Net Zero targets must be brought forward by a decade to stop the “climate time bomb”, the UN has said at the launch of a major new climate change report. The Telegraph has more.
Rising emissions in recent years mean cuts in the next two decades will have to be more extreme than current plans, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said.
An 80% global reduction in CO2 emissions is needed to limit warming to 1.5°C, the upper aim of the Paris Agreement, its new report says.
But the UN said richer countries must move faster than developing nations, by “super-charging” their Net Zero goals and helping poorer countries cut their own emissions.
The U.K., like most other developed nations, has set a target for Net Zero emissions by 2050, and its climate change advisers have said getting there quicker will “stretch feasibility”.
Speaking at the launch of the report on Monday, Antonio Guterres, the UN Secretary-General, said “humanity is on thin ice – and that ice is melting fast”.
“The climate time bomb is ticking,” he said, and added that the 1.5°C limit was “achievable”, but would require a “quantum leap in climate action”.
Developed countries should “commit to reaching Net Zero as close as possible to 2040” while emerging countries, including China and India, should aim for 2050.
The U.K.’s climate change committee, which advises the Government on its Net Zero goal, has modelled a way to reach the target by 2042.
It includes a 50% reduction in meat and dairy consumption, a 15% cut in air passenger levels compared with pre-pandemic levels, and the widespread acceptance of heat pumps in homes.
The committee said it was a “highly optimistic scenario, stretching feasibility in a wide range of areas”.
Chris Jones, from the Met Office Hadley Centre, and a co-author of the report said the scale of the global challenge was “massive”.
“In 2020, during the Covid lockdowns, CO2 emissions dropped by about 6%,” he said. “So we need to achieve that year-on-year for the rest of this decade, and obviously we can’t do that by locking people down.”
Worth reading in full.
Here we go: ratchet up the fear and alarm to accelerate the abandonment of cheap, plentiful, reliable energy and the standard of living it creates for billions in favour of expensive and unreliable renewables that will hold development back in much of the world and keep people in poverty.
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Have we one politician in our country with the courage to get some real scientists together and make it clear that there is no climate problem and CO2 is one of the essentials for life, not a pollutant and the human generated CO2 has very little impact on our climate? Even now, CO2 is only 0.042% of our atmosphere and has been many times more than that when temperatures were lower. Why are we governed by idiots, and places like the UN are full of them?
How do the terminally dim gain positions of such power and influence?
Most of them would struggle to find their buttocks with both hands.
Many people, and much of the media, respond to this fear and alarm.
They stop thinking and go into overdrive because of their induced anxiety.
They want to accelerate action so they can achieve their goals (whatever they may be) before everyone realises the whole thing is a load of nonsense.
Einstein said the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Now it seem it is doing everything much quicker.
The odious little creep Antonio Guterres in the header photo know’s that CO2 is the gas of life and vital for the planets well-being.. its just that he’s had orders from his betters to deprive us of it.. for obvious reasons..
OK, so Net Zero must be brought forward.
Where are the calculations of how much electrical energy will be required to replace fossil fuels; where the calculation of how much grid expansion, how much copper will be needed?
Where is the capital investment programme?
Where the manufacturing programme?
Where the construction programme?
Where will capital, labour, mining, industrial, construction, transportation resources come from with the whole World racing like all-giddy-up towards Net Zero.
Clearly the plan is to stop use of fossil fuels with no replacement.
I heartily agree with everything you’ve said..
There’s only one way this can be stopped and it’s not going to be by voting.
Why bother to make the quest for scientific truth your vocation in life when there is so much more money to be made in promoting climate hysteria. With all dissent from this position effectively banned, and no real possibility of the predicted catastrophies actually happening, huge empires can be built simply by spouting nonsense on the international stage.
This is all based on extremely inaccurate modelling and a downright pack of lies. You would think an organisation like the UN would have access to competent scientists, but they use those financed by organisations who gain from aiming for the net-zero targets and distort the information they give. There is no climate emergency, and every time these idiots predict one, time proves them wrong. According to that silly uneducated girl, Greta Thunberg in 2018, mankind has only a couple of months left to live. Surely people must have learnt this climate catastrophe thing is rubbish by now, even if politicians can’t and insist on wasting our money on it and giving it to companies making money from their stupidity
There’s a little more to it.. its about control..
