Topic: Climate Emergency is already here. How much worse it gets is still up to us (?)

[Jwils21]

Just saw a video of a woman in tears begging the Insulate Britain dickheads to move out of the road. Completely awful way to get a message across, nobody is going to take them seriously and all they’ve done is turn people away from their cause. Absolute failure of a protest, got people talking for the wrong reasons.

[jonnypb]

Paramedics literally begging them to move so they can get their ambulance through and they keep on blocking it.

It’s appalling, if these protesters won’t even move when an ambulance driver is begging them to move so that the ambulance can get through, then it just shows what low life scum these people are. There’s ways and means to protest and to make yourself heard, this isn’t one of them.

The old bill really should just pepper spray the fuckers.

At the minimum….. then leave them lying on the side and say sorry we can’t get you any medical attention because your dick head friends have blocked the road.

[CraigDS]

Wonder where Red Soldier is at the moment with his Tory name calling insults? Few of us you need to call it now it seems.

[Buggy Eyes Alfredo]

3 hours after it waa detected, oil is leaking out out of the pipeline devasting Huntington Beach and the surriounding areas.

[Sudden Death Draft Loser]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/28/eu-lawmakers-vote-prolong-fossil-fuel-gas-subsidies?fbclid=IwAR1A_RpNObYJziiAXkpvekgZz_V7FCTZvn-Y0J6iN-SoFImMF1iB5dqcqsU

[clinical]

One good thing to come of high energy prices is people are more careful with how much they use and are more efficient with their energy usage. Which in turn reduces CO2 emissions. It was never sustainable to be heating homes to 27C and walking around in t-shirts mid winter.

[Sudden Death Draft Loser]

One good thing to come of high energy prices is people are more careful with how much they use and are more efficient with their energy usage. Which in turn reduces CO2 emissions. It was never sustainable to be heating homes to 27C and walking around in t-shirts mid winter.

I've often thought that energy is too cheap anyway. For example the average cost of doing a load of washing the UK is around 25 pence, just think of the time and effort needed to hand wash your laundry.

[clinical]

I've often thought that energy is too cheap anyway. For example the average cost of doing a load of washing the UK is around 25 pence, just think of the time and effort needed to hand wash your laundry.

It's far too cheap for what it is really is and what it does to the environment currently. Far too much is wasted. Like shops who keep lights on all night still. I understood in the past for security but there's no good reason to now. Light sensors exist and are reliable as well as good night vision security cameras.

[CraigDS]

I mean it’s all well and good saying this as people who can afford the energy. But try and think from people who are going to struggle to heat their family home, wash their kids school clothes and let them get daily hot showers.

[clinical]

I mean it’s all well and good saying this as people who can afford the energy. But try and think from people who are going to struggle to heat their family home, wash their kids school clothes and let them get daily hot showers.

They need to be helped, by the government.

[Nobby Reserve]

How about an annual cap on domestic energy usage for people?

I mean, all those huge mansions owned by multi-millionaires, with swimming pools to heat, etc, should be targetted.


 

[killer-heels]

I mean it’s all well and good saying this as people who can afford the energy. But try and think from people who are going to struggle to heat their family home, wash their kids school clothes and let them get daily hot showers.

Government should be helping them.

But yeah, immigrants.

[clinical]

How about an annual cap on domestic energy usage for people?

I mean, all those huge mansions owned by multi-millionaires, with swimming pools to heat, etc, should be targetted.


 

I think big domestic users should have increased VAT on usage. They pay less per kWh than low users when you take into account standing charge. It's wrong.

[Red-Soldier]

Biodiversity loss risks 'ecological meltdown' - scientists

The UK is one of the world's most nature-depleted countries - in the bottom 10% globally and last among the G7 group of nations, new data shows.

It has an average of about half its biodiversity left, far below the global average of 75%, a study has found.

A figure of 90% is considered the "safe limit" to prevent the world from tipping into an "ecological meltdown", according to researchers.

The assessment was released ahead of a key UN biodiversity conference.

Biodiversity is the variety of all living things on Earth and how they fit together in the web of life, bringing oxygen, water, food and countless other benefits.

