This is a misleading analysis. Zeke is trying to maintain useless and harmful policies in the EU27 and the UK.
A thread as to why this is the case. The vast majority of people who are interested in climate policies (for or against) will learn several things.
Trigger warning. Those who believe that cutting emissions will stop climate change will find this thread extremely challenging.
Global CO2 emissions have plateaued since 2013, leading to a slower growth in atmospheric CO2 than would have otherwise been the case. In a new analysis at The Climate Brink, I've taken look at what would have happened if emissions had continued to grow.
If you had properly understood the 2021 UNIPCC AR6 WG3 SPM, you would have understood that UK net zero will make no significant difference to climate change. Just compare the UK GHG emission stats with the global total. Then look at the UNEP Emissions Gap Report 2025, and compare with actual emissions against the 1.5°C pathway that the UK is slavishly following. Then, if you are honest, you will realise that the expensive, incompetently managed, UK net zero is not just a waste of effort, it is damaging this once great country for future generations.
@EyesOnThePriz12 Give the Makerfield voters a break. Having Andy Burnham as both your MP and Prime Minister will likely get some kickbacks in terms of government-funded jobs and recognition. This will be at the expense of most of the other 649 constituencies.
After a run of long hot and sunny days there will be many comments from those who don't understand full costs how cheap solar power is. @KathrynPorter26
points out the whole truth. Solar is great during long summer days, with hardly a cloud in the sky. But solar is no good at night. Nor in the winter. Costs of storage of electricity in a live grid is a major reason for renewables powered grid being intrinsically many times the cost of a system using a combination of nuclear, coal and gas. Then there is the massively increased grid costs.
This..
We need cheap, secure energy
Anything that relies on the weather is neither cheap nor secure
The grid should serve the people. That's the entire concept of a "utility". Anyone suggesting people need to sacrifice their comfort to save the grid is missing the point
@ken_hobbs@KathrynPorter26 Great during hot days. But solar is no good at night. Nor in the winter. Costs of storage of electricity in a live grid is a major reason for renewables powered grid being intrinsically many times the cost of a system using a combination of nuclear, coal and gas.
If heatwaves are becoming the new normal, then people will adapt, just like many the many British who emigrated to Australia.
One way of adapting is with air conditioning. But UK electricity costs have risen over 250% over the last 20 years due to the "climate" policies.
Amazing how people comment on economic matters, without having studied economics
Since 2005 CPI has risen 70%. The minimum wage has increased by 152%. The Freddo bar is an exception, not representative of general inflation.
Unless you are a toddler throwing a tantrum, a near substitute for a Freddo is Cadbury's chocolate, which has much lower in cost per kilo. A 18g Freddo at 39p is £21.67kg. 4 x18g bars of Cadbury's can be got for £1.25 or £17.36kg. 4x33.5g bars at the same place is £1.70 or £12.69kg
Chocolate has increased significantly over the last three years due to a series of bad harvests. Prices are starting to come down.
Minimum wage in 2005 was £5.05 an hour.
A Freddo cost 10p.
One hour of work bought you 50 Freddos.
In 2026, minimum wage is £12.71 and a Freddo is 39p.
One hour of work now buys you just 32 Freddos.
So despite minimum wage more than doubling, your Freddo buying power has fallen by 36%.
If wages had actually kept pace with Freddo inflation, minimum wage would be £19.65 an hour today.
Forget economists. Forget politicians.
The Freddo has just delivered the most depressing cost of living graph you'll ever see.
@trefeca@KathrynPorter26 The Chinese and Indians are increasing their emissions. China alone accounts for over half the net increase in emissions this century.
@ret_ward does not not understand the science that he has been promoting so forcefully for years. Global warming is caused Global GHG emissions.
UK net zero can have no significant impact on global warming. Would be a complete waste of money even if it was efficiently implemented. As it is, the UK net zero should be viewed morally in a similar way to a patient being forced to undergo a major operation with absolutely no medical benefits in a hospital with pre-Victorian hygiene levels.
The EU is not the only market for UK goods and services. There is also the home market and the rest of the world.
Also restrictive regulations affect the purchasers of goods and services.
From both supply and demand perspectives the UK is better off without regulations that are too onerous. If regulations are net advantageous the the UK can copy them.
In 2022 77 had malnutrition as the main cause of death. Out of ~53 million people. Most had medical a medical condition.
My father died of cancer in 1999. He was severely malnourished when he died having been unable to eat for months.
You are perverting the evidence for ideological purposes.
UK net zero policy can make no significant difference to global emissions. So cannot influence climate. Net zero policies are having a huge and increasing adverse impact on the British people.
Further, UK net zero is not part of of successful global emissions reduction strategy. Global net zero requires massive emissions cuts this decade. But global emissions are still rising.
