Change Committee – not available online. 

South East Rivers Trust, 2025. Restoring the Upper Mole Catchment – One Stream at a Time. Available at: https://www.southeastriverstrust.org/projects/gatwick-airport-nfm/ (Accessed 21 January 2026).

Souto, L., Neal, R., Pope, J.O., Gonzalez, P.L.M., Wilkinson, J., Taylor, P.C., 2024. Identification of weather patterns and transitions likely to cause power outages in the United Kingdom. Commun Earth Environ 5, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-024-01217-w

S&P Global, 2025. UK’s Grangemouth refinery ends crude oil processing. Available at: https://www.spglobal.com/commodity-insights/en/news-research/latest-news/crude-oil/042925-uks-grangemouth-refinery-ends-crude-oil-processing?

SP Energy Networks, 2025. SPEN – Our Transmission Network [WWW Document]. Available at: https://www.spenergynetworks.co.uk/pages/our_transmission_network.aspx (Accessed: 8 August 2025)

St John, T.W., Oliphant, H. and Butler, M., 2024: A40 Brecon bypass landslide: investigation, remediation and asset management for climate resilience. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 57 (3). doi:10.1144/qjegh2024-026. 

Steen, B. et al., 2022: Climate Change Adaptation and Transport Infrastructure: A Rapid Evidence Assessment. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6569b274cd4dda000d082fa3/climate-change-and-transport-infrastructure-rapid-evidence-assessment.pdf  

Taaffe-Maguire, S., 2025: ‘Heathrow shutdown: Cost of airport closure could be worth millions’, Sky News, 21 March. Available at: https://news.sky.com/story/heathrow-shutdown-cost-of-airport-closure-could-be-worth-millions-13333089 (Accessed: 22 July 2025). 

​Taylor, M., 2024: Climate change is causing a pothole plague. Are robots and self-healing pavement the solution? Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/future/article/20240124-climate-change-is-causing-a-pothole-plague-are-robots-and-self-healing-pavement-the-solution (Accessed: 3 June 2025). 

techUK, 2024. Future-Proofing Digital Infrastructure: Climate Resilience in the Data Centre Sector (ARP4). Available at: https://www.techuk.org/resource/future-proofing-digital-infrastructure-climate-resilience-in-the-data-centre-sector.html. 

TfL, 2021: TfL Adaptation Reporting Power Submission 2021. Available at: https://tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/adaptation-reporting-power-3.docx.  

TfL, 2024a: Climate change and interdependency risks for London’s land based transport sector. ARP4 Interdependencies project report. Transport for London. May 2024 https://tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/tfl-arp4-climate-interdependencies-project-abbreviated-report-2024.docx

TfL, 2024b: TfL Adaptation Reporting Power Submission 2024. Available at: https://tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/tfl-adaptation-reporting-power-2024-full-report.docx.  

TfL, 2024c: TfL Adaptation Reporting Power Submission 2024 – quantitative risk assessment. Available at: https://tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/tfl-climate-risk-assessment-2024.xlsx.  

TfW (n.d.) Climate Adaptation and Resilience Plan. Available at: https://tfw.wales/sites/default/files/2023-05/CARP_ENG.pdf  

​Tichavský, R., Ballesteros-Cánovas, J.A., Šilhán, K., et al., 2019: Dry Spells and Extreme Precipitation are The Main Trigger of Landslides in Central Europe. Scientific Reports, 9 (1): 14560. doi:10.1038/s41598-019-51148-2. 

Tidman, R., Abela-Ridder, B. and de Castañeda, R.R., 2021: ‘The impact of climate change on neglected tropical diseases: a systematic review.’, Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 115(2), pp. 147–168. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/trstmh/traa192. 

Toimil, A. et al., 2020: Addressing the challenges of climate change risks and adaptation in coastal areas: A review. Coastal Engineering, 156, p. 103611. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2019.103611  

Tran, N. K., Haralambides, H., Notteboom, T., Cullinane, K., 2025. The costs of maritime supply chain disruptions: The case of the Suez Canal blockage by the ‘Ever Given’ megaship. International Journal of Production Economics, 109464. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2024.109464

Translink, 2025: Adapting infrastructure today for tomorrow: Leading a resilient climate-related transformation of transport in Northern Ireland. Available at: https://www.translink.co.uk/getmedia/ffe9e895-2fc5-4ff5-b168-8745fde8c8ca/44093-Translink-Climate-Change-28pp-brochure-v17.pdf  

​ Transport Focus, 2023: What rail passengers need during extreme heat. Available at: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Extreme-Heat-Task-Force-Passenger-Report.pdf.