Prof Andy Purvis, research leader at the Natural History Museum in London, said biodiversity is more than something beautiful to look at.

"It's also what provides us with so many of our basic needs," he told BBC News.

"It's the foundation of our society. We've seen recently how disruptive it can be when supply chains break down - nature is at the base of our supply chains."

The new tool for assessing biodiversity, known as the Biodiversity Intactness Index, estimates the percentage of natural biodiversity that remains across the world and in individual countries.

The UK's low position in the league table is linked to the industrial revolution, which transformed the landscape, the researchers said.

The UK has seen relatively stable biodiversity levels over recent years, albeit at a "really low level," team researcher Dr Adriana De Palma explained in a news briefing.

The assessment was released on the eve of the UN Biodiversity Conference, COP 15, hosted by China, a mega-diverse country with nearly 10% of plant species and 14% of animals on Earth.

World leaders are attending week-long virtual talks seen as pivotal in raising ambition for slowing the loss of nature ahead of face-to-face talks in Kunming, China, in April next year and the climate conference in Glasgow at the end of the month.

 

Andrew Deutz, global policy lead of international conservation charity, the Nature Conservancy, said the gathering momentum behind nature had not come a moment too soon.

"As with the accelerating climate emergency, what happens over the next year will - to a large extent - set humanity's course for the rest of the decade; and what happens this decade is likely to define our prospects for the rest of this century," he said.

At the summit in Kunming - taking place in a two-part format due to pandemic disruption - world leaders will negotiate a framework for protecting nature and species for the next decade.

The draft agreement aims to conserve at least 30% of the world's lands and oceans, but not all countries have signed up.

The global biodiversity framework replaces the plan for the last decade, which missed all 20 targets.

"To play our part, we need the UK to step up and turn our global promises into action at home, to show that we are not going to let another lost decade for nature slip past," said Beccy Speight, chief executive of the RSPB.

Biodiversity is declining faster than at any time in human history. Since 1970, there has been on average almost a 70% decline in the populations of mammals, birds, fish, reptiles and amphibians.

It is thought that one million animal and plant species - almost a quarter of the global total - are threatened with extinction.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58859105

[BarryCrocker]

So now that Murdoch's realised the politicians he has in his pocket are going to get smashed at the next election Australian election he'a all for action on climate change.

News Corp’s climate campaign is a political development with impact
By David Crowe - October 11, 2021 — 7.04pm

Rupert Murdoch’s many critics were savage on Monday after his Australian newspapers staged a spectacular backflip and embraced the need for faster action on climate change.

Newspapers that once warned of a $600 billion cost from cutting emissions now claimed a $2 trillion benefit from doing the same thing.

It was a brazen move to reposition Murdoch’s company, News Corp Australia, on an issue where its strongest voices have warned against action for years. And it came just as Prime Minister Scott Morrison tries to reposition as well.

“Greenwash,” fumed Kevin Rudd. The former Labor prime minister saw the campaign as cover for Morrison and the Liberals to finally adopt a net zero emissions target for 2050. He called it hypocrisy, too, for suddenly celebrating what the papers had railed against when Labor was in charge.

These aren’t the only somersaults ahead of the United Nations summit on climate change in Glasgow next month. The Business Council of Australia (BCA) just called for a cut to greenhouse gas emissions of at least 45 per cent by 2030 – the same target it said would wreck the economy when Labor suggested it at the 2019 election.

No wonder this ignites fury. Australia lost more than a decade on climate change after the Coalition and the Greens combined to block an emissions trading scheme in the Senate in 2009. The country needed a steady policy on a long-term problem and got deadlocks and turmoil instead.

But this is why the shift at News Corp is so significant. It is not a provocation – it is a vindication. One of the most experienced people in the Australian debate, John Connor of the Carbon Market Institute, calls it a tectonic shift. The sceptics have woken up to reality. Connor does not say it, but he and others have won. They have forced that awakening.

News had to change. So did Morrison. So did the BCA.

First, the financial markets expect governments and companies to act on climate change, as Treasurer Josh Frydenberg noted in a speech two weeks ago. Costs can be higher for those who do not act.

Second, consumers also expect action. A Resolve Political Monitor survey last month found 60 per cent of voters support net zero by 2050. Only a foolhardy media company would turn a deaf ear to that sentiment.

