Climate change policy

[Blackswanwood]

I've heard all this virtue signaling rubbish put out by the Greenfreaks before and it just doesn't wash!

Achieving net zero is going to seriously impact on ordinary people's lives if introduced too quickly, it will also make the UK's industries uncompetitive if we follow a faster track toward net zero than other nations with which we compete.

I can't see any of the nations on the list I gave that will hamstring their own economies and industries in order to achieve some magic arbitrary figure by a specific date that our government seems to think will be the date after which the world will end if we haven't reached net zero before that date.

We saw what Germany did when it was still buying Russian oil and gas after Russia invaded Ukraine...they were big on lip service about sanctions on Russia but they weren't prepared to cut ties with Russian energy until they were ready as it would have affected their economy which is why I can't see any of the countries on that list achieving net zero by the 2050 deadline.
They will protect their own interests and we should as a nation do the same.

As I said, you’ve missed the point.

Predictable opening with the insults though

 

[Chris152]

Achieving net zero is going to seriously impact on ordinary people's lives if introduced too quickly

I don't think anyone on here is arguing that the reduction of fossil fuel use should be immediate, but rather at the fastest possible rate. A few pages ago you mentioned Just Stop Oil - even they are proposing a date of 2030. UK govt seems to be aiming for 2050 for net zero on carbon.

You seem to look for the most extreme position, often one you've imagined, then attack it. I've not ready anyone on here suggesting we stop use of fossil fuels immediately, nor even by 2030. I'd imagine the transition will cause many difficulties along the way, but none anywhere nearly as great as if we don't work through them and cut emissions and mitigate manmade climate change.

 

[Scruples]

Can’t say I’ve noticed a decline in “clever people”. Have you?

Perhaps you're not clever enough to notice?

 

[RobinBHM]

I really don't share your blinkered views

Tony have you ever considered your views might be a weeny bit er, you know um blinkered.

I can’t decide if your posts are serious or rather clever Johnathan Pie satire.

 

[Yorkieguy]

Discuss climate change policy by all means. If we can't keep political slanging out of it this goes to OT2.

Spot on.

For goodness sake just read the Global Rules on posting standards and self-moderate or yet again, this will be another thread destined to be a name-calling slanging match till the moderators pull the plug. The first sentence in the first post of this thread not only risks inviting adverse comments, but inciting them.

It's yet another off-topic thread destined to generate more heat than light:

https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/threads/global-forum-rules.124302/

The moderators have enough on their plate as it is.

David.

 

[RobinBHM]

Spot on.

For goodness sake just read the Global Rules on posting standards and self-moderate or yet again, this will be another thread destined to be a name-calling slanging match till the moderators pull the plug. The first sentence in the first post of this thread not only risks inviting adverse comments, but inciting them.

It's yet another off-topic thread destined to generate more heat than light:

https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/threads/global-forum-rules.124302/

The moderators have enough on their plate as it is.

David.

Sadly many people aren’t interested in a debate where we all learn, they just want to repeat their well worn opinions.

Climate change is a very important subject which will impact our lives a lot, it’s a shame we can’t just have a meaningful debate.

I personally find forum debates a place where I learn a huge amount, because opposing views force me to consider my own understanding and bias. And this forum has people from a huge range of backgrounds, so it’s a great community.

 

[Yorkieguy]

Correct, a smart phone is similar in behaviour to a cat in that they take control and you become their servant. Odd thing is that I have always worked in technology, electrical / electronics and other engineering fields and kept as far as possible work and living separate but these phones are just like having an implant and it seems they become your life. No one can say they are not addictive but at last people are realising they are damaging kids education as well as removing any chance of a proper childhood as they have everything good, bad and ugly at there fingertips so things we would never have known or worried about are now in there face.

This poem says it all:

 

[Croolis]

This poem says it all:

That's the saddest thing I ever read . That's set me up for the day, cheers

 

[ey_tony]

Tony have you ever considered your views might be a weeny bit er, you know um blinkered.

I can’t decide if your posts are serious or rather clever Johnathan Pie satire.