Transport Scotland, 2023: Transport Scotland’s Approach to Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience (ACCAR). Available at: https://www.transport.gov.scot/publication/transport-scotland-s-approach-to-climate-change-adaptation-and-resilience/ (Accessed: 21 May 2025). 

​Transport Scotland, 2024: A83 Rest and Be Thankful. Available at: https://www.transport.gov.scot/projects/access-to-argyll-and-bute-a83/project-details/#64523 (Accessed: 21 May 2025). 

Transport Scotland, 2025. Severe weather now an all year round challenge. Available at: https://www.transport.gov.scot/news/severe-weather-now-an-all-year-round-challenge/ (Accessed 23 January 2026).

UK Government, 2018: Climate change: second national adaptation programme (2018 to 2023): NAP2 (Withdrawn). Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/climate-change-second-national-adaptation-programme-2018-to-2023 (Accessed: 21 May 2025). 

UK Government, 2025: Unlocking NUAR’s full potential: opportunities ahead. https://doi.org/https://gdsgeospatial.blog.gov.uk/2025/05/19/unlocking-nuars-full-potential-opportunities-ahead/

UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), 2023. Health Effects of Climate Change (HECC) in the UK: 2023 Report, Chapter 7. Effect of climate change on infectious diseases in the UK. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/657087777469300012488921/HECC-report-2023-chapter-7-infectious-diseases.pdf.  

UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), 2024: Impacts on health of emissions from landfill sites. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/landfill-sites-impact-on-health-from-emissions/impacts-on-health-of-emissions-from-landfill-sites.

UK Parliament, House of Lords, 2018: Brexit: energy security. (HL 2017-2019 63). Chapter 8, The island of Ireland. Available at: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201719/ldselect/ldeucom/63/6311.htm

UK Parliament, 2022, House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee: Water Quality in rivers. Fourth Report of Session 2021-22.  

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) , 2023:Review of maritime transport: towards a green and just transition.Available at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4042151?v=pdf

Uswitch, 2024. UK fibre optic broadband statistics 2024. Available at: https://www.uswitch.com/broadband/compare/fibre_optic/fibre-broadband-statistics/. 

Utility Regulator 2024: Price Control for Northern Ireland Water 2021-2027.  Mid-Term Review Final Determination. September 2024. Available at: https://www.uregni.gov.uk/files/uregni/documents/2024-09/UR%20PC21%20MTR%20Final%20Determination%2001.00%20Final.pdf Accessed 13^th February 2026.

Valero, D. et al. 2023. Addressing Water Poverty Under Climate Crisis: Implications for Social Policy. Social Policy and Society. 22(4):747-762. doi:10.1017/S1474746423000258  

Van Houtven, G. et al., 2022: Act Now or Pay Later: The Cost of Climate Inaction for Ports and Shipping. Available at: https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/press-releases/RTI-EDF Act Now or Pay Later Climate Impact Shipping.pdf (Accessed: 19 March 2025). 

Verschuur, J., Koks, E.E. and Hall, J.W., 2023: Systemic risks from climate-related disruptions at ports. Nature Climate Change, 13(8), pp. 804–806. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-023-01754-w. 

Visser-Quinn, A. et al. 2021: Mapping future water scarcity in a water abundant nation: Near-term projections for Scotland, Climate Risk Management, 32, 100302, doi:10.1016/j.crm.2021.100302.

Vita, G., Shu, Z., Jesson, M., et al., 2020: On the assessment of pedestrian distress in urban winds. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 203: 104200. doi:10.1016/J.JWEIA.2020.104200.

Vodafone Group, 2023. Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (‘TCFD’) Report 2023. Available at: https://reports.investors.vodafone.com/view/682172827. 

Wales and West Utilities, 2024: Wales & West Utilities ARP4 Report. Available online: https://www.wwutilities.co.uk/media/6060/wwu-arp4-report.pdf (Accessed: 7 August 2025)

Wallace, E., Chowienczyk, K., Pearce, M., and Rushby, I. 2020: Energy Industry Specific Risk Assessment on Climate Change Impacts – Work Package 3 Report.

Warnock, J., McMillan, D., Pilgrim, J., and Shenton, S. 2019: Failure Rates of Offshore Wind Transmission Systems Energies 2019, 12(14), 2682, https://doi.org/10.3390/en12142682.

