FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Politics

Kemi Scraps Net Zero Targets

Jump to newest
 

By *eoBlooms OP   Man
4 weeks ago

Springfield

Kemi Badenoch, who some of you will remember is leader of the Conservative Party has said the UK target of Net Zero by 2050 is impossible without bankrupting the UK.

Obviously she is correct but when do you think Sir Kier will acknowledge this ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
4 weeks ago

in Lancashire

Tbh she's a bit of a nonentity ..

I'm waiting to see what Nigel says..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eoBlooms OP   Man
4 weeks ago

Springfield


"Tbh she's a bit of a nonentity ..

I'm waiting to see what Nigel says.. "

I'd be more worried about Mad Millivolt.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
4 weeks ago

in Lancashire


"Tbh she's a bit of a nonentity ..

I'm waiting to see what Nigel says..

I'd be more worried about Mad Millivolt. "

He's gone quiet..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eoBlooms OP   Man
4 weeks ago

Springfield


"Tbh she's a bit of a nonentity ..

I'm waiting to see what Nigel says..

I'd be more worried about Mad Millivolt.

He's gone quiet.. "

I think Sir Kier's new henchman has sent him to research wind farms in the Outer Hebridies

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
4 weeks ago

in Lancashire


"Tbh she's a bit of a nonentity ..

I'm waiting to see what Nigel says..

I'd be more worried about Mad Millivolt.

He's gone quiet..

I think Sir Kier's new henchman has sent him to research wind farms in the Outer Hebridies "

He's had a touch then, stunning part of the world..

Apart from the poor phone signal..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *0shadesOfFilthMan
4 weeks ago

nearby

Philip Hammond said the uk could not afford the one trillion pound cost of climate change.

He was right.

The grandchildren will have to sort it all out

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *appyPandaMan
4 weeks ago

Kilkenny, but Dublin is more fun

At this point with how things in the natural world are deteriorating and how natural carbon sinks like forests and the oceans are becoming less effective at absorbing excess co2 from the atmosphere (and often becoming carbon sources), we need to be aware that the semi stable climate of the Holocene that allowed mankind to advance rapidly in large settlements is leaving us quickly.

Our "economy" will not fucking matter in a world that can not sustain complex civilisation dependent on agriculture in large regions of the world. The real world costs for our era of abundance and convenience that we've normalised are far fD greater than most people can realise.

By 2050, we'll be very lucky to even have anything resembling this around us. It's only going to get worse.

At this point, we need to be aware that there's dozens of civilisations that have collapsed before, and the very same thing may occur in our lifetimes, although leaving us with a much harsher and unpredictable world to try rebuild from.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ove2pleaseseukMan
4 weeks ago

Hastings


"At this point with how things in the natural world are deteriorating and how natural carbon sinks like forests and the oceans are becoming less effective at absorbing excess co2 from the atmosphere (and often becoming carbon sources), we need to be aware that the semi stable climate of the Holocene that allowed mankind to advance rapidly in large settlements is leaving us quickly.

Our "economy" will not fucking matter in a world that can not sustain complex civilisation dependent on agriculture in large regions of the world. The real world costs for our era of abundance and convenience that we've normalised are far fD greater than most people can realise.

By 2050, we'll be very lucky to even have anything resembling this around us. It's only going to get worse.

At this point, we need to be aware that there's dozens of civilisations that have collapsed before, and the very same thing may occur in our lifetimes, although leaving us with a much harsher and unpredictable world to try rebuild from. "

2050 you say that's 25 years away I'll be 82 if I'm still on this planet so I'll take the risk of how the planet copes or dose not cope with more Co2.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *0shadesOfFilthMan
4 weeks ago

nearby

Labour have just ended the sustainable farming initiative which pays farmers in England for managing their land sustainably to benefit the environment and support food production, offering a choice of actions and payments for sustainable practices

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ungFunJackMan
4 weeks ago

Berkshire

Never. The bloke is an ideologue and will never change his mind. Even when he changes his mind, if you get my reasoning.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ungFunJackMan
4 weeks ago

Berkshire

Sorry mate, but you've bought a bit of a lie there. The net zero things got nothing to do with the environment, its population control.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
4 weeks ago

Central

I think she has likely got her sums wrong, which is a recurring theme for their leaders, a la Truss.

They might have had their Excel licenses expire or computers infected by Russia.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
4 weeks ago


"Kemi Badenoch, who some of you will remember is leader of the Conservative Party has said the UK target of Net Zero by 2050 is impossible without bankrupting the UK.

Obviously she is correct but when do you think Sir Kier will acknowledge this ?"

It's an act. If she was ever PM she would resurrect the same bullshit policies. They're all net zero WEF sock puppets.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
4 weeks ago


"Tbh she's a bit of a nonentity ..

I'm waiting to see what Nigel says.. "

Boom.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *otMe66Man
3 weeks ago

Terra Firma


"I think she has likely got her sums wrong, which is a recurring theme for their leaders, a la Truss.

They might have had their Excel licenses expire or computers infected by Russia.

"

Oh please

Truss never enacted the budget, it was the city's knee jerk that created the chaos.

Now shall we talk about Ms Reeves and her sums? Rhetorical question of course knowing she is slowly walking us into a recession....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ichaeltontineMan
3 weeks ago

SWANSEA

Ha ha

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hrill CollinsMan
3 weeks ago

The Outer Rim

newsflash .... kemi kazi flip flops on the sidelines

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ungFunJackMan
3 weeks ago

Berkshire

Totally agree. The BoE acted outrageously against Truss and her Chancellor, which the press didn't call out.

