- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
I would like to be first to congratulate my (UK) government to be the first in the world to commit itself to legally binding reductions in carbon dioxide emissions; with the Climate Change Bill that will eventually go through our Parliament. With no doubt that it will go through, as the principle is being supported by all the major parties.
As it currently stands, this bill will enshrine into law the commitment to cut emissions by 60% by 2050, with an interim target of reducing emissions by between 26 per cent and 32 per cent by 2020.
The opposition parties and Labour MPs, want even higher targets, wanting an 80% reduction by 2050.
And hopefully this means the Bill be amended.
An article on this by The Independent newspaper.
http://tinyurl.com/2ot2al
Keep up the good work guys!
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
Does anyone have any critisism of how these targets should be achieved? Or whether there should be annual targets and not five year ones?
Personally, i like the idea of 5 year targets because it allows for some variations between the years, an unusually cold year for example.
Originally posted by Diet Cokeheating? -most of em cant afford it anyway, due to the taxman robbing pension funds, and the pitiful state pension
Owing to our commitment to reach our targets people over the age of 65 should not be allowed to heat their homes as they are going to die soon anyway.
:'(
Not to worry -- just as the member states of the EU failed to not only meet their emission reduction standards under the Kyoto agreement (ironically, emissions went up), the UK won't make a dent in their own emission standards. What's more, when the costs to business go up due to some carbon credits, forced implementation of new "clean" technology or carbon taxes, and they start shedding jobs, the British will realize that they made a mistake going along with this nutty scheme.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterSurely dependence on unsustainable resources is economic suicide? It's like using a jetpack to fly as high as you can and not leaving enough fuel to land. Sure you get higher but in the long run you end up all mushed into the ground.
And another thing, you should have titled this thread: The British Resolve Not to Compete, since they won't be able to do so against those nations that don't take such a economically suicidal stance, including the USA, China and India.
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterI would hope that this would lead others by example.
And another thing, you should have titled this thread: The British Resolve Not to Compete, since they won't be able to do so against those nations that don't take such a economically suicidal stance, including the USA, China and India.
To be honest dSR, there is little we can compete on with countries you mentioned, manufacturing (which is the most important for these measures I think) and the like have been on the decline for decades here now.
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterAh, but it didn't go up much as it would have otherwise I think, so it did work in some sense, but yes, not on target...
Not to worry -- just as the member states of the EU failed to not only meet their emission reduction standards under the Kyoto agreement (ironically, emissions went up), the UK won't make a dent in their own emission standards. What's more, when the costs to business go up due to some carbon credits, forced implementation of new "clean" technolog ...[text shortened]... jobs, the British will realize that they made a mistake going along with this nutty scheme.