On the contrary Robin, far from being blinkered and toeing lines set by people who clearly haven't fully thought things through properly, I've actually shed any potential blinkers and actually looked at what the reality of these lines spell for ordinary people! You might try the same.

All actions have consequences no matter how well meaning and intended they may have been initially and while I have no objection to attaining this net zero target at some point, my protestations are primarily to do with timing.
It's not the target, it's the timing which will be the UK's undoing.

 

[ThornOfCamorr]

Is that just lecky cost?

It’s cost for charging (public + at home). I did not include insurance in that number as you pay it regardless of you moving the car. Insurance premium has also depends on many other variables subject to personal circumstances.

 

[ThornOfCamorr]

On the contrary Robin, far from being blinkered and toeing lines set by people who clearly haven't fully thought things through properly, I've actually shed any potential blinkers and actually looked at what the reality of these lines spell for ordinary people! You might try the same.

All actions have consequences no matter how well meaning and intended they may have been initially and while I have no objection to attaining this net zero target at some point, my protestations are primarily to do with timing.
It's not the target, it's the timing which will be the UK's undoing.

It’s normal for humans to be scared of change. That’s basic psychology. Some people are better with dealing with change, others don’t do as well.

Change is the only constant in our life, regardless of us liking it or not.

Best thing to do is see change as an opportunity and chance to improve. Worst thing is to put your head in the sand, cause if you like it or not, the world around you moves forward.

 

[ey_tony]

I don't think anyone on here is arguing that the reduction of fossil fuel use should be immediate, but rather at the fastest possible rate. A few pages ago you mentioned Just Stop Oil - even they are proposing a date of 2030. UK govt seems to be aiming for 2050 for net zero on carbon.

You seem to look for the most extreme position, often one you've imagined, then attack it. I've not ready anyone on here suggesting we stop use of fossil fuels immediately, nor even by 2030. I'd imagine the transition will cause many difficulties along the way, but none anywhere nearly as great as if we don't work through them and cut emissions and mitigate manmade climate change.

Militant green groups like JSO are simply green fringe lunatics not dissimilar to religious extremists, they worship their GW god unquestioningly.

I'm all for the UK government aiming for the 2050 deadline in order to cut down harmful emissions to help the planet in some small way providing that the UK is in synchronised step with the major polluters and not unilaterally racing ahead at breakneck speed in order to finish first so that the virtue signallers can have their day on the podium.

All of this self-flagellation by the GW zealots in the form of self-punishing the UK for playing what is effectively a relatively minor part (0.88% of global emissions) these days in what is a huge world problem is not going to solve the issues by the UK unilaterally taking action that will ultimately harm the UK's economy if out of sync with the rest of the world.

The top 10 pollution contributors are simply not going to handicap their economies so that they can look good on the virtue signaler's podium, they are unfortunately going to protect their own interests first and likewise we should do the same but continue forward with the same goals in a modified timeframe.

 

[Chris152]

I'm all for the UK government aiming for the 2050 deadline in order to cut down harmful emissions to help the planet in some small way providing that the UK is in synchronised step with the major polluters and not unilaterally racing ahead at breakneck speed in order to finish first so that the virtue signallers can have their day on the podium.

I think the race is to develop technologies that allow us to hit that target. Those that do so will benefit bigly from it at all levels. I don't think people tend to think we can just chuck away what we have and suddenly achieve net nought.

 

[ey_tony]

It’s normal for humans to be scared of change. That’s basic psychology. Some people are better with dealing with change, others don’t do as well.

Change is the only constant in our life, regardless of us liking it or not.

Best thing to do is see change as an opportunity and chance to improve. Worst thing is to put your head in the sand, cause if you like it or not, the world around you moves forward.

No need for heads in sand.
Everything changes/evolves but I see no rational reasoning behind bringing in sweeping change which if not carefully synchronised and choreographed in step with the rest of the world will only serve to harm the UK's economy and for what if other nations don't advance at the same rate?
Kneejerk reactions are not the solution.

