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

[Chekhov]

8 hours ago, Magilla said:

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! 🤣

 

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

 

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.

 

 

🙄

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? 🙄

 

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

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?

 

 

Hint :

If you want your questions answered, don't ask so many in one post.

 

7 hours ago, Magilla said:

>> 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 :

 

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......<<

 

You couldn't make it up! 🤣

Not sure what you mean.

Are you saying I was naïve for believing that Sunak was actually listening to what the people really want ?

[Chekhov]

8 hours ago, Magilla said:

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

I agree with you actually. Although it must be partly about renewables, but, as I stated earlier on, most of it, probably about 60% of it, is about "behavioural change".

Which is politicians double speak for having less of what most people really want on life. 

And that is why support for it will reduce markedly once people realise that, in fact that is already happening in Germany.

[melthebell]

1 minute ago, Chekhov said:

it, is about "behavioural change".

Which is politicians double speak for having less of what most people really want on life. 

 

you speak as though its a bad thing, human beings are damaging and greedy, we should be modifying our behaviours

 

we are polluting the planet, we are damaging the planet, we are running out of space with burials and rubbish tips, we are cutting down too many trees, we are using too many resources and fuel.

 

We take take take and give nothing back, it shouldnt just be take, its a selfish, greedy attitude.

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Magilla said:

You couldn't make it up! 🤣

Unbelievable,  but I don't worry.   I'm quite sure the weather will change their minds.

[Chekhov]

10 hours ago, Magilla said:

>>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!).

Still not answered it then I see......

 

>>I just don't think it'll happen" (based on zero knowledge of anything involved and resolutely ignoring 'experts", who do!).<<

 

Ignoring the fact that, after the unparalleled over reaction that was Covid, my confidence in "experts (particularly where computer models are involved......) has never been lower, I have never said I just don't think it will happen. You are putting words into my mouth, yet again.

What I have said is :

 

1 - I do not believe the effect on the world, certainly on humans, will be as bad as is being suggested. Historically the climate has been both far hotter and also far colder than it is now. Humans are the most adaptable creatures ever to have walked the earth.

 

2 - There is no guarantee that changing our lives forever, at massive cost, will prevent it anyway. What we do is almost irrelevant whilst China, India and many other countries aren't interested. And who can blame them, if I were a poor country I would not be countenancing keeping my population in poverty just so we could try and head off climate change, and there is no way this country should to be paying them the many Trillions necessary to subsidise them to do so. That would never fly if if put to a referendum in this country, no way.

 

3 - Mitigating climate change will be much cheaper than trying (very possibly unsuccessfully) to prevent it, certainly in this country.

 

>>based on zero knowledge of anything involved<<

 

Funnily enough all the suppressionists were telling me the same sort of stuff during Covid, yet my record was better then most of the so called experts. Not that that is saying much, literally tossing a coin would have been more accurate than most of what the experts were saying, certainly the ones the government were listening to anyway.

 

2 hours ago, melthebell said:

you speak as though its a bad thing, human beings are damaging and greedy, we should be modifying our behaviours

we are polluting the planet, we are damaging the planet, we are running out of space with burials and rubbish tips, we are cutting down too many trees, we are using too many resources and fuel.

We take take take and give nothing back, it shouldnt just be take, its a selfish, greedy attitude.

You say what you want, most people want a warm house, a car, to fly abroad etc etc.

So, telling people they must have less of what makes them happy is a bad thing.

How can it not be ?

Edited October 1, 2023 by Chekhov

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, melthebell said:

you speak as though its a bad thing, human beings are damaging and greedy, we should be modifying our behaviours

 

we are polluting the planet, we are damaging the planet, we are running out of space with burials and rubbish tips, we are cutting down too many trees, we are using too many resources and fuel.

 

We take take take and give nothing back, it shouldnt just be take, its a selfish, greedy attitude.

Wasting your time there Mel.  His ollidays more important and it doesn't matter if his little lad gets his feet wet or starves.

 

[melthebell]

4 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

 

You say what you want, most people want a warm house, a car, to fly abroad etc etc.

do you need your heating on 24/7?

 

i dont, we arent cold, we've never been ones for heating on 24/7, in fact some peoples houses are too warm, greedy and damaging

Edited October 1, 2023 by melthebell

[melthebell]

From 1971

 

[melthebell]

From 1989 (its noisy but not as noisy as they were) they stayed at our house on City Road in 1988, then me and the missus stayed at the singers house in bradford later on after a gig)

 

 

Edited October 1, 2023 by melthebell

[Chekhov]

2 hours ago, melthebell said:

do you need your heating on 24/7?

i dont, we arent cold, we've never been ones for heating on 24/7, in fact some peoples houses are too warm, greedy and damaging

Hardly anyone has their heating on 24/7. That's a strawman argument.  In fact you're being dishonest implying that we'll get to Nett Zero without massive changes in people's behaviour, and they are not the sort of changes that most people want to make.

And I for one do not blame them.

What's the point in living if you do not enjoy life ?

But the point is, as with Covid, it's a matter of proportion. How much damage are all these "Nett Zero" measures going to do to people's lives, including their enjoyment of life ?

No, for me pragmatic environmentalism is the more sensible approach. You do what you can within reason.

 

Nuclear power : yes

Planting more trees : yes

Tidal power (incl the Severn barrage) :  yes

More renewable (provided they are reliable and a reasonable price) ; yes

Carbon capture (provided it's not too expensive) : yes

 

Banning all petrol and diesel cars : no

Making gas and elec very expensive to reduce usage : no

Banning (or severely restricting) flying : no

Forcing people to radically alter their lives against their will : definitely not. And certainly not unless they have clearly voted for it.

Edited October 1, 2023 by Chekhov