The Big Ask Climate Debate comments_5

28 April 2008

I agree that there is a responsibility with the individual to help as much as possible and that every family should try to cut the amount of electricity they use as much as possible.

I think there has been a trend recently in keeping electric items on when they don't need to be. PCs and mobile phones left on 24 hours a day and appliances such as TVs and stereos left on standby (which still uses 70% the amount of the electricity used when switched on).

Should the govenment send out a message, "If you're not using it, switch it off! ?

Iain Hepburn

I believe more pressure should be applied to commercial companies to ensure their businesses are environmntally friendly. I worked for a prestigious property consultancy that didnt recycle because the the facilities management company said "it was too expensive". It was a disgrace especially for a company that makes out it is environmentally aware. Should their be penalties for large companies who do not contribute or rewards for those who make a large contribution to ensuring their business however small or large makes a difference.

Kirsty Glen

What good does the Kyoto Protocol do when the biggest polluters the USA and China have signed up?
Can the British government bring pressure/sanctions on them to get them to sign up????

John Unknown

In my area of Rhondda Cynon Taf, South Wales, our local Environmental Spokesman, a Labour councillor, endorsed an environmental document produced by the council that advocated the retention of green areas as being of great benefit to communities. This same Labour councillor happens also to be on the planning committee of our council which gave permission to a developer to erect 100 houses on a green area in our village. How can you, Mr. Blair, be so vociferous in your claim that the Labour Party has adopted green credentials, when your own politicians are busy undermining our environment to such an extent as this? Why should I believe that the Labour Party really does have the environment close to its heart when I see contradictions such as this perpetrated even at my own local level?

Alan Davies

Prime Minister,
Thank you for this opportunity.

Your achievements in regard to the Kyoto agreement are something which (to quote you about another subject) "history will judge [you] on". It's a start, but they are early battles with a long war ahead.

Please use your all influence with the US administration to get them back on board with Kyoto and future world climate targets.

The 'carbon trading' scheme seems flawed to me - it simply offers companies a loophole to doing EVERYTHING they can to reduce their own emissions.

Perhaps a subject for another debate, but nuclear power is ONLY reducing our CO2 emissions whilst leaving another potential environmental catastrophe with the waste. The lack of a long-term supply of good grade nuclear material also means that the question of what to do after nuclear will come up BEFORE the 2050 deadline. It makes more sense to look at a post-2050 deadline instead of a quick-fix now.

I fully support FOE's calls for an annual target and their assertion that if it is not reached then there should be an independent investigation and subsequent report as to why. A regular criticism i have of your government is that it seems to think targets have to be hit or exceeded every time to demonstrate success - THIS IS NOT THE CASE. Any 'real' target should stretch the abilities of those trying to hit and sometimes they will fail. 3% CO2 reductions year-on-year is a realistic challenge to the government, business, and individuals and should form the cornerstone of the environmental policy.

Finally i would like to add that 'green taxing' has to be a combination of incentives and punitive measures. You mention low-energy light bulbs and these cost many times more than a standard one. This would seem to be an ideal example of something that could be used in conjunction with, perhaps, a sliding scale of VAT for the 'good' and 'bad' versions.

You have an ideal opportunity here to make a difference - i urge you to be the person who leads Great Britain towards a greener future and hold us up as a beacon for the world to follow.

Martin Cook

Many thousands of us every morning are forced to jump in our cars every morning to go into work. This seems a daft constraint when the technology is available for the majority of people to work from home over the internet/telephone/conferance calls etc. For safety reasons: Less Traffic on the roads in the "Rush Hour" as well as the obvious environmental issues these short (generally) journies have on emmissions, simply because of the ingrained ideals of an older generation that say we all have to be in our place of work in order to work. If companies were given an incentive to allow more people to be able to work from home and generate a culture of this as the norm then the amount of cars already overloading the basic infrastruture every morning and evening would be considerably eased.

Brian West

Mr Blair and the Labour party has systematically robbed the working people of this country and used enviromental issues to protect them from criticism.

Petrol,car taxes and air taxes are just underhand ways to squeeze money out of us instead of having the balls to raise direct taxes due to their unpopularity. The vast majority of this money is then not spent on the promised public transport improvements as I, like millions of others have to use them every day will testify.

He and his party do nothing to the real polluters as the people running these industries are friends and benefactors. It is a sham and I cannot believe the people of this country keep falling for it.

Tony Blair is no enviromentalist. He is a cynical, manipulative politician like those he took power from. Shame on you Mr Blair and shame on your government.

Martin Ferguson

It is not fair that those of us that live in the country side, well away from public transport systems should be penalised by the heavy car taxes I have read about on the horizon.