Water Resources East, 2023: Regional Water Resources Plan for Eastern England. Available at: wre.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/WRE-Regional-Water-Resources-Plan-for-Eastern-England.pdf

Watkiss, P., 2022: The Costs of Adaptation, and the Economic Costs and Benefits of Adaptation in the UK. Policy Paper. Available at: https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/The-Costs-of-Adaptation-and-the-Economic-Costs-and-Benefits-of-Adaptation-in-the-UK-Paul-Watkiss.pdf

Watkowski, L., Oosterwyk, G., and Elo, J., 2025: The Hidden Costs of AI-driven Data Center Demand: Five Systemic Tensions. AMCIS 2025 Proceedings. 21. https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2025/intelfuture/intelfuture/21   

Weber, R. et al., 2025: Review on the need for inventories and management of reservoirs of POPs and other persistent, bioaccumulating and toxic substances (PBTs) in the face of climate change. Environmental Sciences Europe, 37:48, doi:10.1186/s12302-025-01060-6.

Welbank, J. 2021. Development of strategic water resources in England. Dams and Reservoirs, 31(3): 84–89, doi: 10.1680/jdare.21.00016  

Welsh Government, 2024a: Climate Adaptation Strategy for Wales. Available at: https://www.gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2024-10/climate-adaptation-strategy-for-wales-2024.pdf (Accessed: 22 July 2025). 

Welsh Government, 2024b: Guidance document: Find disused coal tips: frequently asked questions. Available at: https://www.gov.wales/find-disused-coal-tips-frequently-asked-questions-html.

Welsh Government, 2024c: Legislation: The Disused Mine and Quarry Tips (Wales) Bill. Available at: https://www.gov.wales/disused-mine-and-quarry-tips-wales-bill.

Wiegmans, B., 2018: The UK domestic water transport system: an evidence review. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/761924/Domesticwatertransport.pdf (Accessed: 22 July 2025). 

Wilczak, J.M., Kirk-Davidoff, D.B., Bloomfield, H., Bracken, C. and Sharp, J.,, 2025: Wind and solar energy droughts: Potential impacts on energy system dynamics and research needs. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, 17(2), p.022301. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0253058

Wilkinson, S., Dunn, S., Adams, R., Kirchner-Bossi, N., Fowler, H.J., González Otálora, S., Pritchard, D., Mendes, J., Palin, E.J., Chan, S.C., 2022. Consequence forecasting: A rational framework for predicting the consequences of approaching storms. Clim Risk Manag 35, 100412.

Wilkinson, S., Manning, C., Fowler, H., Kuriakose, J., Wood, R., Martínez Ceseña, E.A., 2024. Enhancing Resilience in UK Energy Networks Final Report.

Wilks, J.H., 2015: Transport infrastructure slope failures in a changing climate. Loughborough University. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/2134/17489 (Accessed: 3 June 2025).

Williams, P.D., 2016: Transatlantic flight times and climate change. Environmental Research Letters, 11, (2). doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/2/024008.

Wilson, M.P. and Worrall, F. 2021. The heat recovery potential of ‘wastewater’: a national analysis of sewage effluent discharge temperatures. Environmental Science: Water Research and Technology., 7, 1760-1777, doi: 10.1039/d1ew00411e.  

Winter, M.G. and Waaser, T., 2024a: Debris flow at Luib on the A87 strategic road: Isle of Skye, Scotland. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 57 (2). doi:10.1144/qjegh2023-111.

Winter, M.G. and Waaser, T., 2024b: The evolution of instability at the A83 Rest and be Thankful from 2008 to 2023. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 57 (4). doi:10.1144/qjegh2024-097.

Winter, M.G., Waaser, T. and Fiddes, G., 2024: Quantitative risk assessment for static and mobile road users: methodology and application at A82 Glen Coe, Scotland. Geoenvironmental Disasters, 11 (1): 12. doi:10.1186/s40677-024-00274-9.

Wright, M., Hutchins, B., Fallon, J., Bloomfield, H., 2024. State of the Climate for the UK Energy Sector 2023-24: Full Report.

Xenochristou, M.et al. 2020. Using Smart Demand-Metering Data and Customer Characteristics to Investigate Influence of Weather on Water Consumption in the UK. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 146(2), 04019073, doi:10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0001148.  

Xu, J. et al. 2020. Increased Dissolved Organic Carbon Concentrations in Peat‐Fed UK Water Supplies Under Future Climate and Sulfate Deposition Scenarios. Water Resources Research, 56, e2019WR025592, doi:10.1029/2019WR025592 

Yesudian, A.N. and Dawson, R.J., 2021. ‘Global analysis of sea level rise risk to airports’, Climate Risk Management, 31, p. 100266. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2020.100266.