The beauty of this combined financial scam and totalitarian political agenda is that it can never be disproved (at least at a surface level, but see below).
If these wildly guesstimated and relatively meaningless ‘global temperatures’ start to go down then proponents can say that the CO2 reducing policies are working.
If they continue to go up as alleged (ignoring any inconvenient ‘pauses’ of course) then the arguments in favour of Net Zero – which obviously can never actually be attained – will simply be made ever more forcibly and susceptible populations ever more impoverished.
In fact the tiniest amount of digging can categorically show that the argument for mankind’s 5% annual contribution to an atmospheric trace gas measured in parts per million being the main driver of world temperature, weather and climate is as preposterous as it sounds.
Three graphs are all it takes:
First of all increasing annual human C02 emissions over time:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-emissions-per-country?country=~OWID_WRL
Note the dramatically accelerating output between 2000 and 2019 from 25.54 billion tonnes per year to 37.08, in other words by app 50%.
The anthropogenic Climate Change ‘scientific’ thesis claims that atmospheric CO2 levels are naturally in equilibrium, therefore all recent increases must be… Read more »
Someone should collate all the predictions on climate change, global warming etc and see how many cam even close to coming true or accurate. It would be interesting and probably very informative while also enabling us to respond to the MSM alarmists with some facts.
If ever there was an example of putting the ideological cart before the reality horse then this is it. ——Only a few countries are committing themselves to this NET ZERO absurdity and ofcourse the UK would have to be one of them wouldn’t it? We are actually forcing ourselves in law to do this, leaving us wide open to being sued right left and centre if we fail. What makes us almost certain to fail ofcourse is that government have no idea how this can ever be achieved. The technologies to achieve it simply do NOT exist. Here is only one example of the stupidity ——- In only 27 years we would have to remove the best central heating system we ever had (gas) which would be an almost impossible task when you consider that the roll out of little Smart Meters is taking forever, so how long will ripping out radiators, boilers and tearing up floorboards take? This is the politics of the looney bin all based on junk science from the pretend to save the planet people at the UN and WEF. What however is even worse than that is that our own politicians pander to this garbage.… Read more »
Well the estimate is more than that, for the UK more like £10 Trillion, because you forgot the cost of improving the entire housing stock. The CO2 footprint (as far as that is important) of more or less rebuilding every property is astronomical, and probably more than will ever be saved by heat pumps or anything else.
I’m glad to see the climate fight back is beginning, very tenuously, in the Netherlands (well bloody done BBB), the ulez areas,here in ireland, windfarm planning permission denials, and of cause Sri Lanka who’s people really have showed a lot of dismay at their leadership! Let’s hope it keeps snowballing as more and more people wake up from their convenience slumber.
“The UN was established after World War II with the aim of preventing future world wars”
What the f has climate change got to do with the UN? Talk about sticking your finger in a pie who’s ingredients you don’t understand! The UN needs to be dismantled before it starts a war with Russia!!
And as for that Git’erres, he should be shot for crimes against humanity! Mainly based on inflicting untold fear on the young and condemning the poor into deeper abject poverty
Who put this idiot in charge?
Certainly wasn’t a democratic process because I didn’t get a vote.
China and India, emerging nations??? Both Nuclear powers. This UN stooge needs to increase his medication 💊
Utter hog wash.
The Reform Party will abolish Net zero legislation and stop this insanity designed to destroy our livelihoods and economy.
Well said.
The Reform Party is fully behind Net Zero – Richard Tice has aligned himself with it. They’re all part of the problem.
Let’s assume the Reform Party actually manages to succeed. It’s then going to become a very attractive target for the leeches which are presently still sucking blood from the more established parties and within a fairly short amount of time, it’ll become just one of them.
Representative democracy is a bit like the lottery: Fool enough people into believing they could also gain something from it so that you get to spend their money on yourself. As put into words by somebody else: The system isn’t beset with problems, it is the problem.
