IPCC sixth report.

[spread-tee]

Hang on, I thought we were trying to reduce consumption

Absolutely, there are quite a lot of good ideas here

https://campaigns.greenparty.org.uk/manifesto/

Desp

[Bugtownboy]

Beer don’t count, it’s recycling, ‘init’

[AE-NMidlands]

As I feared:
Treasury blocking green policies key to UK net zero target
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ero-target
the headline speaks for itself.
Maybe it's time to abolish the treasury altogether, or to formally give it carbon reduction/sustainability as its principal objective...
A

[Bugtownboy]

In a similar vein -

And here we have it, the fundamental issue why we won’t take appropriate action - money/capitalism/greed.

This is a report of US Republican Senators views.

“Politico reported yesterday on congressional Republicans' widespread indifference to humanity's code red.

The United Nations report that found the nations are already facing catastrophic effects from climate change drew a cool reception from Republican senators, who were largely unmoved by the dire warnings. Despite the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Sixth Assessment Report painting the starkest picture yet on how climate change will wreak havoc around the globe, Republicans brushed off the urgency and largely reiterated their view that efforts to rein in greenhouse gases would threaten the economy.”

Violin for Mr Nero ?

[spread-tee]

Exactly, unless we show overwhelming support for green policies by voting for them, the politicians, particularly the right wingers don't care.
Presumably they think they can buy their way out of trouble and leave the rest of us to perish, it'll probably come to conflict which will prove that to be a vain hope. Once food and water production falters all our wind turbines, EVs and Hydrogen wont matter a f**k

If COP26 is just a cop out it's game over, may as well book that flight to somewhere sunny and enjoy it before the end.

Happy days

Desp

[AE-NMidlands]

Somebody has ben paying attention:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... st-driving (Transport for the North boss calls for debate on raising cost of driving) includes

Tugwell said a gap had opened up as public transport fares have risen while driving has become cheaper, thanks to the freeze on fuel duty.
Asked if the government should make driving more expensive to make public transport better and cheaper, he said: “I think that’s something we need to have a debate on because when we start talking about decarbonising our transport system there are some issues we need to talk through as a society, and make a choice about what we are going to have to accept.

Pity they are deaf in Wesminster. On second thoughts, it's more than a pity, it's criminal neglect.

[AE-NMidlands]

And Greta calls Boris out: (not before time, IMO)
https://www.spin1038.com/news-and-sport ... rt-1241529

Climate activist Greta Thunberg brands UK's claims that they are Climate Leaders as 'a lie'.
Earlier this year at the Leaders' Climate Summit, the UK's Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the "UK has managed to reduce its CO2 emissions by about 42% on 1990 levels".
Greta Thunberg said this simply wasn't true. The 18-year-old said that "if you don't include all emissions then the statistics are going to look much nicer".

It's funny how lots of stuff which is reported on the R4 news at 6am (and in the half-hour afterwards - which is where I'm sure I heard this) vanishes without trace after that.

As I said somewhere, "forget distant targets, what are you going to do TOMORROW?" I'm afraid that it is already too late.
We need to halve road traffic, ramp up public transport, accept that we can't move around so much. If a kid's ballet or swimming class can't be reached by walking/cycling or bus then it's just not a goer, I'm afraid. The people without access to cars pay the price (in health etc) for what the ones living in leafy suburbs enjoy when mobility gives it to them.
A

[Mart]

I think Greta's point about the need for immediate, and one year targets is so, so correct and important. No point setting a 10yr goal, then admitting you won't reach it at the end of yr9. We need constant targets, that need to be met, building to ever more lofty goals.

[Ken]

When discussing this subject the problem is achieving balance. I would suggest that 99% of people would be unable to debate an opposite view to the stance they take. There are pros and cons to virtually everything in life and without balance you have in effect made yourself prejudiced. Most of the debates stem from how to achieve the relatively undisputed net CO2 and then goes on to public and private inactment.

At the moment i am in a broadly positive mindset after reading many good articles recently. True the gov does need to show leadership and direction but not much more than some initial funding as they did with wind and solar. I have no doubt just the suggestion of banning gas boilers has had the desired effect in many business circles.

I cannot envisage the adoption of EVs going much faster due to the time needed to build up supply lines,particularly batts and chips, and factories. I cannot envisage the building of PV and wind going much faster than they are. I know some people would have us go on a war footing to solve the climate but i would suggest this is unrealistic.

Todays good story https://cleantechnica.com/2021/08/21/cl ... emissions/

[Mr Gus]

I think Greta's point about the need for immediate, and one year targets is so, so correct and important. No point setting a 10yr goal, then admitting you won't reach it at the end of yr9. We need constant targets, that need to be met, building to ever more lofty goals.

We've already had "whoopsie, we missed that bus" moments, (you know the rest)

I'm not saying we have to hold politicians over an actual chopping block, but to my mind "Doing a Cromwell" may get us where need to go in terms of instigating action & buying some time (as well as prison)