Beat me to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Printable View
Beat me to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
That's a share of GDP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kato
We manufacture about about the same amount of goods. The amount we manufacture hasn't changed much in 30 years whilst other nations have grown.
The majority of our c02 drop has been from closing our coal power stationsAttachment 27087Attachment 27088
I don't think so. It's the Uk's percentage of world manufacturing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
Yep your right every nation dropped by around half including Germany though, as China exploded. Graph shows it well China squeezed everyone. We manufacture about the same inflation adjusted. So our drop in co2 can't be from there. Full fact says its due to reducing coal, although we aren't on track to drop 80%Quote:
Originally Posted by Kato
https://fullfact.org/environment/uk-...gas-emissions/
u
Return to Full Fact homepage
THE ENVIRONMENT
UK greenhouse gas emissions: fast progress but not yet enough to meet future targets
21 JUNE 2019
WHAT WAS CLAIMED
The UK has led the world by committing to “net zero” greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
OUR VERDICT
The UK’s stated ambition to reduce emissions goes further than most other countries, and the UK is generally considered to be a world-leader in setting targets into law. A few other countries have set similar or more ambitious targets.
“We have made huge progress in growing our economy and the jobs market while slashing emissions”
Theresa May, 12 June 2019
“The UK is already slipping away from its mid-term carbon targets of cutting emissions by 80% by 2050”
BBC News, 12 June 2019
"This is the government that has just led the world by committing to a zero carbon economy by 2050."
Philip Hammond, 20 June 2019
The government wants to set a new target to cut UK net greenhouse gas emissions to “net zero” by 2050. The existing target is to cut emissions by 80% compared to 1990 levels. The government is following recommendations from the independent Committee on Climate Change (CCC), made earlier this year.
“Net zero” means the UK emitting as much as it is removing from the environment (like by planting trees or carbon capture technology). So if this new proposed target were met, this “would effectively mean that the UK will end its contribution to global remissions in 2050”, according to the House of Commons Library.
Up until now the UK has been exceeding its own targets and reducing emissions faster than any other major advanced economy in the G7. But that progress isn’t fast enough at the moment to meet even the 80% target set by the Climate Change Act 2008.
Honesty in public debate matters
You can help us take action – and get our regular free email
Progress on cutting emissions has been fast
Gross greenhouse gas emissions in the UK have been cut by about 44% since 1990, although those figures don’t include emissions from international aviation and shipping.
That’s a faster cut than any other G7 country over the same period.
Using comparable figures as far as 2016, the UK had reduced gross emissions by 41%, compared to 27% for Germany, 23% in Italy and 18% for France. Emissions were higher by 4% in Japan, 5% in the USA and 26% in Canada.
The CCC, which assesses the government’s progress against its targets as set out in the Climate Change Act, has described the UK’s record as:
“[T]he most substantial emissions reduction in the G7, over a period when economic growth was above the G7 average.
“The UK can rightly claim early leadership on decarbonisation and the governance framework to deliver it, but the Government must not be complacent. Market-led developments explain much of the fall since 1990: energy efficiency improvements, a shift from coal to gas in the power sector and a broader shift to less energy-intensive UK industry.”
Less coal, more gas and renewables have driven falling emissions
The key driver behind the UK’s recent reductions in emissions has been the rapid decline of coal power. In 2008, Coal provided 32% of energy generation in the UK. In 2018, it was 5%, and in recent months there has been barely any coal-powered electricity generation. Coal is one of the most carbon-intensive forms of energy, so a shift away from that towards gas has driven a lot of the fall in emissions
Attachment 27089
Could Scotland use old mines and subways to power homes. We could then use a national energy company to unlock the profits say common weal
https://archive.ph/X7ZAK
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...-fife-66376143
Scottish Parliament targeted by climate protestors.