 

[ThornOfCamorr]

No need for heads in sand.
Everything changes/evolves but I see no rational reasoning behind bringing in sweeping change which if not carefully synchronised and choreographed in step with the rest of the world will only serve to harm the UK's economy and for what if other nations don't advance at the same rate?
Kneejerk reactions are not the solution.

Can you provide us with some reputable source on all those claims of the net zero change harming our economy?

If you want a synchronised approach, well then you are too late and you will not emerge as a technological leader. Did Tesla wait until all the other car manufacturers were ready to build modern cars? They just did it, even built their own charging network as this was an adoption blocker. Now they are the clear market leader in the sector and all other car manufacturers are scrambling to catch up.

 

[selectortone]

What might also be a bad for our climate and the enviroment that has not been mentioned is that sad old device called a smart phone. It takes people out of the real world and isolates them from their surroundings so they have no interest in nature or wildlife.

Says the man spending an inordinate amount of time arguing with fellow old curmugeons like me on an internet forum. Physician, heal thyself!

 

[cerro]

Yes, you didn't want a debate based on facts, you just wanted to make silly sarcastic comments.

I didnt want a debate just state my opinion. I am sorry if I offended you but you seem to be like the Ruperts I met in my severn years in the marines. Very intelligent but no common sense read the posts man END

 

[Fitzroy]

Spot on, Spectric.

Correct, a smart phone is similiar in behavior to a cat

This poem says it all:

Parental child avoidance is now more visible as phones are consumed in public, is it worse now than historically where parents would get home from work stick the TV on and say not a word until 'bed time' was called out, who knows?

To simply say 'NO' to smartphones is too simplistic, as they have considerable benefits as well as detriments. As a parent to a teenager I've had to think carefully about phones, social media, access to harmful information, etc. The social interaction they enable is fantastic, my son maintains friendships with people who have left the area and moved across the world, I find him frequently laughing with his friends about the latest meme, he brings interesting topics up at the dinner table about things he has seen he has a broader education because of the device. He also talks utter garbage at times quoting misinformation that he has seen, but this gives the opportunity to learn how to think critically etc. As a parent it is harder work but I think overall the pros outweigh the cons, and to not learn how to use the technology will hamstring an individual in the future. A quote I like is "all progress takes place outside the comfort zone".

On the contrary Robin, far from being blinkered and toeing lines

Militant green groups like JSO are simply green fringe lunatics not dissimilar to religious extremists, they worship their GW god unquestioningly.

I'm all for the UK government aiming for the 2050 deadline in order to cut down harmful emissions to help the planet in some small way providing that the UK is in synchronised step with the major polluters and not unilaterally racing ahead at breakneck speed in order to finish first so that the virtue signallers can have their day on the podium.

All of this self-flagellation by the GW zealots in the form of self-punishing the UK for playing what is effectively a relatively minor part (0.88% of global emissions) these days in what is a huge world problem is not going to solve the issues by the UK unilaterally taking action that will ultimately harm the UK's economy if out of sync with the rest of the world.

The top 10 pollution contributors are simply not going to handicap their economies so that they can look good on the virtue signaler's podium, they are unfortunately going to protect their own interests first and likewise we should do the same but continue forward with the same goals in a modified timeframe.

Your view is that the economy is more important than the environment. The green group militant's view is vice versa. Much of your language is equally militant, stating this and that will happen without any presentation of any data or evidence. As others have said they think being a leader in this area will provide opportunities for growth, and being a leader will enable us to develop solutions that are exportable and valuable. Can you admit that there is also opportunity in being a leader?

You raised some interesting points regards top global polluters, this caused me to go and look at the data, from which I learnt something new. I learnt that since 1990 the UK has roughly halved it's CO2 emissions, no other country in the world has achieved such a cut, something to be proud of! I learnt that China's per capita emissions are higher than the UK, however all the stuff they make for the UK is included in their numbers so this muddies the water. This research has changed my view and makes me think more pressure is required on some of the developing nations, but perhaps is support and regulation that encourages low carbon production of goods exported.

Spending energy debating a topic is only worthwhile with an open mind and a willingness to understand the other's position, if you have a closed mind and a hammer then likely the other party also does and it becomes a fight not a debate.