I am a Dragon. I emerge from my Egg. Says the Guardian. The full report is here (by the Tyndall follk) but the summary (by FOE/Coop) is here. There is a clear void between the scale of the problem and the actual policy mechanisms proposed well I can agree with that, but from there on...
"...the report says that 90% cuts are achievable if measures are taken within four years to stabilise emissions. Beyond 2010, it says, annual cuts of 9% will be needed for the next 20 years. If the measures are not introduced urgently, say the authors, much more drastic and much less manageable cuts will be needed later. The authors say that little new technology or investment in infrastructure will be needed to reduce emissions, apart from the development of hydrogen as a fuel, and carbon capture as a way to store carbon dioxide."
And more along those lines. They seem to have all cars running on hydrogen (generated from roadside PV systems?) and carbon-capture frm power stations, both of which seem rather hopeful, as does 9%/year reductions.
As for "decrease the speed limit on motorways to 60mph" that was floated about a year ago (or was it just restrictiong people to actually obeying the current 70 mph limit?) and that got shot down quickly enough.
Email this entry to a friend
View the Technorati Link Cosmos for this entry
Comments
What a coincidence, I was just thinking I could go for a nice word salad, with a random-capitalization vinaigrette.
[If anyone is wondering about this comment, its a ref to the, errrm, over enthusiastic commentator I've just removed. Sorry -W]
Posted by: Davis | September 18, 2006 2:31 AM
Worth noting that the report assumes no use of nuclear as the current generation of plants closes down. This may indeed happen but it's a bit odd to base an entire report on that one point. At the very least they should have given us with and without a new generation of nukes.
[Indeed it does... perhaps because it was commissioned by FOE (but then it would be nice to have that stated) -W]
Posted by: Tim Worstall | September 18, 2006 6:47 AM
There's no point in factoring in nuclear power because all the uranium will have been used up by 2030. The report is nonsense anyway. The British government should be concentrationg on getting the US on board. Even if we in the UK had phased out all of our CO2 emissions, saving 150 MTonnes of C per year,
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/emissions/uki.dat
the US, who increased their emissions by 1,580 - 1,414 = 166 MTonnes in the eight years beginning in 1995,
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/emissions/usa.dat
would wipe out savings pretty quickly.
It is pure hubris to believe that we in the UK can solve the problem solely by reducing our emissions.
Posted by: Alastair McDonald | September 20, 2006 7:33 AM