“this is making enough money to pay us bribes, the other involves investing in infrastructure for the future of the country when this trough dries up”
Don’t we have to pay something like 8 billion if we fail to meet the targets?
Sabotaging jobseekers? I believe we lost 120k North Sea jobs, reducing uk emissions following EU directives
Are you giving up your long-haul flights and petrol powered car then Caroline, if as you say, the fossil fuel age is over?
The climate crisis is only going to help fuel more migrants coming here for safety and increase food shortages at a time when our self-sufficiency is pitiful. We are only going to fuck ourselves over more if we go ahead with watering down the net zero strategy.
“emissions do not come down drastically before 2030, then by 2040 some 3.9 billion people are likely to experience major heatwaves, 12 times more than the historic average. Temperature increases are already resulting in the equivalent of over half of COVID-19-induced lost working hours. By the 2030s, 400 million people globally each year are likely to be exposed to temperatures exceeding the workability threshold, and the number of people exposed to heat stress exceeding the survivability threshold is likely to surpass 10 million each year.
To meet global demand, agriculture will need to produce almost 50 per cent more food by 2050. However, yields could decline by 30 per cent in the absence of dramatic emissions reductions. The probability of a synchronous, greater than 10 per cent crop failure across the top four maize producing countries, which together account for 87 per cent of exports, during the decade of the 2040s is just less than 50 per cent.
Cascading climate impacts will likely cause higher mortality rates, drive political instability and greater national insecurity, and fuel regional and international conflict. During an expert elicitation exercise, the cascading risks that experts had greatest concern over were the interconnections between shifting weather patterns, resulting in changes to ecosystems, and the rise of pests and diseases, which combined with heatwaves and drought will likely drive unprecedented crop failure, food insecurity and migration. Subsequently, these impacts will likely result in increased infectious diseases, and a negative feedback loop compounding each of these impacts.”
And to cheer you up after reading that the IPCC just released another report recently
“The viability of humanity living within planetary boundaries rests on the actions we take in the next seven years. There’s no time to lose to keep to the target of limiting the global average temperature to below 1.5°C.”
> Ministers will refuse to force oil and gas companies to stop flaring by 2025, as recommended in the review of net zero by Chris Skidmore earlier this year.
> Ofgem will not gain important powers to include the net zero target in its regulation of the energy sector, effectively defanging the regulator.
> No overarching new office for net zero, as recommended in the Skidmore review.
> No compulsion on housebuilders to fit rooftop solar to new housing.
> No comprehensive nationwide programme for insulation of the UK’s draughty housing stock,
> Major roles for carbon capture and storage technology and hydrogen, which could boost the oil and gas industry with questionable gains for the environment.
> The potential licensing of a massive new oilfield, Rosebank, under cover of investing in carbon capture and storage technology, which campaigners warn is “greenwash”.
Let me guess they are going to do Net Zero about it?
8 comments
neo lib economics at its finest
“this is making enough money to pay us bribes, the other involves investing in infrastructure for the future of the country when this trough dries up”
Don’t we have to pay something like 8 billion if we fail to meet the targets?
Sabotaging jobseekers? I believe we lost 120k North Sea jobs, reducing uk emissions following EU directives
Are you giving up your long-haul flights and petrol powered car then Caroline, if as you say, the fossil fuel age is over?
The climate crisis is only going to help fuel more migrants coming here for safety and increase food shortages at a time when our self-sufficiency is pitiful. We are only going to fuck ourselves over more if we go ahead with watering down the net zero strategy.
In the meantime
https://www.chathamhouse.org/2021/09/climate-change-risk-assessment-2021
“emissions do not come down drastically before 2030, then by 2040 some 3.9 billion people are likely to experience major heatwaves, 12 times more than the historic average. Temperature increases are already resulting in the equivalent of over half of COVID-19-induced lost working hours. By the 2030s, 400 million people globally each year are likely to be exposed to temperatures exceeding the workability threshold, and the number of people exposed to heat stress exceeding the survivability threshold is likely to surpass 10 million each year.
To meet global demand, agriculture will need to produce almost 50 per cent more food by 2050. However, yields could decline by 30 per cent in the absence of dramatic emissions reductions. The probability of a synchronous, greater than 10 per cent crop failure across the top four maize producing countries, which together account for 87 per cent of exports, during the decade of the 2040s is just less than 50 per cent.
Cascading climate impacts will likely cause higher mortality rates, drive political instability and greater national insecurity, and fuel regional and international conflict. During an expert elicitation exercise, the cascading risks that experts had greatest concern over were the interconnections between shifting weather patterns, resulting in changes to ecosystems, and the rise of pests and diseases, which combined with heatwaves and drought will likely drive unprecedented crop failure, food insecurity and migration. Subsequently, these impacts will likely result in increased infectious diseases, and a negative feedback loop compounding each of these impacts.”
And to cheer you up after reading that the IPCC just released another report recently
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/
And accessible summaries are here
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-03-23/the-latest-ipcc-climate-crisis-report-paints-nightmare-scenarios-for-our-kids?leadSource=uverify%20wall
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/20/ipcc-climate-crisis-report-delivers-final-warning-on-15c
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/03/the-ipcc-just-published-its-summary-of-5-years-of-reports-here-s-what-you-need-to-know/
“The viability of humanity living within planetary boundaries rests on the actions we take in the next seven years. There’s no time to lose to keep to the target of limiting the global average temperature to below 1.5°C.”
This one has an interesting graphic
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/03/21/climate-ipcc-report-temperatures-graphic/
> Ministers will refuse to force oil and gas companies to stop flaring by 2025, as recommended in the review of net zero by Chris Skidmore earlier this year.
> Ofgem will not gain important powers to include the net zero target in its regulation of the energy sector, effectively defanging the regulator.
> No overarching new office for net zero, as recommended in the Skidmore review.
> No compulsion on housebuilders to fit rooftop solar to new housing.
> No comprehensive nationwide programme for insulation of the UK’s draughty housing stock,
> Major roles for carbon capture and storage technology and hydrogen, which could boost the oil and gas industry with questionable gains for the environment.
> The potential licensing of a massive new oilfield, Rosebank, under cover of investing in carbon capture and storage technology, which campaigners warn is “greenwash”.
Let me guess they are going to do Net Zero about it?