Net Zero

[countryman]

Are we finally going to hear from the Government some common sense on this, obviously an election is playing a part in this, pushing back the ban on petrol and Diesel cars and oil boilers, has the penny dropped that our little island is not going to save the world all on its own.

[RyanMc]

Or the possibility it is an impossible goal, nonsensical and will bankrupt every last one of us, not a UK issue, woke/spineless/lefty/liberal (or whatever label you want to use) western countries issue! Maybe that's the real goal....too many peasants.

[Good shot?]

Some say, when loosing the argument for net zero aims, we should lead by example.

I doubt, once we have bankrupt ourselves trying to achieve net zero, that anyone will follow our example.

[oowee]

Unfortunately humans as a species are all about here, now and me. We all want someone else to save our future. What a complete load of Tosh this govt is. I just hope there are enough voters to see them for what they are. Short term charlatans. 

[Scully]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

Unfortunately humans as a species are all about here, now and me. We all want someone else to save our future. What a complete load of Tosh this govt is. I just hope there are enough voters to see them for what they are. Short term charlatans. 

To a certain extent of course we are, including you and me. 
We are here for the briefest blink of an eye in the great scheme of things, and humans as a species for even less. 
We don’t just want to survive, we want to thrive, and the UK’s Net Zero policy will have absolutely no effect whatsoever on global emissions whilst having a huge detrimental effect on those with a lower income.
Meanwhile the more wealthy amongst us can simply pay their way out of the misery bestowed on the remainder. 
Part of the Net Zero policy is to tax the bejesus out of everyone, including raised taxation on holiday flights, which just goes to show the policy up for what it is. 
If you can afford to pay the tax then climate change doesn’t matter, exactly the same as the ULEZ tax and those suffering with breathing problems; pay the tax and they don’t matter.🤔 Weird eh? 

[discobob]

@Scullyand that is the massive hypocrisy elephant in the room.

[Penelope]

9 minutes ago, discobob said:

@Scullyand that is the massive hypocrisy elephant in the room.

'cause it ain't about the climate; that's just a convenient peg to hang on.

[Gordon R]

Stealth tax - nothing else.

[matone]

41 minutes ago, Scully said:

To a certain extent of course we are, including you and me. 
We are here for the briefest blink of an eye in the great scheme of things, and humans as a species for even less. 
We don’t just want to survive, we want to thrive, and the UK’s Net Zero policy will have absolutely no effect whatsoever on global emissions whilst having a huge detrimental effect on those with a lower income.
Meanwhile the more wealthy amongst us can simply pay their way out of the misery bestowed on the remainder. 
Part of the Net Zero policy is to tax the bejesus out of everyone, including raised taxation on holiday flights, which just goes to show the policy up for what it is. 
If you can afford to pay the tax then climate change doesn’t matter, exactly the same as the ULEZ tax and those suffering with breathing problems; pay the tax and they don’t matter.🤔 Weird eh? 

Well said !

[oowee]

Yep better to just let us burn. 

[Scully]

10 minutes ago, oowee said:

Yep better to just let us burn. 

🙂 Don’t be silly! You seriously believe that lowering UK emissions ( or any other country you care to mention ) is going to cool the planet? By how many degrees cooler will the planet be if the UK achieves Net Zero? Seriously, tell me. 
Are you going to stop sailing your boat abroad and out on pleasure jaunts for the sake of the planet? Are you going to cease travelling abroad to shoot things for pleasure for the sake of the planet? Or will you just cough up the levied tax and carry on regardless?
Let me guess! 🤔🙂

[oowee]

It will cost us all more not to meet the targets. 

[Scully]

12 minutes ago, oowee said:

It will cost us all more not to meet the targets. 

Go on then, enlighten us. 

[JohnfromUK]

The way to achieve 'long term' sustainability as a planet is to have a stable and supportable population.

Stable in that it is not increasing continually (which of course the globe and it's resources aren't) and supportable in that sufficient space is allowed for plant life (which is the main carbon fixer, food source and source of weather influence) - and human production of carbon dioxide is controlled to a level that can be 'fixed' back into plant matter by the plant life.

That population figure is unknown, but almost certainly less than we now have, so the ongoing increase needs to change to a natural decrease until a sustainable level is reached.

Edited September 20, 2023 by JohnfromUK

[Rewulf]

23 minutes ago, oowee said:

It will cost us all more not to meet the targets. 

Seriously ?
The UK, financially , or do you mean the world in general ?

The western world will cripple itself to hold some moral high ground , while China, India and other emerging economies like Africa, just carry on as usual.
Net zero is a stupidity, not just in its ridiculous premise, but in its implementation.
Taxing people wont stop them using fossils fuels, or driving, or flying, trying to control the populace with a 'war on carbon' is about as totalitarian as it gets, and while they try to remove other governmental options, there is still an element of people power.

Trying to force people to drive ridiculously expensive electric cars, with inadequate charging infrastructure, or forcing people to freeze in winter because they cant afford to heat their homes or replace existing heating with 'green' options, remember heat pumps ?
Forcing people to not travel abroad, because its 'destroying the planet' while world leaders and elites jet around with gay abandon.
Its levels of stupidity and hypocrisy like these that make me shake my head in dismay.

[oowee]

Dr James Rising, who led the analysis at the University of Delaware, said: 

“We estimate that the mitigation costs involved in the UK’s pathway to net zero by 2050 are unlikely to exceed the equivalent of 2 per cent of GDP over the transition period. Furthermore, climate mitigation policies bring additional benefits, for example by improving health and invigorating of the economy through investment, equivalent to an increase of 6.1 per cent in GDP by the end of this century.”