A third factor is people in business can see society changing. They know many young people will not work for companies that block action on climate change.

There was no edict at News Corp to tell its strongest voices what to write. Andrew Bolt isn’t changing. In fact, he made a point on Monday of sticking to his guns. The Australian is not part of the campaign, although it endorsed the target of net zero by 2050 in an editorial on Monday.

But the News coverage will be a real force in politics. Morrison can cajole Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce into accepting net zero by 2050 in the knowledge the country’s biggest newspaper publisher will not campaign against the target.

Whether this issue wins votes for Morrison is another matter. Voters with strong views on climate change can see Morrison is a reluctant convert, so they may prefer Labor and the Greens. Morrison may at best neutralise the issue for others.

So the new dynamic is much more than fodder for the media business. It is a political development. It will have a political impact.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/news-corp-s-climate-campaign-is-a-political-development-with-impact-20211011-p58z21.html

[clinical]

It's mad that Australia was burning not long ago and the government there aren't arsed about climate change. They are out of touch just like this government.

[BarryCrocker]

It's mad that Australia was burning not long ago and the government there aren't arsed about climate change. They are out of touch just like this government.

Not just burning to the ground. We've had a record drought, once in a lifetime floods, a mice plague, a dying Great Barrier Reef and temperature records beaten virtually every week during summer.

But. We're also the worlds biggest exporter of coal @ $32b + $27b in petroleum. All of these are from our rural areas, and although very heavily automated in their production they support small country towns who vote for the minor party in the coalition of the current government.

[gazzalfc]

Another set of protests by 'Insulate Britain' this morning.

The usual drivers screaming at them to move, dragging them away only to have them sitting right back in front before they have time to drive on.

Police arrested another 35 people who I assume will just be released on bail this afternoon and will be back again tomorrow morning.

Their tactics are infuriatingly efficient and non-violent. They do cause maximum disruption without becoming physical. Vehicles are starting to move dangerously close to running them over.

Their 'leader' gave Talk Radio a very sarcastic interview last week that I dont think sunk in with their hosts.

It will probably stop when it starts to get colder and those 60-80 year old vicars cant cope with it

[CraigDS]

Any pleas from ambulance drivers for them to move being ignored again this time?

[gazzalfc]

Any pleas from ambulance drivers for them to move being ignored again this time?

Today it was screaming mums getting their kids to school and a few who missed job interviews.

[ChaChaMooMoo]

Can they be charged with manslaughter if someone dies OTW to the hospital?

[OOS]

Can they be charged with manslaughter if someone dies OTW to the hospital?

Not condoning it, but I wouldn't be suprised to see someone get ran over soon. This isn't going to end well. Surely you are better protesting outside goverment buildings anyway?

[Elzar]

They are doing nothing but losing more and more public support every time they do this.

It just comes across as properly thick to me, the videos where they get dragged and just lay on the floor at the side of the road make them seem so absent. I’m yet to hear a good reason they are blocking the public from getting to work, school or anywhere else they are going. If they are this committed go and target something that will affect those that make decisions or something.

[ianburns252]

Another set of protests by 'Insulate Britain' this morning.

The usual drivers screaming at them to move, dragging them away only to have them sitting right back in front before they have time to drive on.

Police arrested another 35 people who I assume will just be released on bail this afternoon and will be back again tomorrow morning.

Their tactics are infuriatingly efficient and non-violent. They do cause maximum disruption without becoming physical. Vehicles are starting to move dangerously close to running them over.

Their 'leader' gave Talk Radio a very sarcastic interview last week that I dont think sunk in with their hosts.

It will probably stop when it starts to get colder and those 60-80 year old vicars cant cope with it

Was that the interview where he said he didn't have insulation and called himself a hypocrite?

That got reported pretty widely but was reported "straight" as opposed to calling it sarcastic or implying that he was not being 100% honest.

[Cruiser]

Looks like these idiots have realised the public backlash and have called off protests for 11 days.

[CraigDS]

Looks like these idiots have realised the public backlash and have called off protests for 11 days.

