Climate Change Committee Demands Government Impose Radical Lifestyle Changes on UK

The Climate Change Committee, the UK’s official Net Zero advisory body, has told the Government that to hit Net Zero it must impose radical lifestyle changes on the UK population. The Mail has more.

The UK’s drive for Net Zero means millions of Brits face having to install heat pumps in their homes over the next decade, according to the Government’s climate advisers.

The Climate Change Committee said there needed to be around 1.5 million heat pump installations a year in existing homes by 2035 – up from just 60,000 in 2023.

In its [advice on the UK’s] Seventh Carbon Budget, which sets a limit for UK greenhouse gas emissions between 2038 to 2042, the committee also piled pressure on Brits to buy electric cars, fly less and cut their meat and dairy consumption.

The report said, in order to meet the country’s Net Zero ambition, three-quarters of cars and vans and two-thirds of heavy good vehicles (HGVs) would need to be electric by 2040.

At the same time, Brits should be shunning their cars to cycle and walk more, while eating 25% less meat, the committee stated. 

Holidaymakers were warned of more expensive flights as the committee urged the Government to commit to a 17% fall in aviation emissions compared to 2023.

Demand for air travel needed to be managed to curb emissions, with airlines taking responsibility for the costs of decarbonising through sustainable fuels, capturing carbon and electric and hybrid planes, the committee said. [All of which are, being generous, unproven technology.]

That would push up costs, for example increasing the price of a return ticket to Alicante, Spain, by £150 and a round-trip to New York could be £300 more expensive by 2050, according to the report.

Critics of Net Zero policies condemned the report as the committee’s “usual Marxist garbage” and urged Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer to “face down the zealots” as his Labour administration scrambles for economic growth.

The Government is committed to reaching Net Zero – which means reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 100% from 1990 levels – by 2050. 

Under the committee’s “balanced pathway” for reaching this target, the report found achieving Net Zero would cost around £110 billion over the next 25 years.

At an average of £4 billion per year between 2025 and 2050, this translates to around 0.2% of GDP. 

This was estimated to be front-loaded into the first half of the period, peaking at annual net cost of £33 billion in 2029.

For the period between 2025 and 2040, the committee’s figures showed the drive to Net Zero would cost an eye-watering £320 billion.

But the report added, from 2040, the annual net cost would become a saving due to falling technology costs and more efficient use of energy and resources. [Jam tomorrow.]

This would lead to a net saving of around £35 billion in 2050, it said.

In its latest advice, the committee urged the Government to commit to an 87% cut on the UK’s 1990 levels of greenhouse gas emissions by 2040.

It set out what it said was a deliverable and cost-effective route to the greenhouse gas emissions cuts required from 2038 to 2042 to ensure the UK meets Net Zero by 2050.

Around a third of the emissions cuts in the period will have to come from action by households, mainly buying an electric car and a heat pump to replace an old gas boiler.

But personal choices on eating less meat and dairy, and flying, would play a “smaller, but important role”, the committee added.

To cut emissions from meat and dairy production – and free up land for tree planting to absorb carbon – Brits were told they would have to eat 25% less meat by 2040 compared with 2019 levels.

The Climate Change Committee was created by the Climate Change Act 2008 to give the Government independent advice on how to achieve its climate goals. The Government is obliged under the act to create legally binding carbon budgets for each five year period up to 2050 to ensure it is on track. The Government doesn’t have to accept the committee’s advice – though to date it invariably has – but it does have to set a binding carbon budget (this will be the seventh, for 2038-2042) that keeps the country on target. Without repealing or amending the act the Government has very little wiggle room, so it’s worth looking out for what it actually comes up with in the next year or so. We shouldn’t expect it to be much different to what the committee has suggested, though. The point of the committee, after all, is to do the donkey work in figuring it all out. How this fits with ‘going for growth’, though, is anybody’s guess.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/h27tjxV

February 27, 2025 at 08:04AM

New Propulsion Technology Could Send Spaceships to Mars in a Month 


This is one of several ideas being pursued in various countries, but with this one ‘a laboratory prototype of the engine has been developed’. Testing is planned to reach flight model stage by 2030, assuming it all works out of course.
– – –
Russia’s Rosatom is developing a plasma electric rocket engine that could drastically reduce travel time to Mars, potentially making the journey in 30 to 60 days, says OilPrice.com.

Russia may have unlocked the technology needed to make travel to Mars viable. The limitations of existing propulsion systems mean that astronauts must travel for up to a year to reach Mars.

However, Russia’s state atomic energy corporation Rosatom has developed a plasma electric rocket engine that it believes could send spacecraft to Mars in just 30 to 60 days.