The researchers found that achieving the UK’s net zero target would provide added benefits to the UK beyond avoided climate impacts that would be equivalent to an increase of 3.3 per cent in GDP. They would also provide a further boost of 2.8 per cent to the UK’s economy by stimulating investment in green industries and infrastructure.

30 May 2022) by the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

 

[Weihrauch17]

1 minute ago, oowee said:

Dr James Rising, who led the analysis at the University of Delaware, said: 

“We estimate that the mitigation costs involved in the UK’s pathway to net zero by 2050 are unlikely to exceed the equivalent of 2 per cent of GDP over the transition period. Furthermore, climate mitigation policies bring additional benefits, for example by improving health and invigorating of the economy through investment, equivalent to an increase of 6.1 per cent in GDP by the end of this century.”

The researchers found that achieving the UK’s net zero target would provide added benefits to the UK beyond avoided climate impacts that would be equivalent to an increase of 3.3 per cent in GDP. They would also provide a further boost of 2.8 per cent to the UK’s economy by stimulating investment in green industries and infrastructure.

30 May 2022) by the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

 

What a load of utter tripe that is!!

[oowee]

Just now, Weihrauch17 said:

What a load of utter tripe that is!!

And your evidence is? 

Some countries lead and some follow. We were leading and gearing up for the role and now we will just be an also ran. 

[Good shot?]

A minor,minor,minor change to any of the models used in their studies, I suspect would give a major,major change to their results. But that would not suit their preferred outcome.

[Yellow Bear]

5 minutes ago, oowee said:

Dr James Rising, who led the analysis at the University of Delaware, said: 

“We estimate that the mitigation costs involved in the UK’s pathway to net zero by 2050 are unlikely to exceed the equivalent of 2 per cent of GDP over the transition period. Furthermore, climate mitigation policies bring additional benefits, for example by improving health and invigorating of the economy through investment, equivalent to an increase of 6.1 per cent in GDP by the end of this century.”

The researchers found that achieving the UK’s net zero target would provide added benefits to the UK beyond avoided climate impacts that would be equivalent to an increase of 3.3 per cent in GDP. They would also provide a further boost of 2.8 per cent to the UK’s economy by stimulating investment in green industries and infrastructure.

30 May 2022) by the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

 

Emperors new cloths from a financially benefiting group who will not be effected   ==  and before you say , no evidence, the people who have it have been "cancelled" and "closed down" by unelected  bureaucrats and those wealthy enough to have a vested interest.

[Scully]

12 minutes ago, oowee said:

Dr James Rising, who led the analysis at the University of Delaware, said: 

“We estimate that the mitigation costs involved in the UK’s pathway to net zero by 2050 are unlikely to exceed the equivalent of 2 per cent of GDP over the transition period. Furthermore, climate mitigation policies bring additional benefits, for example by improving health and invigorating of the economy through investment, equivalent to an increase of 6.1 per cent in GDP by the end of this century.”

The researchers found that achieving the UK’s net zero target would provide added benefits to the UK beyond avoided climate impacts that would be equivalent to an increase of 3.3 per cent in GDP. They would also provide a further boost of 2.8 per cent to the UK’s economy by stimulating investment in green industries and infrastructure.

30 May 2022) by the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

 

For the UK and or the EU nations to become Net Zero would mean increased importation of energy from other countries such as those in the BRICS consortium, none of whom have made any commitment towards Net Zero ( nor the USA ) which would mean at least one of those countries increasing their output to meet demand, thereby cancelling out any alleged benefits. 
What are you prepared to sacrifice for the sake of the planet? Your boating excursions? Your shooting trips abroad? Or will you just stump up the tax? 

[discobob]

17 minutes ago, oowee said:

Dr James Rising, who led the analysis at the University of Delaware, said: 

“We estimate that the mitigation costs involved in the UK’s pathway to net zero by 2050 are unlikely to exceed the equivalent of 2 per cent of GDP over the transition period. Furthermore, climate mitigation policies bring additional benefits, for example by improving health and invigorating of the economy through investment, equivalent to an increase of 6.1 per cent in GDP by the end of this century.”

The researchers found that achieving the UK’s net zero target would provide added benefits to the UK beyond avoided climate impacts that would be equivalent to an increase of 3.3 per cent in GDP. They would also provide a further boost of 2.8 per cent to the UK’s economy by stimulating investment in green industries and infrastructure.

30 May 2022) by the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

 

Does it also say where his funding came from for the study.....????

[Ttfjlc]

Oowee in 2022: space next year if anyone fancies, off to limpopo.

oowee in 2023: yep better to just let us burn. 
 

I can tell you worked for the civil service 

[oowee]

Yeh of course. Ambition, commitment and consistency is want and all this is the opposite (Ford). Lets export jobs and import energy. Lets poison or city residents, rivers and environment and promote the growth of the erst of teh world. 

We should have learnt the lesson from the economic cost of Brexit. Here is another example of small minded and short term policy. 

Regardless of which side of the debate how can anyone listen to this govt? There is no consistency. 

[Weihrauch17]

19 minutes ago, oowee said:

And your evidence is? 

Some countries lead and some follow. We were leading and gearing up for the role and now we will just be an also ran. 

It will cost everybody a fortune and already is with our ridiculous energy bills which in turn cripple industry and drive inflation.  60k for an EV and a Heat Pump,  I will have ten.   2% more like 222%.  Funny how most of those in favour of Net Zero are very wealthy so not effected by the policies that will impoverish the Plebs.  Zack bloody Goldsmith and the Oaf Johnson are two classic examples.