Seems unfair. They say snp complicit but they weren't the decision makers and condemnedQuote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
It probably is unfair but fair play to them for making themselves heard. We need more like them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They either think the Scottish Government is responsible for the decision, and didn't even bother checking the news to discover that the SNP had already spoken out against it, or they're trying to pretend the Scottish Government is responsible. They've made quite a mess, figuratively and literally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumble de Thump
the article clearly states that they were protesting the Scottish Govt’s silence in response to the announcement of the new licences
Which is weird because both Humza Yousaf and Stephen Flynn have given interviews over the last couple of days? Weird.Quote:
Originally Posted by McD
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Flynn criticised Starmer for saying he'll stop north Sea exploration and this week was non committalQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp...ea-risks-jobs/
Fully explained his position here. I personally think he is getting it just right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcas...=1000622942006
I know full interviews are not as fun as sound bites but they are still important.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I listened to him and agree with him, but he's clearly more pro extraction than others in his partyQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Exactly. We can’t shut down the industry tomorrow but we can gently(not so gently[emoji6]) nudge it towards green energy. It’s an industry that has massive skills in offshore work which will be needed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://twitter.com/extremetemps/sta...dxJXScFNwz8V4A
Just to cheer everyone up.[emoji51]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://twitter.com/saulstaniforth/s...dxJXScFNwz8V4A
Labour commit to another Tory policy.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But there's a large difference between Labour and the tories. I don't know what it is, but it's what we're told.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
How could they legally if they are auctioned off, tories aren't going to insert a small cancellation fee. They can only be judged on if they renegade on not issuing new licences. I'm personally more interested in policies to increase renewables and change from gas to electric. We're going to need a lot of gas for the next 5 decades unfortunately.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Norway is usually held up as how to do it. They have just approved £18 billion investment in new fields, hell mend us all
I'm not sure how you don't because I listed about a dozen policy stark differences. Rwanda and raising the top tax rate alone should show anyone without an agenda there is a sizable difference to many effectedQuote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
Starmer indicates he will not raise income tax for top earners.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
https://www.independent.co.uk/busine...-b2363320.html
Fair play. The man is a clown but he's centre right so it's expected. He says they are going ahead with stopping non dom status and private school tax. That's a massive 5 billion difference the tories would never doQuote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
I hate this Labour Party. I really liked Corbyn he was far more left than any UK political party in my lifetime. But you said the same yesterday as everyone said on here. He needs to be more right wing to win. So what is it be left or win and be left of the tories
Show me where he is further right wing than Sunak as you said.
Did he say what he was going to do with that 5 billion?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
If he has to be more right wing to win, then I don't want him to win. I want them all to lose, otherwise it's the rest of us that continue to lose.
350 million will go on 7000 teachers and £2500 if a teacher stays for 2 years. Ever child in the uk will have a breakfast club with free food. 13,000 neighbourhood police. 15,000 doctors. These are all the amount more than the tories have announced. Think that is only £2 billion. Will have to wait until he announces the policies next yearQuote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
In the real world in England they have no choice but the two. If left wingers don't vote they get tories simple as. Unless you want kids imprisoned until 18 and their kids sent to Rwanda, in my opinion only a sick person doesn't want Labour to beat the tories
He said he wants to see more police on the streets. Perhaps that's where he's going to spend the remaining 3 billion to help enforce the tory anti-strike and protest laws that he's committed to keeping in place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
He says he's committed to repelling it, although I'm not sure what breakfast clubs, doctors and teachers have to do with thatQuote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
He has never stated that at any point. He has however suggested that he wants to allow the anti-protest bill time to "settle in".Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7d3aCM9cvk
Labour WON'T repeal Tory anti-protest law if they win General Election.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23...eral-election/
https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/sir-keir-starmer-pledges-to-repeal-any-new-anti-strike-laws-in-first-big-speech-of-the-year-as-rail-union-warns-legislation-could-lead-to-longer-strife-12780233Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
Sir Keir Starmer pledges to repeal any new anti-strike laws in first big speech of the year
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1777839/starmer-gmb-speech-strikes-union-barons/amp
Sir Slippery' Starmer sparks outrage with vow to wreck new law that will thwart strikers
Repel anti strike, says will look at anti protest. Not far enough in my opinion
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/new-protest-laws-labour-repeal-legisaltion-win-next-general-election-coronation-arrests-2326589
They could make a commitment now to reverse the licenses, no one will invest - job done.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
I've read they can't just reverse it without breaking the contract. So companies will invest now as they if the new gov breaks the contract they can take them to court. Could be wrongQuote:
Originally Posted by Kato