Nuovi campi di petrolio e gas incompatibili con gli obiettivi climatici di Parigi
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2025/jun/new-oil-and-gas-fields-incompatible-paris-climate-goals
di Shiny-Tie-126
Nuovi campi di petrolio e gas incompatibili con gli obiettivi climatici di Parigi
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2025/jun/new-oil-and-gas-fields-incompatible-paris-climate-goals
di Shiny-Tie-126
7 commenti
Is aggregate supply not effectively dictated by OPEC to achieve a desired price? If so, when we pump more do they not pump less than they otherwise would to maintain that price?
Personally, I think the UK is shooting itself in the foot if it does not exploit natural resources, like oil and gas. Appreciate that the climate is vital, but we seem to self-harm whilst others get on with life, especially the large polluters. The UK is not a large polluter.
The solutions to so-called AGW are going to cause so much harm to living standards. The wider point is about transferring tax wealth into private energy subsidies so companies like BlackRock profit from redistribution. If these people are so frightened about AGW, why are they flying on jets paid for by redistributed tax?
1. Paris commitments are entirely voluntary, non binding and purely on a best efforts basis.
2. Paris commitments would completely fail to meet Paris targets as is
3. We’d be better replacing foreign imports with domestic supply from an economic, political, security and moral point of view. And that would be climate neutral at worst so why don’t we just do that?
The fairest thing to do is poll Brits to find out who agrees with these UCL academics.
And then block them from using any products that rely on oil for their manufacture or transportation.
This would radically reduce the UK’s carbon footprint.
I’m actually very green myself – but I’m increasingly angry with the sort of fake greens who demand policies that seem to be designed to destroy Britain’s economy without making any measurable difference to global warming.
I’d like also to know how many international students attend UCL and the carbon footprint associated with them flying to and from the UK.
Most Western countries are changing to renewable not because of the Paris agreements but because it makes more financial sense and allows countries to move away from a volatile resource that depends on the global market.
It’s an incredibly stupid argument if you follow it through.
I mean let’s use the same logic with food. Junk, UPFs are bad for you right? So let’s ban them. The only food to be sold from now is fresh fruit & veg and nuts and unprocessed meat…… see what happens? Hint, if you’re at this point thinking “That would be great! Everyone would be far healthier!”. Err, nope – actually an awful lot of people would starve. The supplies of unprocessed foods are more limited, will take time to scale up, and also cost significantly more. Factor in the massively increased demand and the cost becomes unaffordable for many.
Well it’s exactly the same with fossil fuels. The UK is weaning itself of their usage, with gas boilers being phased out, and EV’s slowly replacing ICE, but it will take time, and for the moment we are dependent on a supply of both gas and petrol and all the wishful thinking in the world won’t change that.
So given our NEEDS, what on earth is the point in paying for those needs to be met by resources shipped in from a foreign country, costing us money AND increased CO2 emissions, when we can provide some of them ourselves. It won’t reduce our emissions.
No this is all extremely counterproductive. We could spend the money generated by providing further grants to decarbonise our economy, to insulate homes, to build charging networks.