• UK to set new emissions target of reducing CO2 emissions by 57% by 2032
    22 replies, posted
[QUOTE]A world-leading climate change target up to the early 2030s is set to be confirmed by the British government. Ministers are expected to announce that the UK will cut carbon emissions by 57% by 2032, from 1990 levels. The announcement will help reassure the investors needed to overhaul the UK's ageing energy system. The energy industry will be relieved after cuts in renewables subsidies and the vote to leave the EU, which influences so much of the UK's energy. [/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-36669248"]Source[/URL] Honestly surprised the government wants to do anything about climate change if it's leaving the EU.
Why 57%? It seems very specific.
[QUOTE=NeonpieDFTBA;50620870]Why 57%? It seems very specific.[/QUOTE] The goal is a specific number, not a percentage but they use percentages because people understand percentages. Let's say my country emits 235 metric tons of carbon each year, and I want to reduce it to 100 metric tons of carbon. It would be a 57% reduction.
Going to need a lot more nuclear if they want to reach that.
[QUOTE=ksenior;50620958]Going to need a lot more nuclear if they want to reach that.[/QUOTE] There's two new nuclear power stations being considered. If both are built they will double the current nuclear power output on the grid right now. In the article it says housing, agriculture, and transport are growing in emissions so expect the focus to be on those areas I guess. 100% electric transportation by 2032 lets go UK!
[QUOTE=Morgen;50620976]There's two new nuclear power stations being considered. If both are built they will double the current nuclear power output on the grid right now. In the article it says housing, agriculture, and transport are growing in emissions so expect the focus to be on those areas I guess. 100% electric transportation by 2032 lets go UK![/QUOTE] Two new plants can't be more than 7GW all up. That's simply not enough.
[QUOTE=ksenior;50621045]Two new plants can't be more than 7GW all up. That's simply not enough.[/QUOTE] It's enough to take coal off the UK grid completely though. It might even be enough to shut down the gas plants at night in the summer if there's enough wind. It's a fairly significant step forward even if we are still dependant on gas plants, at least they are much cleaner than coal plants. Electrification of transport is probably more significant though since that's still growing emission wise + tons of NOx from diesel cars in cities.
Good luck with that, I'm really not confident about our ability to achieve much of anything with all that's happened and predicted to happen as of late.
It'll never happen but if a large chunk of the country went vegetarian therefore cutting down the amount of beef cattle we rear it'd go along way in making that figure.
[QUOTE=ratman;50622806]It'll never happen but if a large chunk of the country went vegetarian therefore cutting down the amount of beef cattle we rear it'd go along way in making that figure.[/QUOTE] Fuck that shit, dead animals taste sooooooo good.
[QUOTE=ratman;50622806]It'll never happen but if a large chunk of the country went vegetarian therefore cutting down the amount of beef cattle we rear it'd go along way in making that figure.[/QUOTE] Or just eat less meat in general, don't have to be vegetarian to do that. [editline]1st July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Cocacoladude;50622821]Fuck that shit, dead animals taste sooooooo good.[/QUOTE] What an intelligent and nuanced viewpoint.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50622825]Or just eat less meat in general, don't have to be vegetarian to do that.[/QUOTE] Or, consume the same amount of meat, but encourage the consumption of animals like goats and sheep. They're relatively lower on the maintenance scale, and they can produce both meat, milk and goods for clothing.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;50622841]Or, consume the same amount of meat, but encourage the consumption of animals like goats and sheep. They're relatively lower on the maintenance scale, and they can produce both meat, milk and goods for clothing.[/QUOTE] If we're going to go down this line of reasoning we might as well all eat insects. I'm not even joking, they're a great source of protein, very easy to cultivate, and some of them taste pretty good too. Western consumers just need to get over their fear of consuming them, and the media needs to stop portraying insects as exotic Oriental foods.
I have a feeling we'll reach these targets through meat becoming widely unavailable, powerplants shutting down and just in general the public at large being unable to afford to run many of the electrical things in the same way, that said that leaves plenty of time for people to have solar panels put in and for innovation to provide more power plants so we can continue to grow. It feels like throwing empty promises at this time though, it's probably not going to be enough and not in time.
