How Law for Change Supported Andrew Boswell’s Fight to Challenge Britain’s Failing Climate Response

In 2024, scientist and computer modeller turned activist Dr. Andrew Boswell, and Leigh Day’s environmental team, partnered with Law for Change to bring two high-profile legal challenges against major UK infrastructure projects: the A12 road expansion and Net Zero Teesside (NZT).

These cases took aim at the government’s flawed assessment of greenhouse gas emissions and, although both were dismissed, shaped environmental decision-making and public discourse, demonstrating that legal challenges can drive social change even in the absence of courtroom victories.

A12 Chelmsford

In January 2024, the Secretary of State for Transport approved a major road-widening project on the A12 in Chelmsford. Dr. Boswell issued judicial review proceedings, contending that the Secretary of State had failed to undertake a lawful assessment of the scheme’s greenhouse gas emissions and had breached the UK’s climate promises under the Paris Agreement. 

The planned expansion was one of the biggest road schemes in the UK and was expected to have significant negative consequences for the environment:

- Biodiversity loss: The scheme threatened to destroy 45 hectares of woodland and 16 km of hedgerows.

- Food security risks: It involved the loss of 474 hectares of arable farmland. 

- High carbon footprint: The expansion was projected to emit almost 2 million tonnes of CO₂. 

Recognising the environmental public benefit of this challenge, Law for Change provided Dr. Boswell with adverse costs protection. The goal was to establish stronger climate accountability in infrastructure planning and encourage the government’s proper assessment of greenhouse gas emissions in future projects.

Net Zero Teesside

In February 2024, the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero granted development consent for Net Zero Teesside, a gas-fired power station fitted with post-combustion carbon capture and storage (CCUS) technology. Marketed as a key element in the UK’s 2050 Net Zero strategy, the project was intended to be the first of its kind.

What is CCUS?

CO₂ is the main gas responsible for global heating and CCUS aims to capture CO₂ emissions from industrial and energy sources before they reach the atmosphere, transporting the gas via pipelines and storing it deep under the seabed.

Dr. Boswell’s Objections

Dr. Boswell argued that the environmental impacts of the scheme had not been adequately assessed and took issue with the purported green credentials of Net Zero Teesside. His independent analysis found that the project could emit more than 20 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent over its lifetime.

Notably, while the government accepted Dr. Boswell’s calculations and acknowledged the emissions would have "significant adverse effects", it nonetheless approved the project, insisting it would help the UK reach its Net Zero 2050 goals.

Dr. Boswell and counsel, Catherine Dobson, highlighted the inconsistency in this argument and noted the government had failed to give a coherent explanation and legally adequate reasons for backing the project.

The Problems with CCUS

Although the government suggests CCUS is a positive step towards tackling greenhouse gas emissions, in reality, it is a risky and unproven technology at industrial scale. Notably, the only two projects in the world that have attempted to reduce emissions post-combustion have failed.

The Public Accounts Committee warn of the ‘‘high risk that CCUS will not deliver to the timescales or the level of carbon reductions needed’’ which underscores how CCUS jeopardises UK carbon targets.

Moreover, the Net Zero Teesside project relies on methane gas. Initially, the significant issue of methane leakage throughout extraction and transport was entirely overlooked. Dr. Boswell’s interventions led the Secretary of State to acknowledge upstream methane emissions but, detrimentally, the Secretary of State used systemically underestimated values to assess them. Given that methane is far more potent than CO₂ in driving climate change, these flaws pose a serious threat to the project’s claimed environmental credibility.

Dr. Boswell and fellow campaigners warned that the UK’s focus on CCS-enabled fossil fuel infrastructure would lock in carbon emissions, delay the clean energy transition, and risk worsening the climate crisis.

Read more about CCUS here

Law for Change's Support

This case also risked undermining the vital environmental impact assessment precedent established in Finch v Surrey County Council - another landmark case supported by Law for Change - which further prompted the Fund to back Dr Boswell’s Court of Appeal case.

Unexpected Success  

While both cases were ultimately dismissed, the challenges have still resulted in meaningful progress in the fight against climate change.

Cancellation of the A12 Road Expansion Scheme 

Although the Court of Appeal dismissed the legal challenge, the case delayed the project long enough that it was never funded. In July 2025, the new Transport Secretary, Heidi Alexander, cancelled the A12 works, alongside plans for a dual carriageway on the A47. She noted that the former Conservative government had approved infrastructure projects “with no plan to pay for them”. Dr Boswell and campaign group Transport Action Network credit the legal delay for helping to halt the £1.4 billion road scheme.

Creation of New Campaign: Scrap Carbon Capture 

Project Net Zero Teesside is still progressing, but the legal challenge sparked a new, energised campaign against carbon capture technology: Scrap Carbon Capture. Dr. Boswell’s arguments and evidence brought the risks of CCUS into mainstream public and policy discussions, helping shape a more critical narrative around the government's net zero strategy.

At Law for Change, success isn't always defined by court rulings. We recognise that litigation can spark reform, delay harmful developments, and shape public conversations - even in the face of legal defeat. 

"We are deeply grateful to Law for Change for their invaluable support in funding critical legal challenges that have held the UK Government to account on climate action. Without their timely and generous funding, at key stages in the litigation, these cases simply would not have been possible. 

Thanks to LfC's backing, we were able to stop a £1.4 billion road scheme that would have generated over 2 million tonnes of CO2 —an outcome with enormous implications for the UK’s ability to meet its climate commitments.

Another legal challenge LfC supported has ignited a powerful national campaign to stop the expansion of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies that, rather than helping the climate, risk locking in carbon emissions, fossil fuel use and worsening the crisis. 

Both cases have placed intense pressure on the UK Government to live up to its climate promises and exposed the duplicity of claiming climate leadership while approving policies that betray future generations. 

LfC responded to our funding requests with speed, clarity, and deep understanding of the urgency of climate litigation. Their team was not only prompt but highly supportive throughout the process. Their commitment to meaningful climate action through strategic legal intervention has made a real difference—and will continue to do so in the years ahead. We cannot thank them enough." - Dr Andrew Boswell, Climate Emergency Science Law.

By backing courageous activists and expert legal teams, Law for Change will continue to empower efforts that demand transparency, stronger climate accountability, and a just transition to a sustainable future.