Ha, I think the “smutty” may have been yet another example of predictive text Sluffy which I absolutely loathe?
I think you should take into account that Traitor May actually committed our net zero attempts into law not just a goal.
Either way, it’s surely ridiculous to set a goal you know full well you can’t physically achieve? It isn’t just the raw material required (copper) that makes it impossible but the fact that the population will not replace gas boilers with heat pumps, drivers will not replace ICE vehicles with EV’s in the numbers required and planners influenced by local people will decline the proliferation of both land based wind and solar farms.
Even if everyone accepted your “Facts” Sluffy, it is not possible to achieve net zero by 2050. Surely even you can see that so why believe we should continue to press ahead with such a flawed plan rather than accept it isn’t viable, scrap it and rethink.
Retain what works and invest the money saved in working with the likes of RR on developing their SMR’s in dormant power plants already plugged into the network and synthetic fuels that can be used in current or modified ICE engines? We get to the same end (net zero) but more simply with less disruption and much more cheaply but it takes a little longer and the money men behind the mad rush to wind and solar lose out. Aww, shame.
Well to start off, they aren't 'my' facts, they are the
facts - the science of what is happening and what will
Kennedy, in his 'we choose to go to the moon' speech set a target which everyone though was impossible to achieve at that time - but it was achieved!
It was achieved because it was a goal that everyone wanted to achieve and worked towards - unfortunately the same can't be said of quitting the use of fossil fuels.
The saying 'if there's a will, there's a way' is often true - but unfortunately not everyone has vested interested in the move away from fossil fuel usage.
Maybe in time they will bow to the inevitable perhaps?
And the target is just that 'a target'.
If it is reached on time then brilliant, if it is reached 5 years, or 10 years or even 30 years later, then it is still better than not being met at all - the target that is being aimed for being that everyone is focused on the same goal and works towards achieving it, and even if it is not met within the ideal timescale, it is hugely better than not meeting it at all.
The thing though is that the later the target is met, the more toxic the planet will have become - and your children and theirs will have to live with the consequences.
Who are these money men behind "the mad rush" to wind and solar you talk about, as I suspect it's just part of the right wing rhetoric you seem so fond of?
For example we are all moving to electric cars, which of course need electric batteries to power them, so would these same "money men" want to get a piece of that action - surely you'd think they would if they existed?
But no, the proposed £4 billion company who was supposed to manufacture them collapsed into administration and the last I heard they had stopped paying the staff their wages...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64303149https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britishvolt
As for May and the legislation I'm sure they will find a way around it somehow, what can anybody do about it if the targets are missed?
Where's the crime, who are the plaintiffs and what loss would they have suffered?
End of the day global warming is happening and the effects can now be seen throughout the world.
It is caused by the burning of fossil fuels and it will only get worse the longer we keep using them.
The science says we need to be on top of it by 2050, so it's up to the people of the world to do so or our children and grand children and every generation thereafter will have to live with the consequences of our fuck up.
It's as simple as that.