How do u vote for change though. Both main parties push near enough the same agenda. Unfortunately Reform are unlikely to be serious contenders. (Not meaning to start a political discussion, just questioning how the heck can people realistically vote for change).
What do you want to change? The fact we have reduced these things by more than nearly every country? We are way down the list for polluters, responsible for less than some smaller countries. We could shut the UK down tomorrow and it would make no difference as both China and India are each building over 50 new coal fired power stations. Germany responsible for more emissions both as a country and per capita than the UK is expanding mining operations.,Canadanper capita is twice that of the UK.
There are more options than labour, tories and reform. It irritates me that we complain there are no alternatives to the usual two, whilst ignoring the alternatives. But maybe we’re heading into politics here.
As a country, we can only do our best and set the best example and put pressure on others to follow our lead. What we are doing is better than others, but still nowhere near enough. If every country waited for everyone else to do their bit before acting, nobody does anything. It’s called procrastination.
Follow our lead? We are an insignificant little country with no standing. Or so Remainers and others claim. How about all these protestors demonstrating in the countries causing the most pollution? We all know why they don’t.
Each remainer wanted to stay in the EU for their own personal reason, the same as leavers wanted to leave the EU for their own personal reasons. How many times have people claimed that leavers are racist because those making the allegation felt that leaving was immigration led, when in fact leavers had all sorts of reasons for wanting to leave the EU not related to immigration. Well the same stands for remainers, who are a diverse bunch. It’s difficult to bunch people’s voting habits together into one opinion.
Many of the measures advocated are liable to have a negative impact on the environment over all, and will cause more harm than good to people on the planet. There are a lot of people hiding behind poor science, and others repeating some of the nonsense as if it is factual. Reading the information that underpins the IPCC reports can often be a shock to those people, as a fair amount is misrepresented in the actual reports as they are political rather than scientific.
In his most recent report as Chief Medical Officer, he is turning his attention to air quality, and the report contains some misuse of data, including using mortality data in a way that those that produced it in the first place explicitly say it shouldn't be used. Khan does the same thing for London, for much the same reasons.
Now here is a young lady who is an inspiration.Truly amazing. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...s-Girl-13-built-camps-using-hair-ribbons.html
Yes, it's a fantastic story, on a par with the Chilean miners and the Thai footballers, etc. If the kids had been injured in the crash or if they hadn't been indigenous the outcome would likely have been different.
Are you saying a Chardonnay from England would, not gave coped? Given how some of them going into meltdown if they break a fingernail or if they internet connection is slow the answer is probably not.
No one denies climate change. If the data is to be believed it's been happening since the planet came into being. But the questions for those demanding we stop it are 1) what is the right climate ? And 2) how is it possible to maintain this 'right' climate for the length of human existence on the planet? Where I live, the range of temperatures last year were from -27°c to +31°c. How is an estimated 'catastrophic' 1.5°c increase in 50 years time going to make that much of a difference? I completely understand more sustainable living, recycling, lower natural resource usage, removal of plastics from the oceans and food chain, protection of natural habitats etc. But increasing tax in Europe to stop climate change, whilst offshoring manufacturing to India and China doesn't make sense. Governments could stop all plane travel and importation of manufactured goods tomorrow if they really wanted and it really was an emergency, but I don't see how they can stop volcanoes from erupting and the sun's rays. It's just another reason to whip up fear, control populations, engender guilt in developed nations and an excuse to increase taxes on working ppl, whilst a global elite gain further and further.
