Unless we move to net-zero carbon by 2030 the future of our planet is uncertain. Labour has appreciated that and set 2030 as its net-zero carbon target date. Not so the Tories. As the Guardian has just reported of Andrea Leadsom's just delivered Tory conference speech:
In a great many ways this is good news: the choice as to whether we are to survive on this planet, or not, is now on the political agenda. The Tory option is extinction. Young people will know what they have to do.
That's Cummings getting things seriously wrong.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
2050 is no target at all. It is saying that we do not need to do anything now as we have 30 years. I support a 2030 target and think it is realistic to cut by over 95% by then. It is area under the curve that counts so if you cut really hard on the low hanging fruit you allow a bit more time to address the stuff that is exponentially harder like flights. Every year you wait you lose your buffer and will suffer more in the long run. This needs to be the primary focus of government, and then to convince the rest of world to follow your example.
I also think that the GND has to be accompanied with a job guarantee such that the mistakes of the 80s are not repeated.
This is an opportunity, not a problem.
I agree re JG for that reason
And it is an opprtunity
Nah, the planet will be OK.
It’s the people and animals that will have problems.
You’d think that adults with children would be thinking of them, but apparently a new car every 3 years and two foreign holidays a year are more important.
Amazing, isn’t it?
That and another throw away consumer electronics to last us forever if only used wisely
Things to bear in mind:
If climate change leads to the 2.38 metre sea-level rise, various UK locations will disappear under water. Most of central London for a start.
As as advantage of sea-level rise, Eton will also be under water.
Put this in a banking context – most of the security for most of their loans disappears in that case
They are bust
net-zero by 2030 is possible. However.
Transport accounts for around 30% of emissions. This implies either a amazingly rapid move to amongst other things electric vehicles or other forms of transport.
The single largest user of gas in the country is the residential sector. Millions of UK homes are badly insulated & in urgent need of energy renovation.
20% of homes have no cavity walls (a key element in reducing heating losses). But even if the homes are very very well insulated – they will still need energy to heat them.
Heat pumps? – then you will need to rebuild the entirety of the low voltage power network & a good bit of the HV & EHV network. I’m using the residential sector as one example. There are others. Where will the skilled people come from to undertake the energy renovations needed?
Over the years, I have seen the EU come out with a wide range of targets to reduce emissions – most were not met.
Apologies for sounding a pessimistic note. Aiming for a target & trying as hard as possible is a worthwhile endeavour. Thus try for the 2030 net zero target – & if it is missed – then maintain the endeavours to get to net zero as quickly as possibl;e.
Which is why you must aim for it and not decades later
Presently I’m reading ‘The uninhabitable Earth: A story of the future’ by David Wallace-Wells. A difficult read for many reasons one being the poor editing and American centric examples and references to Farenheight for temperature when the IPCC uses Celsius. But the scenarios played out for 2, 3, 4 … degrees are truly frightening. Basically we have left behind the climate that enabled humans to thrive and in the period of 2 generations, the earth will have regions that are uninhabitable.
Interesting that 1/3 of emissions come from transport. Thankfully now retired but the conclusion I came to in my last 20 years in work was that a lot of organisations exist simply o further the mini empires of management. Opportunities to work from home abound in this era of the internet but in practice, they would prefer you to struggle in and park in a vast car-park and sit at your desk.
And homes I know from bitter experience are leaky as hell. When in Germany, in the winter you can experience the effect of well-insulated buildings.
“where will the skilled people come from”
Train them from the masses of under employed people that are currently frustrated in low paid jobs.
A well funded training scheme for kids in school and thereafter to skill up for green new deal related tasks would be a hit, I’m sure.
Plus if you train kids and give them skills and confidence you will get unforeseen spin offs in all kinds of other areas. Government has a choice to try and build communities up or you deliberately let them rot.
‘Young people know what they must do’?
Christ – We’ve heaped enough on them for now don’t you think (student debt, low pay, high accommodation costs, BREXIT no future amongst others). Give ’em a break! Or give ’em an earlier vote.
We surely need to share this out fairly – amongst us all – even us older farts?
I’m using my bike and public transport as often as I can. In the last 10 years we’ve flown once. We need more thinking like that.
The SG has also set ambitious targets:https://www.commonspace.scot/articles/14745/far-most-ambitious-anywhere-world-scottish-parliament-backs-new-target-75-carbon – and they are in power. They have also said that if the UK Gov doesn’t up it’s game then it will be unable to meet this target.
The Labour Party has said: “work towards a path to net zero carbon emissions by 2030”. “Working towards” isn’t the same as saying “we will meet net zero…” Will it even get into the Manifesto? Ok, I’m a cynic/skeptic.
The tragedy of all of this for me is that the politicians will just make hay out of anyone who tries to speed this up, flying under the flag of the perceived threat to ‘personal freedom’ (as Richard highlighted yesterday).
Moderate language will have to be used so as not to hurt the sensibilities of the ‘Top Gear Generation’ or the ‘Air Miles Mafia’.
The cultural change required is immense. I was at Meadow Hall at the weekend in Sheffield and the car parks were full – the place was bombed out. The slip road to Meadow Hall from the M1 is nearly always backed up.
The railway station I used at Meadowhall was too cramped, offered bad protection from the torrential rain and was draughty and cold even though it was supposedly modern! And all the trains were late for one reason or another (this was a Sunday).
It was a miserable place when compared to sitting in your car with the heater on, ready to go when you wanted (if only to get tangled up in another traffic jam), being able to listen to the radio or music of your liking and winding up your windows and blocking out the rest of the world.
The challenge to be tackled…
agreed, this is why the changes have to be shown to have strategic benefits to all..
– “let’s restrict the use of cars” – this sounds bad doesn’t it?
But if you instead said: “let’s modernise our public transport infrastructure so you have a better alternative to sitting in a traffic jam for hours, provide cheaper public transport fares, create jobs and improve air quality”
that has a much better ring to it.
If Labour are worried about Brexit Party stealing working class votes in the north, then I’m sure a package of actual modernisation and reform for northern transport and industry would be well received, rather than a load of hot air about the northern workhouse (sic).
Agreed
Labour are already asking all members if we agree to lowering the age to vote to 16. I think most will want that as we believe that children are the future. Hence the Green Revolution took precedence over Brexit at the Labour Party Conference. I believe Labour will try to enforce its Manifesto which is storming and not an election pleaser like some of the promises made st the Tory conference. It’s a hard struggle as the media reported the conference as divided but I read numerous accounts from members who were there that is was united passionate and standing ovations. MSM behaviour was stony faced and unmoved when members spoke about the problems that occurred as people with disabilities due to sanctions. It’s our planet it’s our children and it’s all our vulnerable people who continue to be at risk under this vile government. They will never agree to lowering the age as young people are more sensible than those obsessed with leaving at all costs.