If you ruled the world, what would you implement to help with climate change

[GiraffeInTheCity]

Daydreaming if world domination whilst doing a rain dance...

If you ruled unilaterally, what would you do to make things (anything) more climate friendly? I would

• set net zero targets for much sooner (net zero 2050/2030 feels like ages given the emergency) and would require companies to have solid plans to get there. Probably set it for the next 3 to 5 years. Massive fines if you don't meet targets.

• mandate large scale public transport infrastructure upgrades in big cities where there isn't enough (tax the billionaires to pay for it) and make driving in them difficult (ULEZ, scant parking etc)

• renationalise energy and water, with the view to run it on clean energy and without pumping effluent into the rivers / sea. I imagine there would need to be massive upgrades here too to achieve that. Not renationalising because the private sector is being a bunch of thieves dishonest, But because things need to move quickly now, this is an emergency.

• make eating meat / dairy / fish illegal (I know I'll get flamed for this one...) --

-- What would you do?

@derxa

"They're not infant animals. More like ten year olds. The lambs butt their mothers' and nearly knock them over. Would you breast feed a ten year old child?"

So if your baby was removed permanently that's not good, but if it was your 10 year old that's completely fine/ a relief? 😉

Well, I don't currently breastfeed my 10 year old, no. But if you have cows milk in your tea, that is actual breastmilk (only from a different species 🤢 ) and you're an adult! So, feeding my 10 year old would actually be less weird than that.....

You think they keep cows with their mothers until age 10? Why?

You are anthropomorphising cows and sheep..... and being ridiculous.
What do you think they do in the wild / naturally?

Clue- they wean them before they give birth again the next year!

@whentheraincame

No, I think you've misread it, we are talking about sheep- I'm saying having their babies removed permanently is stressful for them, (I've witnessed this so many times in real life) but another poster is saying the sheep are relieved to get rid of their young as they are equivalent to 10 year olds.... whatever makes you feel more comfortable about your choices I guess.

It seems human nature to think that just me catching a plane won't do much damage. Also to enjoy convenience and comfort and to be able to live like their peers. So they may think there is an emergency but consider their own needs come first. Super wealthy people probably expect to be insulated from the effects of climate change also, although they can't probably say this to the scientists who have been raising the issues for decades.

@whentheraincame making personal decisions based on the words and actions of "the elite" or "super rich" living in their various bubbles is beyond stupid.

The science is out there, it is clear, it is peer reviewed - you @whentheraincame have personal access to the information, you need to really get into that information.

@twinkletoesimnot

My problem is primarily with dairy - though I object to using animals for our own (unnecessary) ends just because we can have power over them.
So you are saying there are absolutely no negative feelings from either the Cow or calf when they are separated at a few hours old? That is blatantly not true.
I do not feel comfortable paying people to do that on my behalf. You do it seems.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=jfvopRLAr6E

Thousands of male calves are shot at birth here in the U.K. too. Is that all good with you? I'm not being inflammatory- just trying to understand your position.

Makes perfect sense, humans rarely if ever change when confronted with a slow moving threat, the response is "its over there....long way off" ...do nothing.

The rich & powerful also believe they have the money to buy their way out of problems & have no concern for those that cannot escape the worst effects.

On predictions, climate scientists said back in the 90s we'd see glaciers disappear and they are, at alarming rates.

Its the rate of change that is the concern, not the change itself.

Well, I wouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. There have been some lovely ideas posted that would make everyone's life more pleasant. I see there are some more radical thinkers but we could, you know, negotiate.

How do you buy yourself out of an uninhabitable planet?

In a few months time the male lambs will be able to father their own lambs. It's called biology. The ewes need a rest now. They're fed up of getting their udders being butted and bashed. We have to separate the ewe lambs from the tup lambs because we don't want any tup lambs to impregnate any ewe lambs and certainly not their sisters. We wait till the ewes are over one shear before we put them with a ram

@derxa

Yes, thanks for clarifying, I do understand this. My point is, if you don't breed the animals in the first place, you don't have to do any of this!

