The public doesn't hate Net Zero as much as RW politicians insist they do

[Echobelly]

Politicians like Kemi Badenoch and right wing newspaper front pages love to talk as though everyone hates Net Zero and sustainability as concepts and wants us to get on with burning coal and drilling for oil. They seem to stake an awful lot on people not like sustainability mostly because they see it as 'woke' as far as I can tell.

I think most people don't think about it enough to hate it really and most people broadly want the outcomes of improved sustainability but would like it to happen without it needing any investment. I reckon some people don't like feeling 'nagged' about saving the environment and in many ways I don't blame them as, while we should all do our bit, really it's up to governments and big businesses to actually do the damn work to truly make a difference.

Maybe Net Zero has a bit of a PR problem as it sounds unachievable, and also maybe it sounds like you get nothing, or something will be taken away from you/society. It might do better to have a name that sounds more 'positive'. But it's a shame because ultimately, even if for some reason you don't believe in climate change it seems to me that the benefits of renewable energy (such as ending energy dependence on some not always friendly countries and less pollution) are pretty clear and I'm not sure people realise it's not just powering a few kettles, it's often around 50% of UK energy production

I think most people would pick policies that enable them to have more money in their pocket. Most are happy with the concept in abstract, but when it starts creating a hindrance to their life in some way they won’t prioritise net zero. Heck look how irate paper straws make people. I think RW politicians are correct in their assumption.

What does that actually mean though that we just don't talk about it because it's, 'complex'.

That is a minor issue. It can be encased in concrete underground, or in the middle of a desert.

I agree with Kemi and the best move Burnham has made is removing that swivel eyed loon Milliband as energy and net zero minister

You don't speak for me or anyone I know, thank you very much 😊

There aren’t any deserts in Britain.

Last time I was in Eskdale (a year or two ago) there were posters against having a nuclear dump there.

Storing radioactive waste is not cheap.

Thank you

I’ve always thought it would be good to start with social housing with insulation / solar panels etc. to establish the market & make it affordable for everyone else.

Agree with this. Net Zero is a PR stunt. One that isn’t working.

At the end of the day, people will vote for what they want, so if the Right wing are wrong, they will suffer at the ballot box and if they are correct, they will reap the benefits at the ballot box.

So the argument is it’s ok for you to contribute to climate change because you will only cause a few more deaths compared to a county with a much bigger population?

and are you attributing all of chinas emissions to the Chinese population when it’s you buying the goods they make ? But that’s only a few more deaths what does it matter ?

tragedy of the commons - everyone is convinced they personally have such a small impact that everyone dies of starvation through over grazing

“There aren’t any deserts in Britain.”
Surely you can make the leap that we can send it to a desert?

There are roughly 450 nuclear reactors around the world, they seem to manage the nuclear waste.

Storing waste is not cheap no, nor is having power cuts and an unreliable supply, nor is burning fossil fuels.

Where did I say we shouldn’t talk about it? My point is it’s such a complicated issue that taking a few strands from social media and extrapolating it to claim “ most people” think X is hugely simplistic.

Swivel eyed 😆 🤣 he gives me the creeps

Net zero, the way we do it, is way too expensive. It is shameful environmental vandalism to continue this way.

For parochial political reasons we choose to reduce small amounts of carbon in the UK rather than large amounts overseas, for the same money.

The UK is an expensive country which is already relatively carbon efficient. You mention heat pumps: £1000 buys about 3-5 tonnes of carbon abatement if spent on UK heat pumps, or 150-300 tonnes if spent substituting bio-fuel burning in SE Asia.

Which do you think we would be doing, if we cared about the environment or warming rather than presentation?

I support net zero (indeed, I support net negative), which is why I think most of our net zero policies need to be scrapped.

We are just a small part of the world population. If we take steps towards reducing our carbon footprint it should be by importing less especially foods out of season and being more self sufficient as a country including self sufficient in energy production that includes north sea gas until it is gone

And then when they get their right wing government do you really think they will spend money saving the British population? Food security, water security, fuel, protection from flood and heat?

have you any idea how much that would cost in a 3 degree warmer world ?

the dystopian future novels with only a few humans left scouring the devastated planet ? That becomes very likely at those kind of temperatures

head in the sand again everyone get those heads back in the sand . just like Brexit - so many thought that would lead to us being better off and yet even though we have had the most right wing governments ever we still are less well off

and more at risk from climate change as a result

it’s so terribly sad.

The UK may not be directly responsible for much of the global emissions, but we consume so many of the goods that higher polluting countries produce that we are indeed responsible. It is foolish and simplistic to say oh, this is on China. They wouldn’t be making those goods for export if we weren’t buying them.

I think far too many people are short sighted about this issue. Global warming is a very real threat and our children’s futures are at real risk. Is that really worth damaging for the sake of slightly lower bills? Especially when investment now will result in lower bills in the future as well as a safer and more habitable world?

Politicians and parties who ignore this care only about power and what they can gain in the short term. I think that is dangerous and stupid.

I would also ban cryptocurrencies which require a huge amount of energy

They just hate the affects achieving it has on the cost of living.

Let me check whether you are also a head-in-sand person:

If you became convinced that we could 50x the amount of carbon reduction we do, for the same money, by redirecting that money to the best overseas projects, would you support making that switch? It would mean cancelling most of the UK’s net zero activities.

In fact let’s be very conservative: let’s say it’s a 10x efficient improvement.

We need cheap energy

As does streaming tik tok videos or watching YouTube.

For me the problem with renewables (great idea when we are surrounded by water and some areas are very windy) is that our aging infrastructure is not set up to cope with it. That should have been addressed first. Get the grid up to spec then hook up the wind farms, solar farms and any tidal production. Currently anything produced by renewables has to be used pretty much as soon as its generated because the current grid can't store it.

Yes new homes should be built with the latest carbon reducing heat pumps etc but I think people object to being told that they can only buy expensive tumble driers (when money is tight and often it will be bought in a hurry when the previous one dies), that they will have to own an EV even though the infrastructure isn't in place for that to be sensible for their life and that the wealthy person telling us this uses private jets and doesn't drive around in an electric car.....

YANBU, particularly the younger generations.

Aside from the fact Kemi is behaving like a dictator- you can no longer be a Conservative candidate if you don’t agree to abandoning net zero carbon policies and to withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyrjnwe8xlo

Shapes was about one of the only Tories I liked and one of the few with half a brain and a foot in the real world. Clearly the Tory party is no longer a party for those that aren’t far right, who care about the burning planet or human and women’s rights.

There’s huge money and interest being persuading us that oil and coal are good for the economy and that green options are bad for it. It’s very hard to see through the propaganda to the truth without going away and doing tonnes of research. Even if you do the research online, it’s hard for most people to judge what research is genuine and what is funded by financial interests.