Won't the Government do this for us?
Sorry, no they won't
They are doing something. Currently the UK government is back peddling fast on it's climate policies. While vaguely green-washing. Even if they were perfect though and did all they possibly could to:
even then, they couldn't keep within the budget without significant action from individuals.
- get us onto renewable electricity fast whilst still keeping the lights on,
- retrofit our homes to zero carbon,
- provide us with effective, affordable and enjoyable public transport,
- ensure Carbon footprint labelling of all goods
even then, they couldn't keep within the budget without significant action from individuals.
UK Carbon Budgets
There is a UK carbon budget which is being implemented in 5 steps of 5 years each. See this Friends of the earth report or this article on how the budget is set and why it's woefully inadequate.
In summary:
In summary:
- The UK carbon budget starts by aiming for a 50:50 chance of staying below 2 degrees C.
- 2 degrees C is very risky
- 50:50 chance is not a safe bet.
- It is not fair globally: The remaining budget is not shared equally per person historically or even from now, instead it aims to gradually become equal with other countries per capita by 2050. i.e. because we in the UK burn far more than our fair share now, we should be allowed to continue to do so untill 2050 to ease us into equality. It assumes that countries emitting far less than average per capita (through poverty) will continue to do so, increasing emissions slowly untill 2050 when all countries could emit an equal amount per capita.
- The emissions from manufacturing consumer goods are attributed to the country of manufacture, not to the country that the consumer goods are consumed in. So net import countries such as the UK can use a lot of consumer goods without the emissions caused by those goods being counted in the UK carbon budget.
- The budget relies significantly on carbon sequestration to pull carbon out of the atmosphere, allowing us to emit more. But the technologies relied on to do this are currently unproven and unfunded. It's like joining a gym to allow you to eat more cake but never actually going to the gym.
Update: as of April 2019 the UK government has declared a climate emergency and is currently interpreting this as needing to steadily drop emissions to reach net zero by 2050 in the UK. This is too late for many reasons. Firstly 2050 is too late to get to zero globally. Secondly, even if it wasn't, the UK is currently emitting over twice the global average per person and over a hundred times the per capita emissions of the poorest countries. If all countries reduced emissions steadily to zero by 2050 then big emitters continue to emit more and the poorest countries get poorer. It's like sharing a cake by having eaten most of it already and then claiming most of the remaining crumbs on the basis that we're used to eating more. Thirdly, it takes no account of the fact that we've used our fair share of the budget long ago. Fourthly, it considers emissions embedded in the products we import for our use to be somebody else's problem. As this is a major part of our emissions responsibility, (about a third of our total emissions). That's a major problem.
2015 UN Climate Conference Paris COP21
You would imagine that the Paris talks would look at the budget and consider how best to meet it and share the remaining emissions budget. Unfortunately, mentioning the budget is considered “too ambitious”. So instead countries have volunteered what they consider they will be able to achieve and the hope is that that will be sufficient.
Here's a selection of responses to how the talks went, put together by the Fleming Policy Centre:
"A victory for all of the planet and future generations" ~ John Kerry, U.S. Secretary of State
"We did it! A turning point in human history!" ~ Avaaz
"10/10 for presentation, 4/10 for content" ~ Kevin Anderson, climate scientist
"A historic moment and positive step forward ... but not the legally-binding science and justice-based agreement that was needed" ~ Friends of the Earth UK
"A sham" ~ Friends of the Earth International
"It's a fraud really, a fake" ~ James Hansen, climate scientist
"Our leaders have shown themselves willing to set our world on fire" ~Naomi Klein, author/activist
"Epic fail on a planetary scale" ~ New Internationalist
“The US is a cruel hypocrite. This is a deliberate plan to make the rich richer and the poor poorer” ~ Lidy Nacpil, Asian People’s Movement on Debt and Development
"A victory for all of the planet and future generations" ~ John Kerry, U.S. Secretary of State
"We did it! A turning point in human history!" ~ Avaaz
"10/10 for presentation, 4/10 for content" ~ Kevin Anderson, climate scientist
"A historic moment and positive step forward ... but not the legally-binding science and justice-based agreement that was needed" ~ Friends of the Earth UK
"A sham" ~ Friends of the Earth International
"It's a fraud really, a fake" ~ James Hansen, climate scientist
"Our leaders have shown themselves willing to set our world on fire" ~Naomi Klein, author/activist
"Epic fail on a planetary scale" ~ New Internationalist
“The US is a cruel hypocrite. This is a deliberate plan to make the rich richer and the poor poorer” ~ Lidy Nacpil, Asian People’s Movement on Debt and Development
If pledges work perfectly, they make 2°C impossible.
For an in depth analysis see climateparis.org
OK, OK, so I accept it's up to us really. How do I do it?