Wild fires in BC Canada.

[deema]

At last, Mr Sunak has decided that some of the crazy targets for going green should be pushed back to align with Europe and USA.

Well, at least the Welsh are busy going nowhere very slowly, no change there! I think they should consider going back to having the chap in front of a car carrying a flag. It will make all the difference.

 

[Cobbs]

Words fail me at the man's stupidity - at least, any words with more than four letters. He says he wants to build a better future for our children, yet is content to watch the world burn. The sooner we ditch him, the better.

 

[Jacob]

Have you not realised yet, Terry, that providing Jacob with accurate and scientific facts in the hope that he might see the light and jump off his bandwagon is like trying to nail jelly to a tree ?

I read the report which Terry referred to.
He concluded "apparently most authoritative work on the subject suggests a reduction in these storms with climate change."
Correct, but in fact the report concluded that they could be more intense:
"Given the small number of events it is difficult to extract a significant trend. In most of previous works the trend in the number of events per season was deemed insignificant (Nastos et al., 2018) or, in a recent work, slightly positive (de la Vara et al., 2021). However, similarly to tropical cyclones, several model studies project a reduction of the overall number of events, with an intensification of individual storms (Romero and Emanuel, 2013)."
Storm Daniel seems to have been an intensification of an individual storm, as I underline above, which Terry ignored.
This article says the same sort of thing: Libya’s Deadly Floods Show the Growing Threat of Medicanes i.e. could be falling in frequency but growing in intensity.
I realise that some people can't hold two ideas in their heads at the same time!
Climate change isn't all one way, the general picture is of global rising temperature everywhere but local effects are variable.

 

[Jacob]

Words fail me at the man's stupidity - at least, any words with more than four letters. He says he wants to build a better future for our children, yet is content to watch the world burn. The sooner we ditch him, the better.

It's very odd. Sunak seems to be contradicting everybody except the nutters. Maybe he is under orders from the fossil fuel lobby? Maybe he is just another simpleton like Truss, but better able to cover it up?

 

[deema]

Or perhaps has realised that the infrastructure cannot support the switch to all electric. Don’t forget, last winter there was concern of blackouts due to electrical load exceeding generating capacity. I will suggest it will take at least 50 years to build the required infrastructure. That’s taking into account the available expertise to build and design it, and the ability of all of us to pay for it. Just look how long HS2 has taken so far and that’s just a tiny project in comparison.

 

[Agent_zed]

I will suggest it will take at least 50 years to build the required infrastructure

thats a shame as a lot of estimates put proven oil resources left between 45 - 55 years at current consumption. Might be alright if its the later although I'd imagine it will have become hugely expensive by that point.

 

[Jacob]

...... I will suggest it will take at least 50 years to build the required infrastructure. ....

Too late. Look how fast things are moving now.
Should have started 50 years ago.

 

[Jacob]

Radio 4 news interesting but not in a good way. Interview one expert and for balance give equal time to one idiiot (Richard Tice in this case). Should be more 20:1, the idiots are in the minority by a long chalk and diminishing rapidly as events unfold.
Maybe they should have a regular 5 minute slot: "Daft thought for the day" or something!

 

[John Brown]

Sunak is just trying to win the next election. It's as simple as that. Jacob Rees Mogg actually said as much in a radio interview, although he immediately backtracked when challenged. Quite why anybody would want to ask JRM anything is beyond me, but a lot of people seem to be taken in by his affectations.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

The changes may have relatively little impact on 2050 net zero as:

• most manufacturers have switched resources into EVs, and limited ICE development. By 2030 new car buyers will have a choice - increasingly obsolete 10+ year old designs or EVs which will have benefitted from another 7 years development. For most it will be an easy choice.
• gas boilers are normally replaced end of life. By early 2030s many failed heating system will anyway upgrade to alternatives. Currently 74% of homes have a gas supply - falling gas demand will make the distribution network increasingly costly, and reliability flaky through lack of investment.
• rental property - making properties compliant with EPC regulations may encourage landlords to sell. This is simply disruptive - there is no change in the demand for housing - it merely transfers the energy inefficiency from the landlord to the owner occupier.

The disappointing part is that it signals a lack of resolve to address a real issue, although it does de-risk the transition by giving extra time for both technical and infrastructure development.

Whether he has made the right political judgement is another matter. Voter views views are likely to be polarised. The response of the opposition is predictable.

 

[deema]

I’m not aware of any European country investing in the electrical generation and distribution system to the level required to move away from fossil fuels. So, I feel confident that 2035 will be kicked down the road by another 5 years by all Europe and the USA before we get there. Voters can vote any which way they want, it still won’t change the time it takes to build the infrastructure and therefore the timescale it can be done. The Green Party should they become the largest party and firm a Government will also have to face reality and move the goal posts down the road.

 

[Jacob]

....
The disappointing part is that it signals a lack of resolve to address a real issue,

Yes. It's an emergency worse than any that has occurred before in human history and we need positive leadership in the Churchill mode, not just feeble party leaders grovelling for votes, each as bad as the other

although it does de-risk the transition by giving extra time for both technical and infrastructure development.

If there is time - the longer it goes the harder it is to get the genie back in the bottle.

Whether he has made the right political judgement is another matter. Voter views views are likely to be polarised. The response of the opposition is predictable.

He has to convince the electorate that he is doing the right thing. They are not stupid and the speed and scale of developments is becoming ever more apparent.
It's a pity that Johnson was such a berk as he had persuasive powers, viz the idiotic Brexit vote. If only he had been offering something intelligent and positive. He missed his Churchillian opportunity by a million miles and took us up s**t creek instead!

 

[Jacob]

re speed of change, just a detail from todays paper:
"Large wildfires were once rare in the UK. When satellite monitoring started in 2006 through the EU’s Copernicus system, no large fires were recorded for five years until 2011. Since then, 599 large wildfires have been recorded, burning 126,618 hectares (310,000 acres)."

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...fire-training-as-number-of-blazes-doubles-aoe
It seems why may have to undergo a lot more destruction before serious action is taken

"........Freedom of Information Act requests show the number of wildfires recorded by fire brigades in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland more than doubled last year, reaching 23,699 in 2022, compared with 9,307 the year before."

So, will they have doubled again by next year?

 

[Phil Pascoe]

If the number of arsonists does.

 

[Cobbs]

If the number of arsonists does.

I think you're completely missing the point there - it's more to do with the landscape being dry enough to burn uncontrollably. I don't think the number of muppets is increasing exponentially, just the opportunities for fire to take hold.

 

[John Brown]

There is no global warming, it's just a bunch of loony left activists with hair-dryers.

 

[Jacob]

If the number of arsonists does.

Must be a coordinated world wide conspiracy.
I bet Greta Thunberg is behind it. There's a clue in the name; Greater Thunderbird obvious innit!
Maybe a ban on ***-lighters, matches, blow lamps, flints etc?
Or is it a job creation scheme by the FBU?
Cruella says they are all extreme lefty loonies. What does she know which we don't?

 

[RichElfin]

I'm sure his family's billion dollar deal with BP signed back in August has absolutly nothing to do with his decision.

​

 

[paulrbarnard]

I'm sure his family's billion dollar deal with BP signed back in August has absolutly nothing to do with his decision.

​

And the fact that JLR is owned by TATA and JLR are way behind on electric vehicles.

 

[Jacob]

And the fact that JLR is owned by TATA and JLR are way behind on electric vehicles.

Is it really that simple?
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/ris...a-steel-sign-landmark-investment-deal-4394676Looks like it!