All major cities should have low emission fully intergrated transportation systems in place,i.e electric trams, and any 'city dweller' should have to gain 'special licenses' to own vehicles, at a 'cost'.
In the smaller cities, the introduction of 'Park & Ride' systems should be made compulsory.

Those choosing not to use this system should be subject to the 'city conjestion charge'.

4x4's and other 'less economical' vehicles need not be charged 'extra' taxes as I have read about. These owners already pay more to the taxman through the fuel pumps, than those in more economical vehicles.
I am a father of 3, and we own a 1.8 ltr Mondeo, a 'family car'. But I understand that some 'think tank' recommends that this car be subject to over GBP800.00 annual road tax!! As mentioned at the top, we live out in the countryside, where the ownership of a car is a necessaty. Where ocassionally during the winter we get 'snowed in'. I would like to get a 4x4, so that we can get out in all weathers, but the prospect of the anti-4x4 bregade putting pressure on the government to outlaw these by overtaxing them out of existance seems very real to me. If town and city public transportation systems can be improved to what I mention above, then that will drammatically cut the pollutions caused.

Of course, this means nothing. You're not going to change the way some of these people think, other than by banning the vehicle totally.

James Badiali

It is important that we lead by example. However, as our emissions only account for 2% of global emissions, it is vital that we get the whole of the international community to act together.

Andrew Pollock

Dear Prime Minister, I run a business in your constituency, supplying and installing renewable energy for homes. A constant barrier to adoption by my potential clients is the low level of grants available, especially compared to our Euorpean partners, including Scotland. Your energy minister Malcolm Wicks recently announced on 27th October that he beleived the sector would no longer need householder grants after 2008, and that it would not be the best use of their money. Is the government intending to cripple this newly formed sector of industry so soon after its birth? Any reasonable study of the economics would show that aiding microgeneration leads to greater energy security and lower carbon emmissions at a low cost to government, since the major part of the cost is bourne by the householder. Please make firm commitments to support and improve these universally popular grants.

Dr Matt Hogan

There are many public building, like hospitals ecc. that each spring, run the heating system on full power with windows open, to empty the fuel tanks becouse of health and safety ... It's creazy!

... also I'm disable and a few hears ago, I received a grant from my local autority to improve the insulation in my flat... the company that did the work charged around £2700 to simly fit some plastic strips around my 4 windows and 2 doors (took them two hours at most)... I think that some of the risorces are there, but there is not control over how this money are spent...

Massimo Saltini

Dear Tonys,

I am not seeking for a political reply to investment in technologies because I can already picture such reply myself and it wouldn't take us any step closer to a better world.
What everyone can see is that the real problem of climate change is not the climate changing to unbearable temperatures; this is the threat, not the problem. The problem is that climate change is unquestionably urging to a fundamental change in dealing with climate issues, and the economic implications of losing loads of beloved cash in the process.
Climate change means that we have to change the way we spend our money so that the way we spend it will affect the climate less strongly.
We can all do this by cutting down pollution and emissions, and according to the colourful promises of energy conglomerates, we can even save on our energy bill while doing so.
But what about the entrepreneurial spirit of a country that has always been first when it came to world changing innovation? We all know that the technologies for a cleaner environment already exist and have existed for many decades. We all already know that these technologies are being implemented successfully in other countries. We already know that this is not the quest for the holy grail, that these technologies are cheap and easy to implement on a large scale, and that pretending that these do not exist is just plain dumb.

I want to know when this government and country will start realising that it is to heavily incentivise entrepreneurial projects to implement existing technologies if it wants to save time and money on correcting the damage to climate change.

There is no one great solution to be sought that will miraculously stop this cataclysm, everyone knows that. But there is a multitude of small solutions that must be incentivised and should have been heavily incentivised long ago already!

Take for example hybrid cars running on diesel and electricity. Help companies produce bio diesel and guide the automotive industry to implementing flexible solar cells coating to all cars and you easily get to a car that runs on 100% renewable energy, not to mention that ti would be exponentially cheaper than any current vehicle. These technologies exist and have been implemented very successfully on a large scale elsewhere (you can even find bags covered in flexible solar cell coating these days!). Further, incentives have helped develop new industries with substantial impact on domestic economy, making other countries less dependent from traditional energy suppliers and more reliant on renewable and sustainable sources.
Incentives to these steps mean fresh breeze for the economy and on the longer term they mean potentially enormous returns on investment for future governments, too big to be ignored any longer.

Are such steps too erratic for this government? Are such steps too small and irrelevant for leaving the mark of political legacy, Mr Blair? Is the industry too strong and powerful to be shown the direction and guided to these changes? The time for talks is sadly already over, it is time for real rewards or real penalties for any step taken from now on.

Thank you very much for reading this far. Your attention and interest is very much appreciated!

I look forward to your reply, hopefully from both of you Tonys!

Bodo Voet

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

Send your comments >