We don't need meat to be healthy (most of it is the opposite of healthy) So why put these animals through this? For profit. But there are other ways. I know it's a big change. It's the intensive farms (primarily dairy) I have a big problem with.

I said to my partner years ago I'd rather he ate meat than dairy.

I spoke about male calves upthread.

We were however talking about sheep.

I'm not ok with it actually.
We calf share and milk the excess milk off once daily ( for the cow's comfort!)
We wean gradually at around 4 months.
First we only separate for a couple of hours, then an afternoon, then overnight, then leave them where they can touch but not feed, then where they can see but not touch- it takes a few weeks but our neighbours would tell you there's no bawling or distress.

I get that they do not do this on a commercial level but that doesn't mean it couldn't be done.
It's about profit and numbers.
Small herds can do what big herds can't.

Therefore, milk and meat needs to be more expensive to make better welfare economically viable.

I agree conventional commercial farming if all animals is abhorrent.

But it doesn't have to be

You'll have to ask that..... they also believe money can solve the issues in their children or childrens children life times.

I doubt they do.

I should have added intensive to the conventional, commercial farming bit.

My apologies

I think it sounds like heaven! Like finding a restaurant that just serves the one thing instead of the insane Cheesecake Factory-length multi-page menu. Take my choices away in exchange for a temperate climate, please!

For those saying about solar panels etc on new builds, rest assured that this will be happening in the next 18 months or so. Building Regs changes mean that houses completed from late 2023 for the volume builders will need them. Smaller builders (especially those not organised enough to get their applications in before June this year) will probably do it before then. Or air source heat pumps. And from 2025 (or probably a year or two after, given transitional arrangements), new builds will all have air source heat pumps. If there are enough of them...

Stuntbubbles please answer my questions about your plans for land requisition.
As a pp asked earlier, how will people who live in cities get access to land?

@Andante57 I suppose there are a lot of green spaces in London, at least. Lots of parks and commons. Even the poorest estates in London have a sort of central reservation which is usually tarmac, but could be planted. Rooftop gardens could be a thing, as well. Sorry, I know you are not asking me but I find the idea quite exciting. Also, I did read somewhere about the idea of planting edible fruit trees in public areas. Maybe if we make transport cheap or free in London we won't need all those car parks, we could plant them too.

Ban cruise ships

Bring back night trains and heavily subsidise them

Shut down Amazon Prime

Ban people from buying pure disposable shite like christmas jumpers, comedy poo emoji keyrings etc

Plant urban forests

Gnilliwdog
Thank you for answering my questions.
Would growing produce be voluntary or compulsory?

I’d still like to know more about this land requisition is going to work.

Put representatives from the RSPB into every council/Town planning meeting. The RSPB is not just about birds but campaigns for rewilding and creates the most diverse habitats that benefit all wildlife and people.

Create more cycleways, it would also get everyone fitter.

Make the Royal family start to practice what they preach eg rewild their land and just stop it with the private jets.

Buy local.

Build new housing stock upwards instead of outwards, to prevent urban spread.

Create wildflower roadside verges and let grass grow longer.

Ban the sale of fake grass. I mean really? WTF.

I don't envisage all this land would be used for only food growing, because I take on board that we need wildflower areas and trees also. But if a local community want to start a communal growing group they could be offered this land to use. Obviously, if food shortages become really serious it is a different issue. It couldn't be a case of only those who want to grow and do the work get the food, because we would have to feed those who physically can't do the work as well. That's more complicated.

Not what I would do but more justification for needing my car. I work in rural community nursing covering a large rural area so unfortunately will always rely on a car. I have a 1.2 so hardly gas guzzling. Not averse to other methods of powering it but it needs to vastly come down in price and the infrastructure needs to be properly thought out and in place before I take the plunge. I won’t be changing my job and the need for community nurses is not going to decrease with the continued push for more hospital at home type treatments.

my worry is that those who make these decisions will tar everybody with the same brush e.g. those who live in towns and cities who perhaps work in an office and those of us like carers, nurses etc that genuinely need cars