This failure was inevitable. See any edition of the annual UNEP Emissions Gap Report 2015-2025. Executive Summary key chart will do.
https://t.co/wfUl9m6ESR
@7Kiwi@aDissentient@ClaireCoutinho@ClimateRealists@Ed_Miliband
Even if people follow the 'scientific consensus on climate change' there is still no case for cutting British CO2 emissions. The are multiple levels of the economic case against.
There is no successful global emissions reduction policy. Emissions are still rising globally, making British efforts are complete waste of time and effort.
Even if there were a successful global policy, that was cost effective (policy benefits > policy costs), for any one country the impact of that country's emissions reductions is spread globally, but the policy costs are borne by that country alone. If the UK were contributing to a consistent global policy, nearly all the benefits of emissions reductions would be the gift of the rest of the world. There is a massive free rider problem.
Aside from that, the UK is pursuing emissions reduction strategies well beyond the extents justified by existing economic theory. For instance, Nordhaus 2018 estimated through modelling, that economically efficient global policies were only justified to control warming by 2100 to 3.5°C, against a non-policy BAU scenario 4.2°C.
The UK and a small number of other countries are inefficiently pursuing the IPCC 1.5°C global pathway.
Even if people follow the 'scientific consensus on climate change' there is still no case for cutting British CO2 emissions. The are multiple levels of the economic case against.
There is no successful global emissions reduction policy. Emissions are still rising globally, making British efforts are complete waste of time and effort.
Even if there were a successful global policy, that was cost effective (policy benefits > policy costs), for any one country the impact of that country's emissions reductions is spread globally, but the policy costs are borne by that country alone. If the UK were contributing to a consistent global policy, nearly all the benefits of emissions reductions would be the gift of the rest of the world. There is a massive free rider problem.
Aside from that, the UK is pursuing emissions reduction strategies well beyond the extents justified by existing economic theory. For instance, Nordhaus 2018 estimated through modelling, that economically efficient global policies were only justified to control warming by 2100 to 3.5°C, against a non-policy BAU scenario 4.2°C.
The UK and a small number of other countries are inefficiently pursuing the IPCC 1.5°C global pathway.
@DaleVince acknowledges that the Labour Government is squandering ten of billions on net zero vanity projects. But he totally the wrong idea about the problem. It is not that such waste is a gift to political opponents. The waste is due to a complete ignorance of
a) The marginal impact on climate. Answer is always ~0
b) The financial impact on the people of UK. Answer is huge.
Dale Vince: Miliband’s net zero projects are a gift to Reform
https://t.co/ojJ4YA6fNx
When climate alarmists say opponents are just supporting Big Oil they are flaunting their ignorance of major fossil fuel producers.
Most fossil fuel production globally is from state owned or state-controlled entities. If climate alarmists were real scientists they would be calling out China, Russia and Iran, not ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron and BP.
This #clown account repeats lies & misinformation of William Happer, founding member of Big Oil lobby group CO2 Coalition.
We are not in "CO2 famine".
CO2 is 50% higher now than during 10,000 yrs of development of human civilisation & likely has not been higher for millions yrs.
Bob Ward does not understand climate science, despite being a paid communicator of the stuff for at least 15 years.
By the theory, human-caused global warming is the result of GLOBAL GHG emissions. Mostly from CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels.
The UK produces less than 1% of GHG emissions. If human-caused climate change is to some extent responsible for the coming heatwave, UK policy can have no significant impact.
But if heatwaves are to become more severe, the best way to adapt is by having air conditioning. That is unaffordable due to the policies to cut emissions having increased by over 250% since 2005.
Don't be gaslighted by those who claim this increase is due to gas. In 2005 there was 32GW of coal-fired capacity, now all gone. For over a decade vast natural gas reserves have been known under Northern England. Ideologues stopped it being developed.
Don't be gaslighted by those who claim there is a global gas price. UK natural gas prices are 3 times what they were at the end of 2019. US Henry Hub prices are only 50% higher. Check for yourselves.
Shutting down coal and smothering fracking before birth has made the UK extremely dependent on imported gas as a despatchable electricity source.
If climate change is real, those promoting UK emissions reductions have been promoting a treatment program that can't possibly work, whilst making the mass of British people more vulnerable to the impacts.
https://t.co/6TZAU9eY1C
Current forecast is for record-breaking June temperatures in London on Wednesday, when MPs will be voting on emissions limits for 2040 in line with net zero. Will @Conservatives and @reformparty_uk vote against the 7th carbon budget and for stronger and more frequent heatwaves?
@jaygeejayuk@latimeralder Churches are now mostly registered charities. As such they need to get comparative quotes. Individuals do not, hence some people falling for the sales patter.