Sunak : Nett Zero But In A 'More Proportionate' Way

[Jack Grey]

8 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

Well for a start,  have you noticed that we are surrounded on every side by sea which never stands still  and forget the lies about the fishing grounds and the cockles & mussels.

One of the main things we need to do is build properly with good insulation and solar panels built in.

We are the worst insulated country and solar panels are hardly used in this  country.  They may not do all the job but they will provide more than half the energy we need.

The government are not replacing anything NOW        they are talking about    BY  2050

The governments problem is     they talk about it instead of doing it        just like the house building,  and the sewage clean up.  and stopping the boats.

That's not really an answer is it

 

All you've suggested are added extras

 

Not a replacement fuel source that powers our country

 

We can't produce steel using sea water and solar panels 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Jack Grey said:

That's not really an answer is it

 

All you've suggested are added extras

 

Not a replacement fuel source that powers our country

 

We can't produce steel using sea water and solar panels 

You are missing the point that the sensible option is provide energy from many different sources.  The more the merrier.

We don't want  "A"  source   -   we want  "SOME"   sources.

You can make steel with electricity and the clean energy that we use will provide it.

One day we may also be able to use hydrogen which has long been possible  if they iron out the problems.

My car will run on Hydrogen and so will my cooker and my central heating boiler.   One thing we do need is   investment.

You just need to catch  up with the times.  I'm surprised at you.

 

[Chekhov]

9 hours ago, Magilla said:

Rishi is being dishonest... it'll cost a lot more in the long run... of course, by then it'll be someone else's problem.

This is rubbish, Sunak is the only party leader being honest.

I heard the other day that about 60% of the hoped for reductions in CO2 will have to come from "behavioural changes".

The politicians don't mention that, or at least not in any detail. But what "behavioural changes" actually means is colder houses, less driving (if any at all if you are poor), less travel (particularly less flying), less consumption (i.e. people are expected to buy and live with less), more expensive food (particularly meat etc) etc etc.

I have news for you, people don't want that, the Germans are proving that now.

4 hours ago, Magilla said:

Agree'd, still only a short term solution, the real money's on Fusion.

Nuclear Fusion, practical economic Fusion, is always "30 years away".

Funny how you are being so optimistic about that, yet so mind numbingly pessimistic about so much else to do with Nett Zero....

[Chekhov]

7 hours ago, Magilla said:

We already are! Completely... Net Zero, in part, moves the UK away from some of that dependence! 🙄

 

Cobblers.

Most renewables are unreliable and so need back up power, very expensive back up power if it's only used intermittently.

The most reliable source of renewable energy is tidal power.

On the subject of which, what are your thoughts on the Severn barrage ?

What's more important, wading birds or "the climate emergency" ?

[Chekhov]

On 24/09/2023 at 07:50, Magilla said:

Vast majorities of inhabited land, in the UK, will be under water... long before 5 degrees.

Where is your evidence for that ?

 

On 24/09/2023 at 07:50, Magilla said:

>>Chekhov said:
Are we talking about the same thing ?

This ? (more CO2 causes more photosynthesis which uses up more CO2) :

 

The Times - 10 Oct 22 p8 :

Rising carbon emissions make trees grow bigger

Trees feasting on increased CO2 emissions have grown thicker and larger researchers at Ohio State University suggest.

Academics examined the volume of trees in ten temperate forest groups across America and found that the volume of tree trunks was up 30% bigger than 30 years ago.

The phenomenon, known as Carbon fertilisation - when an influx of CO2 increases a plant's rate of photosynthesis - is likely to be replicated across the world.<<

 

> You said : They die younger, and emit more methane as they decompose in the long term. :?<

 

Well it's not like you to make something up, that bears no relation to anything actually posted or that you read!

It was you who said increased levels of CO2 made trees grow faster, then die younger.

If true that's just what we need, they'll soak up lots of CO2 quickly then slowly release it (or its methane equivalent). 

 

PS what's more important the "climate emergency", or the wading birds on the River Severn ?

Edited September 25, 2023 by Chekhov

[hackey lad]

7 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

Where is your evidence for that ?

 

It was you who said increased levels of CO2 made trees grow faster, then die younger.

If true that's just what we need, they'll soak up lots of methane quickly then slowly release it. 

 

PS what's more important the "climate emergency", or the wading birds on the River Severn ?

Trees don't soak up methane , just sayin .

