THOUGHT EXPERIMENT: Some 70% of people, depends how you ask, accept the global emergency. Climate system destabilisation is one aspect, declining biodiversity and increasing pollution is another. I ask: what would actually *break* if humanity responded decisively? 1/

Climate: a decisive response = cap on fossil fuel extraction and planned phase out. Fewer private car journeys, less electricity. Nothing would *break*. We still live and eat. There are alternatives and we can all cut back and share more. So what are we afraid of breaking? 2/
Pollution: reducing the above helps all that, cracking down on pollution and biodiversity loss will reduce materials consumption but changing and sharing we can still live on the planet. What would break? 3/
Most pollution and resource consumption is done by rich people. Billions of poor people live and thrive so the rich can too. Nothing will *break* there? 4/
Of course, a rapid reduction in resource consumption, less of most things and enough of the essentials for everyone will *break*something. Economic growth for one thing. But if that broke, what would *break*with it? 5/
I guess the economic system would break. Stop working. Jobs would disappear. If jobs go, people's lives get broke. So if we respond to the emergency by cutting back we know what gets broke. But wait. 6/
Most jobs disappearing doesn't HAVE to *break*anything does it? As a society we could reorganise. Society existed before jobs - that is a man-made construction. There must be plenty of alternatives: set up a government agency and employ everyone. There is always plenty to do. 7/
So what this little thought experiment tells me is we are all afraid of losing our jobs. Take away that fear and we can get on with dealing the emergency. Suggestions please! Nothing will *break* if anyone replies to my tweets sometime. I might even smile!8/8

More from Climate change

The UK government's climate advisory body is launching its next carbon budget: basically, outlining what the UK can emit between 2033 and 2037. It's a big deal - launch video starting right now.
Watch along:


Will tweet along snippets. Pretty relevant to...............everything, really. #UKCarbonBudget

"Instead of being just a budget, it's a pathway we have to tread to reach net zero in 2050" @lorddeben

Just like quite a few other modelling exercises, CCC use a spectrum between behaviour change and between technological change. #UKCarbonBudget.

Both = best (just like @AEMO_Media's Step Change scenario in their ISP)


'Balanced' is what they use for their recs. "We're doing 60% of the emissions reductions in the first 15 years, and then 40% in the next".

The slinky kitty curve....good to see. No evidence of delaying action to Dec 29 2049, here. #UKCarbonBudget


"By front loading, we're minimising the UK's contribution to cumulative emissions" - really important point. A slow path to net zero - more climate harm than a fast one. #UKCarbonBudget

You May Also Like

1/12

RT-PCR corona (test) scam

Symptomatic people are tested for one and only one respiratory virus. This means that other acute respiratory infections are reclassified as


2/12

It is tested exquisitely with a hypersensitive non-specific RT-PCR test / Ct >35 (>30 is nonsense, >35 is madness), without considering Ct and clinical context. This means that more acute respiratory infections are reclassified as


3/12

The Drosten RT-PCR test is fabricated in a way that each country and laboratory perform it differently at too high Ct and that the high rate of false positives increases massively due to cross-reaction with other (corona) viruses in the "flu


4/12

Even asymptomatic, previously called healthy, people are tested (en masse) in this way, although there is no epidemiologically relevant asymptomatic transmission. This means that even healthy people are declared as COVID


5/12

Deaths within 28 days after a positive RT-PCR test from whatever cause are designated as deaths WITH COVID. This means that other causes of death are reclassified as