Why is life on earth still second only to fossil fuels? | George Monbiot

TIt is, sadly, that there is no connection between what we know and what we do. Almost everyone knows, at least in part, that our race is on the brink of disaster. But no one ever changes their behavior – most of all, driving, flying and consuming meat and milk.

At a time when the crisis was the worst, the United Kingdom chose the least of all the governments. Both the Westminster government and local authorities have continued to build roads and expand airports. According to an analysis by the World Health Organization (WWF), Britain’s last በጀት 145m has been allocated ባቢያዊ 40 billion for environmental measures, 40 40 billion.

Interestingly, “promoting economic recovery” of oil and gas is still a government policy. According to the government’s Energy White Paper, the promotion will ensure that “the UK continues to be an attractive destination for international capital”, in order to “maintain a systematic and successful transition away from traditional fossil fuels.” It is difficult to imagine a more perverse argument. But when they pursue incompatible goals, the first victim is logic.

So when our house was on fire, the government sent fuel trucks to refuel. With donations from oil and gas companies, the Conservative Party has no doubt that Boris Johnson is approving a new oil field in the North Sea. However, climate scientists have long argued that unless all new fossil fuels are developed, there is no real hope of preventing global warming of more than 1.5C. Of course, existing projects need to retire. And by 2050 we will not be able to achieve the official goal of the government. This target has nothing to do with the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement, which coincides with the coincidence, the other sign of knowledge and action. It should be replaced by a more stringent standard, but no one in power is ready to discuss it.

It is the same for almost every government. Joe Biden’s green hopes were plummeted as soon as the business collapsed. The administration has issued more than 2,000 new permits since it promised to ban new drilling and braking on federal land. The National Security Adviser called on OPEC + to increase the production of oil cartels to reduce the cost of driving monsters that many Americans still buy. We are told that Biden’s modest speech hides the need for extremism. But speech sets boundaries of action, and low promises are lowered.

As long as we do not keep fossil fuels in the ground, any commitment to stop climate change is only a sign. The atmosphere does not respond to signals. He is not moved by promises, he is not impressed by words. There are no factions that can be formed, and there are no voters who can be distracted.

This is one of the reasons why governments hate and reject what climate science tells them. If they take it seriously, they will align their policy with scientific advice. However, such restrictions in political elections are seen not only by politicians but also by the philosophies on which our democracy is based.

Or are they? Governments are happy to limit government representation. The British oil company is now suing the Italian government over its “future prospects” after Italy banned new drilling in coastal waters. She was a signatory to the Energy Charter, which would allow Italy to claim compensation for future projects. The treaty clause allows such cases to be made after the nations are no longer members, so Italy He may be sued if he leaves the agreement in 2016. Climate change is almost impossible. It represents the slightest restriction on the political choice that governments like us can fully enjoy. I’m not sure how we can escape from such agreements, but government lawyers should be on the lookout for a way out. Otherwise, future corporate profits will be more important than life on earth.

The state of emergency requires a new policy, but it is nowhere to be found. Governments still fear lobby groups more than they fear the collapse of our way of life. For small and temporary political gain, they lead to far-reaching and irreversible consequences. Members of parliament who do not care about the poor, and who do not have a long record of voting against them, should be protected by sudden weather action.

The Treasury is unwilling to spend even to support the government’s weak program. Johnson was indicted at the Glasgow Conference in November for changing the global response to climate change, with Johnson appearing unable to make difficult constitutional decisions.

There is no government yet to think of the change we want, the most advanced, universal program that puts humanity and the rest of life on earth above all else. We need not only a new policy but also a new code of conduct. We need to close the gap between knowing and working. But this conversation never started.

Leave a Comment