They’re a bit fucking slow on the uptake if only just realised. Maybe should have rethought it after having paramedics pleading with them. Fucking idiots.

[Cruiser]

They’re a bit fucking slow on the uptake if only just realised. Maybe should have rethought it after having paramedics pleading with them. Fucking idiots.

Maybe they should insulate their heads as nothing seems to be staying in there 

[Red-Soldier]

COP26: Document leak reveals nations lobbying to change key climate report

A huge leak of documents seen by BBC News shows how countries are trying to change a crucial scientific report on how to tackle climate change.

The leak reveals Saudi Arabia, Japan and Australia are among countries asking the UN to play down the need to move rapidly away from fossil fuels.

It also shows some wealthy nations are questioning paying more to poorer states to move to greener technologies.

This "lobbying" raises questions for the COP26 climate summit in November.

The leak reveals countries pushing back on UN recommendations for action and comes just days before they will be asked at the summit to make significant commitments to slow down climate change and keep global warming to 1.5 degrees.

The leaked documents consist of more than 32,000 submissions made by governments, companies and other interested parties to the team of scientists compiling a UN report designed to bring together the best scientific evidence on how to tackle climate change.

These "assessment reports" are produced every six to seven years by the the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN body tasked with evaluating the science of climate change,

These reports are used by governments to decide what action is needed to tackle climate change, and the latest will be a crucial input to negotiations at the Glasgow conference.

The authority of these reports derives in part from the fact that virtually all the governments of the world participate in the process to reach consensus.

The comments from governments the BBC has read are overwhelmingly designed to be constructive and to improve the quality of the final report.

The cache of comments and the latest draft of the report were released to Greenpeace UK's team of investigative journalists, Unearthed, which passed it on to BBC News.
Fossil fuels

The leak shows a number of countries and organisations arguing that the world does not need to reduce the use of fossil fuels as quickly as the current draft of the report recommends.

An adviser to the Saudi oil ministry demands "phrases like 'the need for urgent and accelerated mitigation actions at all scales…' should be eliminated from the report".

One senior Australian government official rejects the conclusion that closing coal-fired power plants is necessary, even though ending the use of coal is one of the stated objectives the COP26 conference.

Saudi Arabia is the one of the largest oil producers in the world and Australia is a major coal exporter.

A senior scientist from India's Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research, which has strong links to the Indian government, warns coal is likely to remain the mainstay of energy production for decades because of what they describe as the "tremendous challenges" of providing affordable electricity. India is already the world's second biggest consumer of coal.

A number of countries argue in favour of emerging and currently expensive technologies designed to capture and permanently store carbon dioxide underground. Saudi Arabia, China, Australia and Japan - all big producers or users of fossil fuels - as well as the organisation of oil producing nations, Opec, all support carbon capture and storage (CCS).

It is claimed these CCS technologies could dramatically cut fossil fuel emissions from power plants and some industrial sectors.

Saudi Arabia, the world's biggest oil exporter, requests the UN scientists delete their conclusion that "the focus of decarbonisation efforts in the energy systems sector needs to be on rapidly shifting to zero-carbon sources and actively phasing out fossil fuels".

Argentina, Norway and Opec also take issue with the statement. Norway argues the UN scientists should allow the possibility of CCS as a potential tool for reducing emissions from fossil fuels.

The draft report accepts CCS could play a role in the future but says there are uncertainties about its feasibility. It says "there is large ambiguity in the extent to which fossil fuels with CCS would be compatible with the 2C and 1.5C targets" as set out by the Paris Agreement.

Australia asks IPCC scientists to delete a reference to analysis of the role played by fossil fuel lobbyists in watering down action on climate in Australia and the US. Opec also asks the IPCC to "delete 'lobby activism, protecting rent extracting business models, prevent political action'."

When approached about its comments to the draft report, Opec told the BBC: "The challenge of tackling emissions has many paths, as evidenced by the IPCC report, and we need to explore them all. We need to utilise all available energies, as well as clean and more efficient technological solutions to help reduce emissions, ensuring no one is left behind."

The IPCC says comments from governments are central to its scientific review process and that its authors have no obligation to incorporate them into the reports.