Then they got pushed out because our dept. repayment went to 4% pa

Reeves has pushed up closer to 5% pa and nobody bats an eyelid.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eroy1000Man
3 weeks ago

milton keynes


"Totally agree. The BoE acted outrageously against Truss and her Chancellor, which the press didn't call out.

Then they got pushed out because our dept. repayment went to 4% pa

Reeves has pushed up closer to 5% pa and nobody bats an eyelid. "

I think some of it may be the speed at what it happened. For Truss she did not run it past the normal channels first and spooked the markets. For Reeves she has taken longer and did run it through the normal channels. Your right though that the end result is an increase in debt repayment and even worse under Reeves

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *2000ManMan
3 weeks ago

Worthing

They won't end it until the first major power cut.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ggdrasil66Man
3 weeks ago

Saltdean

What’s her name again? Can’t be bothered with the Tories of today. They will be totally replace by Reform UK, and that will happen soon. As for net zero? It’s a waste of time and money…

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *UGGYBEAR2015Man
3 weeks ago

BRIDPORT

I would.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *otlovefun42Couple
3 weeks ago

Costa Blanca Spain...


"At this point with how things in the natural world are deteriorating and how natural carbon sinks like forests and the oceans are becoming less effective at absorbing excess co2 from the atmosphere (and often becoming carbon sources), we need to be aware that the semi stable climate of the Holocene that allowed mankind to advance rapidly in large settlements is leaving us quickly.

Our "economy" will not fucking matter in a world that can not sustain complex civilisation dependent on agriculture in large regions of the world. The real world costs for our era of abundance and convenience that we've normalised are far fD greater than most people can realise.

By 2050, we'll be very lucky to even have anything resembling this around us. It's only going to get worse.

At this point, we need to be aware that there's dozens of civilisations that have collapsed before, and the very same thing may occur in our lifetimes, although leaving us with a much harsher and unpredictable world to try rebuild from. "

You could be right, probably not that soon but there's always a chance.

My question has always been, how can a small lump of rock in the north Atlantic that contributes around 1% of carbon emissions make any difference to the final outcome while the rest of the planet carries on regardless?

If (as the scientists keep telling us) the apocalypse is coming why should we sacrifice ourselves on the altar of net zero when the rest of the world doesn't give a fuck?

Let's enjoy what we've got while we can.

Frack baby frack.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *otMe66Man
3 weeks ago

Terra Firma


"At this point with how things in the natural world are deteriorating and how natural carbon sinks like forests and the oceans are becoming less effective at absorbing excess co2 from the atmosphere (and often becoming carbon sources), we need to be aware that the semi stable climate of the Holocene that allowed mankind to advance rapidly in large settlements is leaving us quickly.

Our "economy" will not fucking matter in a world that can not sustain complex civilisation dependent on agriculture in large regions of the world. The real world costs for our era of abundance and convenience that we've normalised are far fD greater than most people can realise.

By 2050, we'll be very lucky to even have anything resembling this around us. It's only going to get worse.

At this point, we need to be aware that there's dozens of civilisations that have collapsed before, and the very same thing may occur in our lifetimes, although leaving us with a much harsher and unpredictable world to try rebuild from.

You could be right, probably not that soon but there's always a chance.

My question has always been, how can a small lump of rock in the north Atlantic that contributes around 1% of carbon emissions make any difference to the final outcome while the rest of the planet carries on regardless?

If (as the scientists keep telling us) the apocalypse is coming why should we sacrifice ourselves on the altar of net zero when the rest of the world doesn't give a fuck?

Let's enjoy what we've got while we can.

Frack baby frack. "

Virtue wins every time, and it allows for the most terrible behaviour to be legitimised.

While I'm at it I do find it strange that we believe that everything is controllable as we are perched on a rock, hurtling through space we know little about.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
3 weeks ago

Central


"At this point with how things in the natural world are deteriorating and how natural carbon sinks like forests and the oceans are becoming less effective at absorbing excess co2 from the atmosphere (and often becoming carbon sources), we need to be aware that the semi stable climate of the Holocene that allowed mankind to advance rapidly in large settlements is leaving us quickly.

Our "economy" will not fucking matter in a world that can not sustain complex civilisation dependent on agriculture in large regions of the world. The real world costs for our era of abundance and convenience that we've normalised are far fD greater than most people can realise.

By 2050, we'll be very lucky to even have anything resembling this around us. It's only going to get worse.

At this point, we need to be aware that there's dozens of civilisations that have collapsed before, and the very same thing may occur in our lifetimes, although leaving us with a much harsher and unpredictable world to try rebuild from.

You could be right, probably not that soon but there's always a chance.

My question has always been, how can a small lump of rock in the north Atlantic that contributes around 1% of carbon emissions make any difference to the final outcome while the rest of the planet carries on regardless?

If (as the scientists keep telling us) the apocalypse is coming why should we sacrifice ourselves on the altar of net zero when the rest of the world doesn't give a fuck?

Let's enjoy what we've got while we can.

Frack baby frack. "

I think you've potentially overlooked the opportunity to become a little bit informed on this. The UK isn't, for example, the only country looking to gain advantages of being better prepared, reducing impacts and making greater economic success, from the changed environmental and economic future.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top