UPDATE: See what David Hone from Shell thought. He went and discovered the “”vegan” “low tech” element who talk of annihilating coal.
Tyndall Centre UK has just held The Radical Emission Reduction Conference: 10-11 December 2013. This is their logo:
Things have to go “radical” now, because there are no sensible pragmatic or long term solutions left:
“About the conference
Today, in 2013, we face an unavoidably radical future. We either continue with rising emissions and reap the radical repercussions of severe climate change, or we acknowledge that we have a choice and pursue radical emission reductions: No longer is there a non- radical option. Moreover, low-carbon supply technologies cannot deliver the necessary rate of emission reductions – they need to be complemented with rapid, deep and early reductions in energy consumption – the rationale for this conference.
These people are seriously discussing reductions of energy of 8%, not just by 2020, but every year.
“… More specifically the conference will consider how to deliver reductions in energy consumption of at least 8% per year (~60% across a decade). It will foster an up-beat and can-do mentality.
The Radical Emission Reduction Conference
”For collectivists, a focus on opinions and social popularity sits awkwardly with plans to change global climate which requires an understanding of maths and numbers.”
At least no one is pretending cheap solar will save the day. Now the aim is to make coal as expensive as solar (which is much more achievable, sadly).
Charlie Baker, URBED:
Expensive energy is a good thing, isn’t it, when you are a university academic on the government gravy train.
Fighting climate change is like fighting World War II, but it’s more complex (seriously, they say that).
Laurence Delina and Dr. Mark Diesendorf, Institute of Environmental Studies, University of New South Wales
Who knew that a life and death battle against mass army’s of killers, with a race to develop better radar, encryption codes, and nuclear weapons, was simpler than fighting a trace gas? Anyone get the feeling these academics don’t know a lot of history?
We just have to change our lifestyles (apparently).
You won’t need to visit relatives anymore, get used to staying at home, and enjoying your “local” environment.
And the Chinese will have to learn to like the low energy lifestyle, I’m sure they will take kindly to being told the American Dream is out of their reach.
These people are so out of touch with reality they are dangerous. The problem is the system that feeds them. Tax dollars supported this event, and the salaries of the people who spoke there. The Tyndall Centre is almost entirely funded through universities and grants: namely the University of East Anglia, University of Cambridge, Cardiff University, University of Manchester, Newcastle University, University of Oxford, University of Southampton, and the University of Sussex. Some money comes from the Chinese, Fudan University. These people are tax-eaters.
Who is responsible for the decision to send taxpayer funds this way instead of something useful? The tax money passes through a web of hands, so accountability becomes a web too. But ultimately someone is responsible for the process and the outcome.
Does the buck stop with David Cameron?
Let me know what other gems lie hidden in the abstracts….
h/t Paul Matthews
David Hone (Shell Climate Change Advisor) actually went to the conference and found a bunch of ideologues.
this was a room of catastrophists (as in “catastrophic global warming”), with the prevailing view, at least to my ears, that the issue could only be addressed by the complete transformation of the global energy and political systems, with the latter moving to one of state control and regulated consumerism. There would be no room for “ruthless individualism” in such a world. The posters that dotted the lecture theatre lobby area covered topics as diverse as vegan diets to an eventual return to low technology hunter-gatherer societies (but thankfully there was one CCS poster in the middle of all this). Much to my surprise I was not really at an emission reduction conference (despite the label saying I was), but a political ideology conference. Although I have been involved in the climate change issue for over a decade, I had not heard this set of views on the issue voiced so consistently in one place. This was a room where there was a round of applause when one audience member asked how LNG and coal exporters in Australia might be “annihilated” following their (supposed) support for the repeal of the carbon tax in that country.
Here was I just thinking (on the Wind Towers post) that the sensible greens (in that case the ones who didn’t like to see rare birds killed) needed to separate themselves from the political activists who wear green disguises. Here’s a different thread, where the economic activists (Shell) wear green disguises, but need to separate themselves from the greens-who-can’t-count.