"Our processes are designed to guard against lobbying - from all quarters", the IPCC told the BBC. "The review process is (and always has been) absolutely fundamental to the IPCC's work and is a major source of the strength and credibility of our reports.

Professor Corinne le Quéré of the University of East Anglia, a leading climate scientist who has helped compile three major reports for the IPCC, has no doubts about the impartiality of the IPCC's reports.

She says all comments are judged solely on scientific evidence regardless of where they come from.

"There is absolutely no pressure on scientists to accept the comments," she told the BBC. "If the comments are lobbying, if they're not justified by the science, they will not be integrated in the IPCC reports."

She says it is important that experts of all kinds - including governments - have a chance to review the science.

"The more the reports are scrutinised", says Professor le Quéré, "the more solid the evidence is going to be in the end, because the more the arguments are brought and articulated forward in a way that is leaning on the best available science".

Christiana Figueres, the Costa Rican diplomat who oversaw the landmark UN climate conference in Paris in 2015, agrees it is crucial that governments are part of the IPCC process.

"Everybody's voice has to be there. That's the whole purpose. This is not a single thread. This is a tapestry woven by many, many threads."

The United Nations was awarded a Nobel Prize in 2007 for the IPCC's work on climate science and the crucial role it has played in the effort to tackle climate change.
Eating less meat

Brazil and Argentina, two of the biggest producers of beef products and animal feed crops in the world, argue strongly against evidence in the draft report that reducing meat consumption is necessary to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

The draft report states "plant-based diets can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 50% compared to the average emission intensive Western diet". Brazil says this is incorrect.

Both countries call on the authors to delete or change some passages in the text referring to "plant-based diets" playing a role in tackling climate change, or which describe beef as a "high carbon" food. Argentina also asked that references to taxes on red meat and to the international "Meatless Monday" campaign, which urges people to forgo meat for a day, be removed from the report.

The South American nation recommends "avoiding generalisation on the impacts of meat-based diets on low carbon options", arguing there is evidence that meat-based diets can also reduce carbon emissions.

On the same theme, Brazil says "plant-based diets do not for themselves guarantee the reduction or control of related emissions" and maintains the focus of debate should be on the levels of emissions from different production systems, rather than types of food.

Brazil, which has seen significant increases in the rate of deforestation in the Amazon and some other forest areas, also disputes a reference to this being a result of changes in government regulations, claiming this is incorrect.
Money for poorer countries

A significant number of Switzerland's comments are directed at amending parts of the report that argue developing countries will need support, particularly financial support, from rich countries in order to meet emission reduction targets.

It was agreed at the climate conference in Copenhagen in 2009 that developed nations would provide $100bn a year in climate finance for developing countries by 2020, a target that has yet to be met.

Chart showing climate finance provided to developing countries

Australia makes a similar case to Switzerland. It says developing countries' climate pledges do not all depend on receiving outside financial support. It also describes a mention in the draft report of the lack of credible public commitments on finance as "subjective commentary".

The Swiss Federal Office for the Environment told the BBC: "While climate finance is a critical tool to increase climate ambition, it is not the only relevant tool.

"Switzerland takes the view that all Parties to the Paris Agreement with the capacity to do so should provide support to those who need such support."
Going nuclear

A number of mostly Eastern European countries argue the draft report should be more positive about the role nuclear power can play in meeting the UN's climate targets.

India goes even further, arguing "almost all the chapters contain a bias against nuclear energy". It argues it is an "established technology" with "good political backing except in a few countries".

The Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia criticise a table in the report which finds nuclear power only has a positive role in delivering one of 17 UN Sustainable Development goals. They argue it can play a positive role in delivering most of the UN's development agenda.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58982445

[BarryCrocker]

An interesting few bits of info from a radio programme I was listening to yesterday.

From Gary Kennedy - Food safety specialist/technologist

90% of all bird biomass on earth is for poultry and egg production.

80% of all mammals are for human consumptions.

75% of all food comes from only 10 animals & 16 plants.

If we created meat in labs we'd cut out the need to produce food to create our food. We'd shrink water and land use as well as the energy to transport it.

[Red-Soldier]

An interesting few bits of info from a radio programme I was listening to yesterday.

