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?

I would put the brakes on any new nuclear. Nuclear is not the way forward if we want to protect the Earth.

@GiraffeInTheCity

Net zero targets - 2050 is pretty challenging to be honest. 75% of CO2e emissions come from burning fossil fuels. To reach net zero by 2030 you would have to stop all cars, aeroplanes, trains, ships, boilers, electricity generation, close hospitals, schools, defence systems etc etc, half the global population would die. On the other hand ALL big businesses are going to be required to produce roadmaps to net zero.

We need alternative forms of transport, Manchester recently announced a centralised transport scheme. It's happening. Sadly it's Jo Blogs who will have to pay for it, contrary to public opinion there aren't as many billionaires with cold hard cash to tax.

Nationalisation, it didn't work last time round as successive governments saw it as an easy way to rob Peter to pay Paul; much better I think that were community interest companies or other not for profit mechanisms that kept greedy government and corporate fingers at bay.

No need to have meat/dairy/fish illegal, just maintain and improve standards.

Sadly the case for many of us.

I simply cannot afford to shop eco friendly at the moment.

I'd ban flying. I don't need that.

Years ago, when we had a drought, the Duke of Edinburgh said it was ridiculous to flush away one little wee-wee with a tank full of drinking water.

rainwater harvesting for every new house built & every extension where possibly would help considerably. Rain water for laundry, loo flushing & keep drinking water for drinking

This, but not two children per family as families change. I would make it one biological child per adult.

I always wonder what it would be like if there was a complete ban on lawn mowing.

The grass would only grow to about knee height, eventually wildflowers will bloom, lots of bees and butterflies, not to mention all the savings in fuel and production process for relevant machinery.

This is probably just because I am so lazy and hate mowing the lawn,😂

I would ban packaging that can’t be recycled. It does my head in that things like fruit and veg come in packets that are made of materials that can’t be recycled

There’s a few posters talking about china and India’s pollution; China is the world’s #1 exporter.

The goods the world buy are cheap because of the way they are produced. People need to change behaviour in terms of the way we buy things for this to have any impact on how China produces things.

@MissyCooperismyShero I agree 1 child ONLY per adult For EVER. Just think what would be saved !
If there's no nuclear energy, or fossil fuel energy what will we use to generate enough globally for all the electric vehicle and so on. Cos sure as hell ain't gonna freeze over, renewables won't produce enough

Bring back a different way of shopping - more continental. You'd shop little and often. Less food waste. You'd need a more sustainable way of working and living to do that where you work the hours paid and have more time for family and friends. You stop for lunch. Much better for mental health etc. I think it would have a knock on effect on the environment because people would have time to think.

Move jobs to areas rather than people to jobs. It would make housing better for everyone.

Limit flying - You'd only get x amount of miles per year. You could sell yours if you needed to at a fixed rate but above market value. Therefore that's that can afford it would have to properly compensate those that can't.

Massively improve public transport everywhere including the countryside so it's less attractive to drive. Do specific buses to Tesco etc so it doesn't take for ever.

100% renewable energy is possible, this consensus is scientific mainstream now - there was news on this last week which was really interesting. The progress in storage and battery technology is really something. Things like this make me really hopeful.

www.helsinkitimes.fi/themes/themes/science-and-technology/22012-researchers-agree-the-world-can-reach-a-100-renewable-energy-system-by-or-before-2050.html

So many good ideas here. I wonder if we could use land for more food growing. We have lots of parks, golf courses, NT properties with land we could be using to grow food. Grass lawns seem a bit of a waste, when we could have cherry orchards, or other foods growing. Obviously agriculture can damage land, but maybe we could look at permaculture techniques. Save on flying vegetables across the world, maybe they could serve local communities.

This thread is brilliant. It just goes to show that the will for change is there. Maybe we should all stand for local councils and start there. 😊

A really interesting report on agricultural land use from the Green Alliance think tank came out today which links to this.

Link to their Twitter feed and the report here twitter.com/greenallianceuk/status/1559069496266162177?s=21&t=8el0pNkFUiyuDT-2y_6boQ

So many good ideas on this thread.

I'd start to ban plastic. Work out different classes of plastic use ranging from completely unnecessary, such as drinking straws and washi tape, right through to essential medical supplies, eg stoma bags etc.

Then I'd implement a sensible timeframe to make it illegal to sell/import/manufacture each class, starting with the unnecessary. Would obviously take years, even decades, to work through all the classes, but everyone would have plenty of notice that the change was coming. It may be that some of the essential plastic items wouldn't have an alternative and in those cases I'd provide research funding ahead of time, or failing that, an exclusion.

Ban flights for "short" breaks such as weekends or 1 or 2 days, or if you can't ban them, then make the cost prohibitive to discourage people going in stag/hen weekends abroad, or going shopping abroad for a weekend, etc.

@RenewableNewt Thank you for the link. It looks interesting.

Encourage "localism" through grants, subsidies, etc., to make it possible for people to shop and work much closer to home. Reverse centralisation of jobs in head offices in 1 or 2 main cities and get back to regional offices. Raise business rates for the largest of premises such as online shopping warehouses, and reduce/zeroise business rates for small shops/offices and High Street premises. Rather than increasing/improving public transport, reduce the need for it in the first place!

1. Max two children per household - tax penalty for more
2. Shift to nuclear energy
3. Heavily incentivise low carbon supply chains

@MadonnasKebab

Just you then that doesn't believe climate change is a 'thing'. Brilliant to see out of 3 pages only one such person.

Some amazing ideas on here, wish we could implement many of them immediately, seems so obvious to us why isn't it to government?

The big one is obviously renewable energy. Tax fossil fuels prohibitively and push the money into renewables investments. Fast track planning, acknowledging that although there might be an environmental cost it is better than the alternative. (By environmental cost I mean mining for rare earth minerals, wind farms messing with reindeer migration routes (yes, this is a thing), offshore wind affecting marine life, etc.)

On a smaller level, ban personalisation. It is a huge hinderance to recycling. A dressing gown with "Lucy" on it is heading straight for landfill rather than the charity shop.

Some amazing ideas on here, wish we could implement many of them immediately, seems so obvious to us why isn't it to government?

It would be a brave government that restricted people to flying under 1000 miles a year. Loads of people have family living more than 1000 miles away. It would help with climate change but there’d be absolute uproar.

Implement a significant tax per tonne on CO2 and other GHG emissions, with a rising amount per tonne.

Use the proceeds to reduce in equality and to invest in lower-carbon energy, transport, buildings and food.

I would invest in the decontamination of slurry and nutrient sharing across farms. Also in preventing coastal erosion and river pollution. I'd ban lights in empty buildings, ration water in each household, make timers of 3 minutes compulsory on showers, ban packaging of all fruit and vegetables and improve public transport. I'd ration petrol (unless essential), ban private jets and lots more.