Badenoch's bad idees pt 1 - Abonding Net Zero....
Claire Badenoch's recent attempt to dump the UK's legislatively obliged 2050 net zero pledge is one of the biggest Conservative Party policy turns in history. Ignited as part of a move towards "realism" and "fiscal pragmatism", the removal of the net zero commitment is a break not merely from the former Conservative leadership, but from an emerging global consensus over the need for climate action.
Badenoch denounced the target as a "fiction," saying that it would either destroy Britain's quality of life or "bankrupt" Britain, and insisted that there needs to be greater flexibility in order to protect the economy.
WTF..?
This rhetoric is probs aimed at floating voters towards Reform UK, drawing on populist resentment of rising energy prices and green regulation. But this short-term political calculation could be costing her in the long run.
To lose its direction on net zero would substantially damage the UK's stature as a global leader in climate finance. The City of London is the world's primary green finance centre. Investors are flowing increasing amounts of capital into sustainable economies, supported by tools such as the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD). If Britain sends a signal of withdrawal, it risks deterring investment and damaging its reputation in sustainability markets.
Or maybe not...?
Others suggest this could be Badenoch's "Thatcher moment" – a dramatic challenge to orthodoxy. But while Thatcher surfed a wave of increasing neoliberalism, Badenoch is in danger of swimming against an increasing international tide in support of decarbonisation...
By 2029, when green industries and employment will be at the centre of economic planning worldwide, net zero could be political common sense. As The Economist recently pointed out, "green growth is not just an ideal—it's an economic imperative.".
Posted Using INLEO
She doesn't seem that bright and will have been influenced by certain elements who don't want change. I do wonder if 'Net Zero' is just not a helpful term as it feels very absolute and perhaps unachievable. We do need to cut our carbon output and it will make a difference, despite what some say. The fact is that people can actually save money whilst doing so. It needs an investment, but I think our solar panels will soon pay for themselves and we contribute to the growing solar grid. We do need smarter energy usage, such as changing cars when there is excess solar and wind power. We have that vast set of batteries.
We do need more British industry building the renewable infrastructure and that will provide jobs. Most solar panels come from China.
Congratulations @revisesociology! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPCheck out our last posts:
Congratulations @revisesociology! You received a personal badge!
Wait until the end of Power Up Day to find out the size of your Power-Bee.
May the Hive Power be with you!
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
Check out our last posts:
Globally there is likely to be a retreat from "net zero" driven by big tech. AI and Datacenters need cheap power. The working class needs cheap power.
My intuition is there will likely be a change in environmental narratives over the next 5-years.
Posted using Political Hive
As in 'it costs too much so fuck it' very short sited, but we are not so clever monkeys.