From Gary Kennedy - Food safety specialist/technologist

90% of all bird biomass on earth is for poultry and egg production.

80% of all mammals are for human consumptions.

75% of all food comes from only 10 animals & 16 plants.

If we created meat in labs we'd cut out the need to produce food to create our food. We'd shrink water and land use as well as the energy to transport it.

Those numbers are crazy, aren't they.  If people are not moved to reduce their meat consumption by those figures, then I'm not sure what to say to them.

Yep.


Watch this if you can :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/p09w80wb/the-earthshot-prize-repairing-our-planet

[Elmo!]

So a couple of weeks out from COP26, it's looking like Glasgow's bus drivers, railway staff and duty solicitors (who were being told they had t owork weekends with no extra pay to cover the expected rise in arrests) are all going to be on strike.

They've all realised the huge leverage they have. More power to them, and it's great that these workers and the public at large have seen how critical they are over the last 18 months to society - but on the other hand this conference is so critical - almost feels like it is too important for disputes about pay.

https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/19663753.1000-bus-drivers-glasgow-vote-strike-poverty-pay-rise/

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19649674.cop26-no-scotrail-trains-run-rail-workers-strike-union-warns/

https://www.scottishlegal.com/article/cop26-scotland-s-bar-associations-opt-out-of-duty-solicitor-scheme

[Red-Soldier]

New trade deals ‘are unfair on farmers and won’t help emissions’

Chair of the UK’s Climate Change Committee condemns New Zealand and Australia agreements as unworkable

The chairman of the government’s climate change advisory board has condemned trade deals with Australia and New Zealand as “totally offensive” as he warned they would undermine attempts to tackle emissions.

Lord Deben, the former Tory cabinet minister who chairs the Climate Change Committee, said that the agreements were “entirely unacceptable for climate change purposes”. He warned they would damage efforts to ask UK farmers to help consumers shift to eating less meat, but of higher quality.

“I do see that you can do all sorts of things to encourage people to buy better meat, and I think we ought to be,” he told the Observer. “That’s why I’m so deeply opposed – and find totally offensive – the agreements with both Australia and New Zealand, which are entirely unacceptable for climate change purposes.

“You cannot ask farmers to do in this country what we are going to ask them to do and import goods from people who are not [meeting the same standards]. The government promised it wouldn’t do that – and it is doing it. It is entirely against its promise.

“I shall go on fighting until we stop it. There has to be, internationally, standards that enable you to carry through climate change rules.”

Labour has already suggested that the trade deals will allow Australian and New Zealand farmers to undercut their British counterparts with lower animal welfare standards. The National Farmers’ Union (NFU) has warned that the deal agreed in principle with New Zealand “offers nothing in return” to British farmers.

A Department for International Trade spokesperson said both trade deals included “substantive articles on climate change that reaffirm our respective commitments to the Paris agreement and achieving its goals, including limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees”.

They added: “Our approach to negotiations has been committed to securing provisions that will help trade in low-carbon goods and services, support research and development and innovation in green sectors, and maintain our right to regulate in pursuit of decarbonisation.”

In his first intervention since the government unveiled its long-awaited net zero strategy last week, Lord Deben said that plans were comprehensive and the “next step” in delivering targets of cutting emissions by 68% on 1990 levels by 2030, and 78% by 2035. “I don’t think anybody could complain about the ambition,” he said. “But obviously, ambition is one thing – delivery is another.”

The Tory peer called on the government to ask schools, hospitals and the armed forces to cut down on the amount of meat they were using in meals as an example to the public. He said ministers would soon need to “bite this bullet” and find ways to encourage the public to make changes to their diets and lifestyles to help reduce emissions. “The only way through it is to do it through its own procurement,” he said. “I think that rather than saying ‘we ought to eat 20% less meat’, we should be pressing for schools, hospitals, prisons, and the Army, Navy and Air Force to do all those things.

“You do not tell other people to do it – you do it yourself and you tell everybody that you are doing it. That’s probably the way you start to get behaviour change without it being a nanny state situation, in a context where so many people are fed up with being told what to do.”

He said that he was encouraged by £5,000 grants to help people switch to low-carbon heat pumps for home heating, adding that his committee would “come down like a ton of bricks” on the government if its plans to create a better market for cheaper heat pumps failed to drive up demand.

