The Big Ask Climate Debate comments_2228 April 2008
I congratulate the Prime Minister on being willing to put tougher caps on the EU Emissions Trading Scheme.
I would also be delighted to see an end to subsidizing fossil fuel-burning power plants and other projects through the Export Credit Guarantee mechanism. If there is already an environmental audit condition attached it does not seem to be doing its job.It would also be good to see management of demand for aviation rather than planning of more runways because demand at these prices will rise.
It is very frustrating to me not to have a good system of public transport. With competing companies on main routes you cannot get on any bus as they won't take each other's return tickets. Still longer waits! They still don't link with the train either. Devon has more road mileage than any county, and with public transport like this, it's often back to the car.
Gill Westcott, North Devon Friends of the Earth
The government has to be tough to bring all of us including business into line to meet our carbon reduction targets, let's see really binding laws that do this. The govt keeps missing the point on nuclear, renewables will do the job of carbon reduction far more quickly and efficiently and people want much bigger investment.
Catherine Edminson
There are many contributors to global warming, both here and abroad. Obviously we have little control over the other contributors but I think we have a moral responsibility as individuals and a nation to do our bit. At the moment the government seems to think the solution to all problems is taxation. If it's bad for you, or considered bad, then tax and/or fine people. In some cases it may be appropriate, but not many. We need to get serious on this issue, and now. Let's not try to re-invent the wheel, why not follow the lead of other countries, abolish duty on bio-fuels like diesel made from used cooking oil and bio-ethanol for a start.
For far too long oil producers have had too tight a grip, you need to encourage people to use alternative energy sources. For a lot of people it is only going to be the fact that something is cheaper that will sway them to use more environmentally fuels. For home & business energy, can you not reduce taxes on solar panels and wind turbines, or even subsidise them ? You have to realise that these issues are not about the next election in anyway, but about your & our futures. This is so much bigger than anything else you've ever done in your time as Prime Minister, you cannot do half a job on this, or make promises that won't be kept. Your actions now will affect immeasurable numbers of people both present and future. You will be remembered more for your actions on this than you will for the NHS, taxation & Iraq.
Gary Lyford
Wow! I cannot find a single fault in Tony Juniper's arguments. Powerfully persuasive. I really like his simple "Do as we do" not "do as we say" argument, to get the rest of the world on board. Tony Blair would achieve the most working with this argument on the USA - of course.
Some country, somewhere, sometime has to start this ball rolling or we are all doomed to serious unknown climate changes and equally unpredictable economic and human disasters.
Bill Dowling
The biggest problem I have with Tony Blair here is on the need for binding annual targets. At the very least we need a statutory requirement for the independant annual monitoring and reporting of the progress to us citizens of the UK (who are going to have to sacrifice something to help achieve this after all!) and to the rest of the world - to show us/them that it can be done and that it is being done!
Tony Blair claims the timescale is too short. He says the problem may be found to be "dissappearing" after it is noticed and thus cause unecessary and painful corrective action. BUT, it may also be "still appearing"(!) which will cause even more urgent and even more painful corrective action to have to be taken later!! Wake up Tony!
If we only look at it every 5 years and after the first 5 we have only done half as well as we should have it only gets much harder every year after that - and so on - and so on!! Isn't it much better to be well within an annual target every year or at least know how near or far we are to/from it - rather than fall far short of it? Look -we really dont even know if a 60% reduction by 2050 is enough do we?! Surely this is a serious enough situation to adopt a precautionary principle?
Bill Dowling
Is not the continuous building (in the name of a strong economy) - and so the continual destruction of nature and wildlife reserves, increased pollution, decreased quality of life and living - a blatant contradiction of everything that is SAID??
Susan O'Neill
I agree with both parties in that something has to be done about climate change, i do not think it is a case of it will not happen anymore, we have all become more aware that it will happen if we do not do anything about it soon.
What we can not be sure of is that what we are experiencing now or in the future is not a natural event, we do not have enough data on the long term scale which the climate works on.
There are many ways we can all make a big, big difference, energy efficiency is just one but one area i feel strongly about is supermarkets and the link to the air industry.
If you really want to make difference on personal level with an affect as a whole level. Then start to source your groceries at a local level, not only does it taste better, the impact that you have on the environment is much less.
Try to make sure that you only get the goods you need at the supermartket such as milk etc and that any produce is local,try to shop seasonally as well.
Is it really necessary to have goods shipped in from all over the world by plane to be sold to you because they say you want it. Well start to say no.
If every household did this the supermarkets would then have to stop and think about what they are doing wrong and supply what we really want.
All those goods are shipped here by plane which is the most inefficient form of transport yet devised, its pollutants go straight into the upper atmosphere which is the worst place for them.