[Chekhov]

On 24/09/2023 at 07:50, Magilla said:

>>Chekhov said: Humans have been manipulating plants evolution for thousands of years to ensure the best crops in the conditions they need to be grown. In fact since genetically modified plants have become common the amount of manipulation possible, and the time scales for doing it, have changed out of all recognition.<<

 

So... literally banking everything, on the very same experts you're bending over backwards to dismiss and ignore now.

I think the chances that humans will develop crops which thrive in a higher CO2 environment is higher than practical economic Fusion power within the next 30 years. FAR higher in fact.

 

2 minutes ago, hackey lad said:

Trees don't soak up methane , just sayin .

Typo, that should be CO2....

Edited September 25, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

I have just been reading up on Sunak's much vaunted compromise on petrol / diesel cars, a compromise most voters want, and we live in a democracy (supposedly).

Well it's actually a big sham because :

 

The zero emission vehicle ( ZEV ) mandate unveiled today means the country will have the most ambitious regulatory framework for the switch to electric vehicles ( EVs ) in the world. This requires 80% of new cars and 70% of new vans sold in Great Britain to be zero emission by 2030, increasing to 100% by 2035.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-sets-out-path-to-zero-emission-vehicles-by-2035#:~:text=The zero emission vehicle ( ZEV,increasing to 100% by 2035.

 

So only 20% of new cars sold can be petrol or diesel !

All this furore over not that much really. But worse still, that 80% requirement effectively means petrol or diesel cars or vans will be very expensive because they will effectively be subsidising electric vehicles.

So, Sunak is a bit more democratic than the rest of them, but not by much......

Edited October 1, 2023 by Chekhov

[Magilla]

On 24/09/2023 at 18:44, Chekhov said:

This is rubbish, Sunak is the only party leader being honest.

He literally just claimed to have cancelled the need for 7 bins... and a load of other policies that no-one's heard of!

 

You believe him... obvs! 🤣

 

On 24/09/2023 at 18:52, Chekhov said:

Most renewables are unreliable and so need back up power, very expensive back up power if it's only used intermittently.

Net Zero isn't just about renewables and never has been

 

On 24/09/2023 at 18:44, Chekhov said:

I heard the other day that about 60% of the hoped for reductions in CO2 will have to come from "behavioural changes".

The politicians don't mention that, or at least not in any detail. But what "behavioural changes" actually means is colder houses, less driving (if any at all if you are poor), less travel (particularly less flying), less consumption (i.e. people are expected to buy and live with less), more expensive food (particularly meat etc) etc etc.

And yet, when asked... the vast majority appear to have understood that point quite clearly. 🙄

 

In Response to Climate Change, Citizens in Advanced Economies Are Willing To Alter How They Live and Work:

https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2021/09/14/in-response-to-climate-change-citizens-in-advanced-economies-are-willing-to-alter-how-they-live-and-work/

 

Most people are concerned, and realise they're going to have to change their ways to some extent or other.

 

 

🙄

On 25/09/2023 at 21:47, Chekhov said:

Where is your evidence for that ?

Typo... "vast areas"... not majorities, apologies.

 

One of many, google is your friend...

https://www.countryliving.com/uk/news/a38142403/uk-areas-underwater-rising-sea-levels/

 

There may be uncertainty about the scope, but no-one's arguing it's not going to happen.

 

This represents millions of people on your doorstep... you didn't answer where they were going to go? 🙄

 

On 25/09/2023 at 21:47, Chekhov said:

It was you who said increased levels of CO2 made trees grow faster, then die younger.

If true that's just what we need, they'll soak up lots of CO2 quickly then slowly release it (or its methane equivalent).

As before, Methane has more than 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide.
 

On 25/09/2023 at 21:47, Chekhov said:

PS what's more important the "climate emergency", or the wading birds on the River Severn ?

A question I'll be happy to answer... when you're prepared to even attempt to answer mine rather than just ignoring, editing them out, or the usual "I just don't think it'll happen" (based on zero knowledge of anything involved and resolutely ignoring 'experts", who do!).

 

So... once again...

 

Given those experts (and incidentally, the insurance industry) believe food is going to be in short supply (will begin to be be noticable by 2030)...

 

...on the week we hear that 40% of UK wildlife is in danger, or on the verge of extinction, and 20% of pollinators have already gone...

 

...how many tree's have you eated today?

 

 

Edited October 1, 2023 by Magilla

[Magilla]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

I have just been reading up on Sunak's much vaunted compromise on petrol / diesel cars, a compromise most voters want, and we live in a democracy (supposedly).

Well it's actually a big sham because :

You couldn't make it up! 🤣