However, he said he was concerned about the failure of the strategy to set out clear plans for restoring peat lands and vegetation that could help draw carbon out of the atmosphere. “We still haven’t had a proper programme for land use,” he said. “You’ve actually got to have trees, you’ve got to have soil. The missing bit of it is the land-use programme.

“We have said that all peat lands have got to be renewed, put back to a proper state, by 2045 if we’re going to meet our net zero commitments.

“At the moment, it’s a pretty pathetic programme. It really isn’t enough.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/23/new-trade-deals-are-unfair-on-farmers-and-wont-help-emissions

[Cruiser]

Looks like the Insulate Wankers are back, this time in the Canary Wharf area.

[Red-Soldier]

Climate crisis: greenhouse gas levels hit new record despite lockdowns, UN reports

The data send a ‘stark’ message to the nations tasked with increasing action at the Cop26 climate summit, UN meteorology chief says

Levels of climate-heating gases in the atmosphere hit record levels in 2020, despite coronavirus-related lockdowns, the UN’s World Meteorological Organization has announced.

The concentration of carbon dioxide, the most important greenhouse gas, is now 50% higher than before the Industrial Revolution sparked the mass burning of fossil fuels. Methane levels have more than doubled since 1750. All key greenhouse gases (GHG) rose faster in 2020 than the average for the previous decade and this trend has continued in 2021, the WMO report found.

The data shows the climate crisis continues to worsen and send a “stark” message to the nations meeting at the Cop26 climate summit in Glasgow in a week’s time, according to WMO chief Prof Petteri Taalas: “We are way off track.”

The negotiators at the summit must deliver action to keep alive the goal of ending GHG emissions by 2050 and avoiding the worst climate impacts. Only stopping emissions will stabilise the levels of the gases and halt the temperature rises that drive the increasing damage from heatwaves, floods and droughts.

“At the current rate of increase in GHG concentrations, we will see a temperature increase by the end of this century far in excess of the Paris Agreement targets of 1.5C to 2C,” said Taalas. “[Rising levels of GHGs] have major negative repercussions for our daily lives and wellbeing, and for the future of our children and grandchildren.”

“It is hoped Cop26 will see a dramatic increase in commitments,” he said. “We need to transform our commitment into action that will have an impact on GHGs. We need to revisit our industrial, energy and transport systems and whole way of life – the needed changes are economically affordable and technically possible. There is no time to lose.”

The burning of coal, oil and gas is the biggest source of CO2, which is the cause of 66% of global heating. CO2 emissions fell by about 5% in 2020 due to Covid restrictions, compared to 2019. But many billions of tonnes of CO2 were still pumped into the atmosphere, meaning the Covid economic slowdown “did not have any discernible impact on the atmospheric levels of GHG and their growth rates”, the WMO said.

About half of the CO2 from human activities remains in the atmosphere, with the other half soaked up by oceans and trees and plants on land. But the WMO warned that global heating is damaging the ability of the natural world to take up emissions with, for example, the Amazon now having flipped from absorbing CO2 to emitting it as wildfires, droughts and logging destroy trees.

Methane accounts for 16% of global heating and the majority of its emissions are caused by human activity such as cattle farming and fossil fuel production. Methane is a potent and relatively short-lived GHG, so cutting emissions has a rapid impact. Ahead of Cop26, the US and EU pledged to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030.

The other major GHG is nitrous oxide, responsible for 7% of global heating. These emissions mostly come from the overuse of chemical fertilisers in farming and cattle manure. The GHG data is collected by the WMO’s Global Atmosphere Watch Programme.

Levels of atmospheric GHGs are higher than ever experienced by the human race, and the highest for 3-5 million years. At that time, global temperature was 2-3C hotter and sea level was 10-20 meters higher than today, said Talaas: “But there weren’t 7.8 billion people then.”

“The true success, or failure, of Cop26 will be written in our skies in the form of greenhouse gas concentrations. This WMO report provides a brutally frank assessment of what’s been written there to date. So far, it’s an epic fail,” said Prof Dave Reay, at the University of Edinburgh.

