3 ms·

It's long term when it comes to the service life of a politician. How many currently-serving politicians will still be around in 30 years to take the blame if w

It's long term when it comes to the service life of a politician. How many currently-serving politicians will still be around in 30 years to take the blame if we miss the targets?

mytailorisrich 7y ago
That's irrelevant and comparing apples and oranges. 30 years is not a long time for such a comprehensive change and it is sensible and needed to have plans and objectives over such timescale. I don't understand the point of trying to create an argument on this. It's quite obvious that this comes along with actions over 1, 2 years and beyond from now. And we see that happening every day. If people think that the goal is achievable within 5 years they do not live in the real world.
- freehunter 7y ago
  And no one is disagreeing with that. There needs to be intermediary steps between now and 2050. That was the entire question, "what are they doing in the next 1-2 years". Just saying "we'll do it within 30 years" is easy, saying "and here's our year-by-year plan" is a lot harder. If there's not a year-by-year plan, when 30 years is up there's no one left to take the blame if we fail.
- maccard 7y ago
  Why isn't it a long time? 30 years ago the internet didnt exist, we've gone from making 100 million tonnes of plastic to 400 million tonnes (and 30 years before that, we were making almost 0 plastic). The entire US highway system took 60 years. We've made it to Mars in less than 10 years. After WWII, vast amounts of Western Europe were rebuilt in a decade. The entirety of the UKs coal mining industry was decimated in 5 years. 30 years is an absolute eternity.
  - mytailorisrich 7y ago
    Random statistics do not prove a point. Net zero emissions over the whole of the UK is a very profound change and I am not even sure that the technologies exist today to make it happen sustainably or at all. I think many people really do not realise how profound and far reaching that is, bearing in mind that the aim is not to destroy the country's fabric and economy in the process.
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  There is a plan which, surprisingly perhaps, came before the headlines, and it's pretty well thought out. The cross party Committee on Climate Change has been working on a plan for a few years, see updates here: https://www.theccc.org.uk https://www.theccc.org.uk The 2050 net zero report, was published 6 weeks back: https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/net-zero-the-uks-contribution-to-stopping-global-warming/ https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/net-zero-the-uks-contr... Which led to the Chancellor saying pft, too expensive last month, and Theresa "committing" to it this month. Though she immediately backed away from simply adopting the report and muttered something about carbon offsets (avoiding the issue).

It's long term when it comes to the service life of a politician. How many currently-serving politicians will still be around in 30 years to take the blame if we miss the targets?

mytailorisrich 7y ago

That's irrelevant and comparing apples and oranges. 30 years is not a long time for such a comprehensive change and it is sensible and needed to have plans and objectives over such timescale. I don't understand the point of trying to create an argument on this. It's quite obvious that this comes along with actions over 1, 2 years and beyond from now. And we see that happening every day. If people think that the goal is achievable within 5 years they do not live in the real world.

freehunter 7y ago
And no one is disagreeing with that. There needs to be intermediary steps between now and 2050. That was the entire question, "what are they doing in the next 1-2 years". Just saying "we'll do it within 30 years" is easy, saying "and here's our year-by-year plan" is a lot harder. If there's not a year-by-year plan, when 30 years is up there's no one left to take the blame if we fail.
maccard 7y ago
Why isn't it a long time? 30 years ago the internet didnt exist, we've gone from making 100 million tonnes of plastic to 400 million tonnes (and 30 years before that, we were making almost 0 plastic). The entire US highway system took 60 years. We've made it to Mars in less than 10 years. After WWII, vast amounts of Western Europe were rebuilt in a decade. The entirety of the UKs coal mining industry was decimated in 5 years. 30 years is an absolute eternity.
- mytailorisrich 7y ago
  Random statistics do not prove a point. Net zero emissions over the whole of the UK is a very profound change and I am not even sure that the technologies exist today to make it happen sustainably or at all. I think many people really do not realise how profound and far reaching that is, bearing in mind that the aim is not to destroy the country's fabric and economy in the process.
NeedMoreTea 7y ago
There is a plan which, surprisingly perhaps, came before the headlines, and it's pretty well thought out. The cross party Committee on Climate Change has been working on a plan for a few years, see updates here: https://www.theccc.org.uk https://www.theccc.org.uk The 2050 net zero report, was published 6 weeks back: https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/net-zero-the-uks-contribution-to-stopping-global-warming/ https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/net-zero-the-uks-contr... Which led to the Chancellor saying pft, too expensive last month, and Theresa "committing" to it this month. Though she immediately backed away from simply adopting the report and muttered something about carbon offsets (avoiding the issue).