Net-zero — a dangerous trap


https://apple.news/AzFahSUbjTOm5hVQwab2Zbw (Non-Apple folk can still click through to read).

A long thought provoking article illustrating the insufficiencies of the current widely accepted ideas…

What do you think?


16 replies

Good article @25 quid 

A long read. If anyone can’t make it all the way through, here’s the conclusion:

The time has come to voice our fears and be honest with wider society. Current net zero policies will not keep warming to within 1.5°C because they were never intended to. They were and still are driven by a need to protect business as usual, not the climate. If we want to keep people safe then large and sustained cuts to carbon emissions need to happen now. That is the very simple acid test that must be applied to all climate policies. The time for wishful thinking is over.

 

We need to do more. Now. 

Userlevel 7
Badge +9

Exactly what Greta was saying in the documentary 👍👍👍👏

The US pledge and gathering of world leaders on climate change happening today (right now in fact) is fascinating. 

Too little, too late! But better than nothing?

Too little, too late! But better than nothing?

I don't think it's too late, we just have to step things up.

This might also include switching energy tariffs - https://www.uswitch.com/gas-electricity/green-energy/green-accreditation/ (This accreditation scheme from Uswitch is a useful tool).

The question for me is: can I afford Good Energy's prices? Can I afford not to?

Userlevel 7
Badge +11

As David Milliband said today the use of carrots rather than sticks is preferable.

Too little, too late! But better than nothing?

I don't think it's too late, we just have to step things up.

This might also include switching energy tariffs - https://www.uswitch.com/gas-electricity/green-energy/green-accreditation/ (This accreditation scheme from Uswitch is a useful tool).

The question for me is: can I afford Good Energy's prices? Can I afford not to?

Interesting, but it seems Good Energy is the only one they have assessed. Where would PP appear?

 

 

Interesting, but it seems Good Energy is the only one they have assessed. Where would PP appear?

Most 100% renewable tariffs have been assessed. PP's is Bronze, like most.

I’m struggling to find that list @DJGShef, any hints (links)?

Hi @25 quid I believe that @DJGShef is referring to Uswitch. They’ve published a tariff ‘accreditation’.

 

Here is the PP response:

 

 

We welcome Uswitch’s move to showcase green tariffs more clearly on its website. However, we think the scheme that’s launched isn’t as clear as it could be and it has the potential to confuse. We hope Uswitch makes improvements to its accreditation scheme.

It fails to make crystal clear that all green electricity suppliers, like ourselves, have to follow the exact same rules imposed by our industry regulator, Ofgem. Our electricity is classified as renewable, as is every other green provider’s, only if and because it is certified with REGOs. There is nothing else that makes electricity green, or indeed any supplier’s electricity more green than any other.

All green suppliers have to follow the same rules – it’s these that make electricity green – and yet Uswitch thinks this is of bronze standard. 

Interestingly, Uswitch does not recognise carbon offset gas as part of its bronze classification, which we find strange.

Its silver and gold categories focus to a large degree on accounting practices regarding the procurement of electricity – not actually whether electricity is legally certified was green – which we find more confusing.

Finally, we think Members buy more than just a tariff; people buy into a supply company’s ethos and brand values. All our tariffs are 100% renewable and fully carbon offset as standard, without exception. A supplier elsewhere could get a gold for one tariff – allowing it to garner some publicity, perhaps – while all its other tariffs are traditional fossil-powered.

We’re a Which Recommended Provider 2020 & 2021; we’re a signatory to the United Nations Global Compact; we’re a Living Wage and Disability Confident employer. While these don’t make our electricity any greener, or gas any cleaner, we think they’re also worth considering when choosing a supplier.

Thanks @Marc it’s good that PP have considered this and are looking at it.

Perhaps we need a better accreditation scheme but also a stepping up of suppliers’ offers in terms of procurement and investment in renewables. I know this topic has been widely discussed in the Community already but the transition to Net Zero (and ideally, real Zero) needs a continual process of improvement and innovation.

It’s great that other energy suppliers are investing directly in renewables, it’s also important that government and businesses invest too (you could argue that Good Energy is simply a means for their energy customers to invest - after all, it’s their customers’ money). 

No worries @DJGShef 

It’s great that other energy suppliers are investing directly in renewables, it’s also important that government and businesses invest too 

Yes, couldn’t agree more. I attended a renewable energy conference call just this morning - called Sustainability and the future of Energy (see link added) - which had some interesting people talking about just this, among much else.

There’s a sense of lots of people do lots of things to tackle the climate crisis, inc us and other suppliers and of course a lot of other ‘players’ in digital technology, academia, in government. There’s no single over-arching plan, however.

This morning’s roundtable event (which was only an hour long and the page I linked to has a recording of it) covered a lot. Some are concerned about the lack of agonstic technology (stuff doesn’t talk to eachother) and others spoke of a need for the Government to provide policy frameworks.

Creating accreditation schemes out of the blue is a good example of this, I think. (That’s my view, not PP’s!) The intentions are all good but there’s some many voices trying to out talk each other. Organisations are trying to ‘own’ the space, and make some money with it. People are pointing fingers, creating a bit of confusion.

The intention’s probably good, however. Because people care. It’s a human trait, I think.

But the worse global warming gets, the risk (I worry) is that people get shoutier, they latch on to stronger views and so cause more division.

It’s a bit like food. If I state here that I’m vegan and list the reasons why, and let’s say that you’re not a vegan, there’s automatically a division. And so ill will, finger pointing, more divisions. Sides are taken. 

Oh, you seem to have got me started!

 

I’ve read that Uswitch info and it left me confused as you suggest was the risk. I suspect there is going to be a lot more confusion to come as organisations try to claim their slice of the low carbon pie.

On a related note about the dangers of ‘burn now, plant later.’


There aren’t enough trees in the world to offset society’s carbon emissions – and there never will be (theconversation.com)

Surely we must eat less meat to have cows and bulls breaking less wind? That might apply to humans of course.

Modern approaches to life, habits and consumption have raced ahead without regard to the natural order of things that has existed for millions of years. Restore that and people will be healthier, they won’t get fat and the atmosphere will be cleaner. A hundred years ago, or even less, we were not quite aware how much harm our development was causing. We know now and on the whole if people used common sense we will succeed in ensuring our grandchildren have a good planet to live on. Problem is sense is not common and there are an awful lot of people who just don’t have the mentality to understand or want to change, only to whinge a lot and believe everything they read regardless. To change that means looking at the day a pupil starts school and ensuring the schooling is adequate to ensure proper cognitive ability. Even then some just don’t have it but those that do need to help those that don’t if possible. Sadly this is idealism. But good education can help. I am not sure we have that at present across the whole of the country.

Userlevel 7
Badge +9

Surely we must eat less meat to have cows and bulls breaking less wind? That might apply to humans of course.

 

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

🏃‍♀️💨💨💨💨💨💨💨💨💨💨💨💥💥💥

#fartqueen

Reply