“The small window of opportunity to stabilise greenhouse gas concentrations at a level that meets the Paris climate goals is about to vanish,” he said. “Will this 26th Cop find success where the previous 25 have fallen short? Our atmosphere will bear witness.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/25/climate-crisis-greenhouse-gas-levels-hit-new-record-un-reports

[TSC]

Looking good for the hosts of COP26

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-59040538

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59039155

[Red-Soldier]

The government has been blamed for failing to reduce demand for flying and meat-eating as part of its plans to rein in climate change.

The Climate Change Committee advisory body says ministers also have not shown how to achieve their ambition of cutting the demand for road travel.

It warns a “techno-centric” approach to cutting emissions adopted by the prime minister has a high risk of failure.

But a report from the committee praised the government's Net Zero Strategy.

A government spokeswoman welcomed the CCC’s generally positive response to the Net Zero Strategy and said it would meet all its climate change goals.

Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson has regularly promised that climate change can be tackled without what he calls “hairshirtery”.

Many experts agree technology is needed but say behaviour must change too.

They judge that the demand for high-carbon activities must be cut for the UK to meet climate targets in the 2030s.

The report from the CCC - an independent body advising the UK and devolved governments on emissions targets - comes ahead of the COP26 climate summit which will be held in Glasgow from Sunday.

    What does net zero mean?
    Obstacles to UK government's net zero plans

It says: "There is less emphasis on reducing demand for high carbon activities than in the CCC's scenarios.

"The government does not include an explicit ambition on diet change, or reductions in the growth of aviation, and policies for managing travel demand have not been developed to match the funding that has been committed."

The committee added: "These remain valuable options with major co-benefits and can help manage delivery risks around a techno-centric approach. They must be explored further with a view to early action."

The government’s over-arching Net Zero climate plans unveiled last week showed how almost every sector of the economy should virtually eliminate planet-heating carbon emissions by 2050.

But on the eve of the Budget the committee warns that the Treasury still lacks policies to cut emissions.

It has not explained, for instance, how finances can be raised for a massive investment in clean electricity, or how a great home insulation programme will be prompted and supported.

The committee said: "Currently vague plans must be quickly pinned down for improving home energy efficiency for the 60% of UK households that are owner-occupiers but not in fuel poverty."

More policies are needed, too, to curb emissions from land use and farming, it says.

The criticisms are tempered by praise for the sweeping nature of the government’s Net Zero Strategy, which is thought to be the first in the world to demonstrate how emissions can be cut across the board.

The report says the strategy is achievable and affordable, and will create many jobs.

CCC chairman Lord Deben said: “This is a genuine step forward. The UK was the first major industrialised nation to set Net Zero into law – now we have policy plans to get us there.

“Ministers have made the big decisions – to decarbonise the power sector by 2035, to phase out petrol and diesel vehicles, to back heat pumps for homes.

“They have proposed policies to do it. I applaud their ambition but now they must deliver these goals and fill in the remaining gaps in funding and implementation.”

This may prove easier said than done, because there is currently a gulf between the government’s climate promises and its achievements.

The CCC recently judged that ministers had only achieved around a fifth of the carbon cuts needed to meet previous climate targets.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-59045851

[RainbowFlick]

I don't necessarily agree with Insulate Britain's methods mainly because it impacts workers the most, as opposed to governments or corporations, but it's really bizarre how many people are just calling for violent acts or heavy-handed policing to be done on these people.

Priti Patel is looking smugly as people start viewing protestors as a hindrance and nuisance.

Ultimately what they're protesting for is right - calling for them to be battered on the street or running them over with a Range Rover is very questionable behaviour.

People were similarly questioning the methods used for BLM protests too, don't forget.

[CraigDS]

People were similarly questioning the methods used for BLM protests too, don't forget.

Not sure I ever saw BLM protestors knowingly block a road as paramedics pleaded with them to move so they could get their ambulance through.

[SouthDerryLaggo]

https://twitter.com/ClareHymer/status/1452948034220867595?s=20

good god this is great

[TSC]

Another day another u-turn.

https://news.sky.com/story/environment-bill-government-u-turn-over-water-firms-dumping-raw-sewage-after-fierce-backlash-12445328