Net Zero 2050

[Bill 13,717]

This morning at university I had to listen to some awful guff about the Net Zero carbon emissions initiative. Now enshrined in law, it calls on the UK to achieve net zero emissions over the next 31 years - note, not zero emissions, net zero emissions. It was the usual one-dimensional stuff about the need to drastically reduce carbon emmissions, while still acknowledging oil and gas will continue to play a major role in our energy needs for a very long time to come. What emerged was that if every petrol and diesel vehicle in the UK was scrapped tomorrow the effect on overall emissions would be minuscule. Also that aviation is nowhere near as important as the saintly Greta would have you believe. What was entirely missing from the debate was any mention of the two principal drivers of emmissions - population growth and the progressive development of the third world. In the end I concluded that any advances in technology and energy efficiency are likely to be completely undone by increasing demand by parts of the world that don't give a fig for the First World obsession with self-righteousness. We're going down and the water level is rising. 

[ranger_syntax 4,316]

Don't know how we will get our carbon footprint down when Scottish kids spend all day playing playstations instead of football.

[compo 7,030]

On 10/09/2019 at 14:31, Bill said:

This morning at university I had to listen to some awful guff about the Net Zero carbon emissions initiative. Now enshrined in law, it calls on the UK to achieve net zero emissions over the next 31 years - note, not zero emissions, net zero emissions. It was the usual one-dimensional stuff about the need to drastically reduce carbon emmissions, while still acknowledging oil and gas will continue to play a major role in our energy needs for a very long time to come. What emerged was that if every petrol and diesel vehicle in the UK was scrapped tomorrow the effect on overall emissions would be minuscule. Also that aviation is nowhere near as important as the saintly Greta would have you believe. What was entirely missing from the debate was any mention of the two principal drivers of emmissions - population growth and the progressive development of the third world. In the end I concluded that any advances in technology and energy efficiency are likely to be completely undone by increasing demand by parts of the world that don't give a fig for the First World obsession with self-righteousness. We're going down and the water level is rising. 

The climate change lot will be having their conference in Glasgow next year you might get to meat Greta but if the environment is so bad why not hold a video conference. 

[ranger_syntax 4,316]

34 minutes ago, compo said:

The climate change lot will be having their conference in Glasgow next year you might get to meat Greta but if the environment is so bad why not hold a video conference. 

Good idea for anyone who has a beef with her, not just Bill.

[ChelseaBoy 2,441]

I wonder if Greta is now heading over to Algeria to harangue those naughty Houthi's for blowing up two Saudi oilfields?