[QUOTE=ratman;50622806]It'll never happen but if a large chunk of the country went vegetarian therefore cutting down the amount of beef cattle we rear it'd go along way in making that figure.[/QUOTE] While it might help I think it's probably unnecessary. We can make the process of managing cattle a bit more environmentally friendly. It's hard to get people to change their habits for the sake of the environment, especially if the suggestion you are making is worse than the current one.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50622825] What an intelligent and nuanced viewpoint.[/QUOTE] Yes. Almost as intelligent as suggesting a significant amount of people should change their diet to combat climate change.
[QUOTE=Enola;50622993]Yes. Almost as intelligent as suggesting a significant amount of people should change their diet to combat climate change.[/QUOTE] Let me quote ratman's post: "if a large chunk of the country went vegetarian". Note the "if". He was arguing that having more people go vegetarian is good for the environment, which it is. He didn't say anything about whether people should or shouldn't go vegetarian, but of course people like Cocacoladude can't understand this and immediately take it as an attack on their personal choices and get all pissy and reactionary about it. That is what I can't stand.
To be honest I'm talking about greenhouse gases in general, not specifically C02, which is the gas we're talking about in this thread. But without a doubt animal agriculture is one of the biggest contributors to greenhouse gasses. But my point, as suggested by Headhumpy, was purely hypothetical. If a large chunk of the country/word stopped eating meat, it would go a long way towards preventing the build up of greenhouse gases, not to mention all the other resources we would save (water/food/land) Sadly, this will never be a viable option for politicians to campaign for as eating meat is close to a lot of people's hearts. [QUOTE=Enola;50622993]Yes. Almost as intelligent as suggesting a significant amount of people should change their diet to combat climate change.[/QUOTE] And to be honest mate, it is an intelligent suggestion, a tiny bit of research will prove that. It's not a viable option though, as people wouldn't change their diets to combat climate change.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50623036]Let me quote ratman's post: "if a large chunk of the country went vegetarian". Note the "if". He was arguing that having more people go vegetarian is good for the environment, which it is. He didn't say anything about whether people should or shouldn't go vegetarian, but of course people like Cocacoladude can't understand this and immediately take it as an attack on their personal choices and get all pissy and reactionary about it. That is what I can't stand.[/QUOTE] Why are you having a quasi-meltdown over a post that didn't even make an attempt to be serious or attack anyone?
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;50623491]Why are you having a quasi-meltdown over a post that didn't even make an attempt to be serious or attack anyone?[/QUOTE] If you think that's a meltdown boy have I got news for you.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50622854]If we're going to go down this line of reasoning we might as well all eat insects. I'm not even joking, they're a great source of protein, very easy to cultivate, and some of them taste pretty good too. Western consumers just need to get over their fear of consuming them, and the media needs to stop portraying insects as exotic Oriental foods.[/QUOTE] Using insect paste as a product for, say, baby foods would be an immensely worthwhile way to cut back on the overproduction of fruits. People fail to recognize that huge fruit and vegetable farms produce just as much waste (pound-per-pound) as meat farms do, since people just flat out don't eat their veggies. An example is the sheer amount of corn that the US produces for human consumption, for something like 10-15% of it to just get [I]thrown away[/I] (I'll find my source later). Food reform is a must-have.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50623036]Let me quote ratman's post: "if a large chunk of the country went vegetarian". Note the "if". He was arguing that having more people go vegetarian is good for the environment, which it is. He didn't say anything about whether people should or shouldn't go vegetarian, but of course people like Cocacoladude can't understand this and immediately take it as an attack on their personal choices and get all pissy and reactionary about it. That is what I can't stand.[/QUOTE] Well hellooooo mister fancy pants.
Except why don't they start making significant change now instead of letting it continue for 16 years until severe damage has already been done? I realise that this is going to be a series of changes over the 16 years and not something that all of a sudden changes, but if the government really wanted to they could take great steps in a much shorter period of time.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.