Rosatom’s propulsion system uses a magnetic plasma accelerator, which it hopes will reduce space travel time. Mars is 140 million miles from Earth, meaning a 30-day journey would require an immense average speed of 195,000 miles per hour. In addition to improving efficiency, a faster travel time to Mars would decrease exposure to cosmic radiation for astronauts.

The innovative plasma engine requires the acceleration of particles between two electrodes under high voltage. The interaction between the electric current and the generated magnetic field expels the particles from the engine, providing continuous thrust.

The system has an average power of 300 kW and is expected to help spacecraft achieve far higher speeds than conventional propulsion systems.

“A plasma rocket motor is a type of electric motor. It is based on two electrodes. Charged particles are passed between them, and at the same time a high voltage is applied to the electrodes,” Egor Biriulin, a junior researcher at Rosatom’s scientific institute stated.

“As a result, the current creates a magnetic field that pushes the particles out of the engine. Thus, the plasma receives directional motion and creates thrust,” Biriulin added.

The engine is powered using hydrogen. As plasma does not need to be heated to a high temperature to function, it reduces the risk of temperature overload.

The scientists expect the engine to have a thrust of around 6 Newtons, which is far higher than other existing mechanisms and is expected to contribute to smooth acceleration and deceleration between planets.
. . .
The team plans to use conventional chemical rocket technology to launch the spacecraft into orbit and once it’s in its designated orbit, the plasma engine will be activated. If successful, the technology could be used to increase the efficiency of other space missions.

Full article here.
– – –
Image: Mars-Earth comparison [credit: Wikipedia]

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop

https://ift.tt/ILjwVaP

February 27, 2025 at 07:55AM

The Net Zero LIE! It Will DESTROY Britain’s Economy For Decades!

By Paul Homewood

 

 

Really good interview with Prof Gordon Hughes.

I don’t know who the interviewer is, but she is extremely naive, continually saying “But the Government says!”

 

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

https://ift.tt/zsi3UCr

February 27, 2025 at 04:11AM

Is Climate Change Killing Australia’s Beachfront Norfolk Island Pines?

Essay by Eric Worrall

Hint – they are blocking the view.

Extreme weather and vandalism impact beachfront Norfolk Island pines

In short: 

Norfolk Island pine trees have become a feature of Australia’s coastline but they are at risk from a number of factors. 

A Gold Coast researcher says a severe weather-fuelled fungus and urban stresses are infecting pines across the city.

What’s next? 

A horticulturist says he is more worried that the trees are being chopped down or poisoned for the sake of residents’ views. 

…

One cause of the trees’ ill health is a nasty fungus from the Botryosphaeriaceae family.

Ms Petrova said it thrived in dry environments and spread through Burleigh Heads’ pine population in the 2018-2019 drought.

…

Ms Petrova said more extreme weather due to climate change, including drought, could be increasing fungal growth.

…

He said he was increasingly being called to pines that had been purposely poisoned.

“We’re talking about 60 to 80 trees at a time being poisoned, huge areas of beach fronts all around Sydney Harbour,” Mr Varley said.

…

Read more: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-02-26/extreme-weather-vandalism-impact-norfolk-island-pine-trees/104949926

Norfolk Island Pines, an evolutionary cousin of Hoop Pines, are tropical weather loving trees which grow to enormous heights in poor quality salty beach soil. They are capable of thriving from the cold southern end of Australia all the way into the far North. They are also grown in Hawaii and other warm weather locations.

Local governments love them because their strong root structure stabilises the beach.

Million dollar beachfront property owners not so much – because that beautiful view you fell in love with in many cases has been obscured by tree hugging councils who seem to think taller is better.

They are beautiful trees – tall, lots of shade, and a soft bed of pine needles supplied with every tree, great homes for Australia’s beautiful songbirds, and a place for young people who want a little privacy. The trees are resilient – they don’t mind being topped to keep the height down.

But Australia’s local governments over the past few decades seem to have forgotten that part of the social contract, beachfront trees nowadays tower over many of Australia’s favourite swimming spots.

Even in my area trees have been poisoned.

It is a difficult crime to solve. In many cases it might be difficult to detect – clever tree killers wouldn’t drill holes in the trees, they would use a sprinkle of readily available heavy metal sulphate poison which reacts with salt in the ground to form almost insoluble chloride salts, a chemical which due to insolubility has good residence in salty soil, exhibits high plant toxicity without being a serious poisoning risk for humans in the quantities used, and which would cause the tree to become distressed rather than instantly killing it, leading the tree to apparently die a natural death, losing its foliage and succumbing to fungal infections. An added bonus for the tree murderer, the residual poison in the soil would also kill whatever the local government planted to replace the dead tree.

I wonder if I just solved the mystery? Maybe it isn’t climate change after all.


Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/VrKOILB

February 27, 2025 at 04:07AM