It’s a bit better in the UK because the original idea of MPs as representatives of the people is still preserved in the voting system and hence, MPs are still sort-of structurally incentivized to care about the problems of their constituents, although, as the COVID scamdemic has shown, not very much. In Germany, it’s more highly developed: Every four years, some pretty random, large subset of the adult population may chose its preferred party from the set of parties other parties haven’t yet managed to outlaw. Close to 50% of these choices will then immediately be binned using a variety of pretexts. From the remainders, a coalition… Read more »
I suggest we build a massive compound and put all these nutters in it, a few straight jackets wouldn’t go amiss either. Just lock the buggers up they’re completely bonkers.
If only we could have net zero of the power-that’s-gone-to-their-heads over at the UN & other institutions swollen by globalist ambitions!
How can ‘climate’ be a time bomb?
How does anyone believe this Climate Change lie?
Yellow Freedom Boards
Wednesday 22nd March 11am to 12pm
between Cox Green Rd &
Junction A404(M) Shoppenhangers Road
Maidenhead SL6 3YP
OFF TOPIC (other threads dead)
I was listening to Radio 4 (yes, I know) in the car at about 08.45-09.00 today and there was an interesting little segment about new anti-obesity drugs.
Heavy paraphrasing but the dialogue went something like this:
Presenter: “basically the government wants to treat obesity like a disease and give all fat people these drugs, what’s wrong with that.”
Interviewee: “well, you can get lots of problems with this. As we’ve seen during the last two years, you can unexpected side effects from new drugs and get lots of politics with that.”
Over the airwaves you could feel the interviewee thinking ‘oh cr8p’ and have them segway quickly into some other angle.
Net Zero is about money and control. The parasites want to ensure ordinary people have net zero of either.
And here’s the advance warning of….yes….
The Next Pandemic.
Coming soon to a 15 minute ghetto near you.
https://time.com/6262639/covid-prepare-next-pandemic/
It’s only the UN, or rather a country that presumably stands to benefit from Net Zero.
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf is just what we need !!….
An ex-President of Liberia no less. How’s about that then?
She’s now one of ‘The Elders.’
Isn’t it comforting knowing that we have a small, elite, cozy grandparent type group looking after us all?
Ooh, I’ve come over all warm and fuzzy.
Net Zero must be brought forward by a decade, because the wheels are coming off the whole scam!
I think there are two ways of looking at this:
1. The Davos Deviants are running scared and believe if they don’t get on with their mission then it could all fall apart under the weight of the awakening and fierce resistance.
2. The Davos Deviants are flushed with the success of the last three years and have decided to ramp up their tactics while most of the population are still in shock at what has happened and continues to happen and before the masses wake up.
I suppose it could even be a mixture of the two. Either way they are clearly intent on ensuring the nastiness levels become supercharged given that their time -lines have been shortened by a third.
Summat big is on the way.
They’re frit by the pushback. Didn’t anticipate such resistance.
Arrogant twerps.
It is nice that the UN is so keen about this.
I’d say that they should lead in this and get themselves to net-zero by 2024. None of that ‘carbon offset’ either — proper net zero. They could have all their premises heated by lovely air source heat pumps, cut their air travel, and reduce the meat that they eat.
After that national governments could reach net zero — say by 2026. Get rid of the meat in parliamentary restaurants (and booze — terrible co2 impact of booze), stop travel (they could be issued with electric bicycles I suppose) and most definitely reams and reams of air source heat pumps all powered by solar power (or something similarly zero carbon).
Then local government and government agencies. I imagine the West could sort this out by 2028 or so. Make all town halls carbon neutral (again, not carbon-offset, which is just an accounting sham and nothing to do with reducing co2), get hospitals and schools heated by air source heat pumps, insist that staff cycle to work, get them to eat crickets and fungi etc etc.
Then, once all the people who are so keen on net-zero have shown how lovely… Read more »
Much to commend Amanuensis. Leadership by example.
Could we not just arrange for all of these people to have every carbon atom removed from their bodies and see how they get on?
They are Lying – “Right” ? !
Sorry, how much plastic PPE are they burning this month?