Net Zero ?

[Observer II]

Having already concluded that the insane drive by Western Nations to reduce their standard of living by reductions in CO2 emissions,  as all we are doing is transfering responsibilty for the emissions that produce our goods, to the likes of China.   However, it was thought, that China too, would be reducing their emissions too. Alas no longer the case; having encouraged the West to embark on this route to economic suicide, China has announce that it is to abandon any "net zero" targets.   This means that they can continue to pollute the planet, whilst using cheap energy sources, to produce the products that we rely on.    So much for inter-global dependency.    

[Bill]

Try looking at this another way.

If a giant meteorite was predicted to hit the earth twenty years from now and the scientists say the only way to avoid a worldwide disaster would be for every country to build the biggest most expensive ever missile to shoot it down, what would we do if China said they don’t believe it?

 

Bill 😊

[Observer II]

Not a good analogy Bill;   it's about emissions into our atmosphere and their effects on future climates,  there are still scientists who dispute the global warming hypothesis, and some who suggest the opposite - that the planet will get colder due to the Mankevitch cycle.  However, I doubt the Chinese are thinking about it in that way; what they see is an opportunity to secure global economic dominance through pragmatism,   while everyone else jumps on the climate change bandwagon and sabotages their own economies.       

[Bill]

I think it’s an excellent analogy Obs. The main question you raised in your opening remarks was essentially if it was worth us doing anything if the likes of China was doing the opposite. Whether the threat comes from a giant meteorite or global warming, there’s always going to be some differences in scientific opinion especially when the outcome is unknown and years away.

Nobody can be 100% certain when it comes to the future, but I think it’s wiser to listen to what the vast majority of scientist say, especially when we can see change happening. The question is how much are we prepared to sacrifice right now for something that’s so far away and not even certain? If we say we’ll do something provided everyone else does the same then we’ll achieve nothing.

I liken it to saving up for some future event where we gradually change to way we do things to achieve this. We don’t go starving ourselves in the process and we don’t need to save as much if unexpected events make it too difficult, but we do it even if others don't. At the end of the day if things as you say do go cooler then at least our children will have a cleaner and healthier environment

 

Bill 😊

[Observer II]

But it requires EVERYONE to act;  a better analogy would be a room full of non-smokers, with one or two chain smokers in the corner, the smoke still fills the room and everyone gets the smoke.   I think our current emissions are around 2%, compared to China of over 40% ;   they still rely on fossil fuels to supply the energy to make our I-phones etc, so anyone buying Chinese products is aiding and abetting pollution, hence net-zero hypocracy.    Meanwhile, we'll become de-industrialised as our energy becomes too expensive.   

[Bill]

No, it doesn’t require everyone to get onboard, it’d be better if it that was the case but that’s never going to happen.

Think about your own smoking analogy. If one person in a room smoked, are you seriously suggesting that the rest of the room are wasting their time stopping? That’s rather like suggesting we’re all completely wasting our time sticking to the speed limit just as long as someone else drives over the limit.

Anyway, analogies aside, net zero is just the name of the target. It’s completely impossible to achieve with or without 100% support so the best we can hope for is to get as close to it as we can without getting silly about it.

 

Bill 😊

[Evil Sid]

1 hour ago, Observer II said:

 they still rely on fossil fuels to supply the energy to make our I-phones etc, so anyone buying Chinese products is aiding and abetting pollution, hence net-zero hypocracy. 

But the problem is a bit more complex than that obs. nearly everything you buy that is electronic has some part of it that is of Chinese origin, be it a microchip or the plastic case. This has been so for many years because of the "cheapness" of components made in china.

Climates change it is a fact. How much is  due to human's and how much is due to "normal" effects is what seems to me to be up for debate. Pick your experts to suit your view is the popular argument.

[Observer II]

I read a lot about human evolution, Homo Erectus etc;   and what's striking is the way our climate has alternated between hot and cold, with glacial periods causing lower sea levels etc.   So climate change is nothing new to the planet.   In order for society to progress technologically, requires energy;   and frankly, the amount of energy on offer from wind and solar is pitiful, likewise battery storage capacity.  Now I can think of better options for green energy, such as wave, tidal and hydro, and meantime nuclear. But to have a productive industrial base, we will need secure and nationally sourced energy; so we don't depend on foreign sources.   The green fanatics are taking us down the road to economic poverty, which will be shouldered by the Plebs.     😠

[Confused52]

18 hours ago, Observer II said:

Having already concluded that the insane drive by Western Nations to reduce their standard of living by reductions in CO2 emissions,  as all we are doing is transfering responsibilty for the emissions that produce our goods, to the likes of China.   However, it was thought, that China too, would be reducing their emissions too. Alas no longer the case; having encouraged the West to embark on this route to economic suicide, China has announce that it is to abandon any "net zero" targets.   This means that they can continue to pollute the planet, whilst using cheap energy sources, to produce the products that we rely on.    So much for inter-global dependency.    

Obs, I cannot find any such story about Chinese emissions of recent origin. There has been a recent inference that the target to overtake the USA GDP is de-emphasized. Can you point to the story with which you started this thread?

[Observer II]

Got it from Tousi on Youtube.  

[Confused52]

1 hour ago, Observer II said:

Got it from Tousi on Youtube.  

Thanks. So having looked, he got it from the Net Zero Watch twitter account. Now Net Zero Watch is the name of the re-branded Glabal Warming Policy Foundation with Benny Peiser (ex Liverpool Uni as a director) and Deputy Director Andrew Montford, formerly of the Bishop Hill website. These are well known sceptics of Climate Change but they do not make things up. The Tweet actually suggests that China will give priority to energy security rather than rush for Net Zero. However that is not a policy change and they are not giving up on net zero at all. Indeed the plan from 2020 which so pleased the Western Net Zero thickos is unchanged as made clear in the Chinese article (in English) Climate change: China’s Xi Jinping affirms net-zero commitment while touting coal’s near-term value for energy security | South China Morning Post (scmp.com)

As this shows there is now official buy in which makes that plan more certain not less. You have set us all rambling on based on the lack of reading skill of a fellow on You Tube who can't be bothered to check his facts.

[Observer II]

Think it's a matter of whether you trust the Chinese or not;  at best they've lagged behind the West on net zero, still using coal & oil;  at worst, when they secure an economic advantage they'll be less inclined to follow the West into self harming their economy.   😑

[Evil Sid]

Inscrutable those Chinese or is that the Japanese.....🤔

[Observer II]

Well, hypocracy seems to be the common thread for the woke liberal elite,  jetting to Sharm el Shiek, on their virtue signalling missions, leaving a huge wake of CO2 behind them; then telling the Plebs not to fly or drive.     😠