How can the government help? how about levying some higher taxes on the airlines? Is that the answer or should we let the market decide, like we did with the power industry?
What about forcing airlines and airports to plough a % of their profits back into green sustainable ventures or research?
Why not make them plant x amount of trees to counteract the pollution they produce? It is not just us that has to make an effort on the individual level but companies have a responcibility as well, which i believe they have to do under the new ltd companies act 2006, though some do not feel this goes far enough, this is where further measures and implementation of add legislature can be added in.
But above all we still have to remain economically viable while at the same time setting an example. There is lot to be done yet and we will get there because we have a responcibility to the future generations, this is where you will always have fight with the American nation, they only live for the hear and now, never or rarely think of their impact on others both now or in the future...me me me me me that is a hard battle to win.
That is a sweeping generalistion but they are much more demanding as a nation than we are but they have to be convinced too that they have a role to play in this as well, especially as they make up 5% of the world population but make up for 25% of the worlds pollution. How do we solve it on a global level?
By working together here and now, setting an example for future generations.
Steven Calver
Lots of hand-wringing by government ministers after the Stern Report. Instead, do something that makes an immediate change: Apply £100 flight tax on every individual taking off from or landing at a British airport; and on every 100 kilos or cubic metre of freight. As from right now.
Mike Jackson
Whilst the Government is putting in place policies that encourage people to be "greener" in their lifestyles, these will be totally ineffectual if local Planning Offices are not updating their policies to take account of these changes. For example, West Berkshire Planning Office has refused us planning permission for a log cabin style shed for the garden that we can use as a home office (rather than rent a local office which would involve driving approximately 10 miles to/from each day) because it is not "aesthetically in character" with where we live despite it not being visible from the public roads. We have also been told that we will be unlikely to get planning permission for our wind turbine for the same reasons. What is the Government going to do to make sure that Planning Offices are updating their policies?
Margaret Pate
Dear Prime Minister Tony Blair,
As a global warming (citizen)activist in California --- who lobbied in support of Assembly Bill 32: "The California Global Warming Solutions Act" -- I thank you for visiting the AB32 signing ceremony by satellite.
It is important to note that in California, great strides are being made every day in the battle against global warming. Recently the LA Times reported that five Southern California cities (Pasadena, Burbank, Glendale, Riverside, and Anaheim) announced that they will abandon plans to renew long-term contracts for coal-fired electricity from a Utah power plant.
It is also important to note (as you have) that bold leadership is underway by Governor Schwarzenegger. In 2005 he signed Executive Order S-3-05 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. And early this year he was pleased to sign California's "Million Solar Roofs Initiative."
In addition, our two Democratic Senators in Congress, Senator Dianne Feinstein and Senator Barbara Boxer, will be at the forefront in sponsoring nationwide legislation addressing the climate crisis.
Senator Boxer will be the incoming Chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. She announced in a Press Release on 11/15/2006 -- containing a letter to President Bush -- that the U.S. "must move quickly" and that she is committed to "pass an effective system of mandatory limits on greenhouse gases." The purpose of the letter was to "ask the President to commit to work with Congress to fight Global Warming."
The above mentioned letter is a significant step forward because two other incoming committee chairmen (who's committees will be addressing global warming issues) -- Senator Lieberman of Connecticut (Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs) and Senator Bingaman of New Mexico (Energy and Natural Resources)-- also signed the letter sent to President Bush.
In addition, Senator Feinstein proposed a bill this year titled the "Climate Protection Act of 2006." She has been a staunch supporter of environmental protection issues since she first joined the Senate in 1992.
But equally important is the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement sponsored by Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels. As of November 15, 2006, 330 mayors representing over 53.3 million Americans, have accepted the challenge. The mayors that sign the CPA have pledged to initiate city-wide policies that strive to meet the current targets of the Kyoto Protocol.
And just today (11/25/2006) the Washington Post reports that large energy firms in the U.S. are finally coming to terms with climate change. Even Exxon Mobil Co. is considering a move to end its financial support of a think tank who has adopted the Herculean task of casting doubt on climate change.My main point is that in spite of the disappointing lack of results at the U.N. climate conference in Nairobi this month, it is extremely important to maintain the 2008 target date for the Kyoto review. The current situation in the U.S. is very fluid.
In closing P.M. Blair, I hope I have added to the climate debate, and I thank you for this opportunity. I am hopeful that meaningful global warming legislation in the U.S. (albeit late) will be coming in 2007. With our California policymakers like Governor Schwarzenegger, Senator Boxer, and Senator Feinstein --and countless other public officials throughout America and worldwide (including yourself)-- I am optimistic that the climate crisis can be slowly diminished and ultimately averted.
Marc Boyd
More comments
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
