April 5, 2025

22 thoughts on “Is the push for Net Zero undemocratic? | The Big Question

  1. GB News, please stop interviewing or giving these globalist mouthpieces airtime: if people want to hear morons repeating slogans they can go to virtually all the other broadcasters.

  2. Firstly, people don't vote 'for.' They vote against the incompetent and corrupt party currently in power. The manifesto of the other party is read in this light; i.e. Is it a tolerable alternative to the current shabby crew? Also firstly, a manifesto is a package deal. To infer the positive endorsement of every aspect of that package is false and misleading.

    Secondly, net zero by 2050 is endorsed by both parties!
    It is a global policy commitment.
    There is no democratic choice.

    And thirdly, anyone who knows anything knows that net zero is a lie!

    Net zero is actually a compound lie. It's not just that it's unachievable; nor merely that it's kicking the can down the road until the science suggests it will be too late, but that, even were it a sincere and achievable policy, it would not address the global reality of the climate and ecological crisis.

    I could explain why at great length, but suffice to say – the earth is a big ball of molten rock containing limitless heat energy easily converted to constant heavy duty electricity and clean burning hydrogen fuel, and the world needs reliable and abundant clean energy to meet the challenges ahead, particularly poor and populous countries like India and China, because, if they continue to develop using fossil fuels, the UK imposing crippling taxation and infrastructure spending to achieve net zero wouldn't make the least little difference globally.

  3. The world would be a better place and pollution, if not stopped entirely, could be more easily controlled if there were less people on the planet. New Zealand is about the size of Britain, but has a population of only 5 million compared to the UK’s 65 million or so, considerably less than a tenth of the UK population. But it enjoys a high standard of living, as high, if not higher then the UK.
    Why could the Uk not have a similar population? Less people means less cars, factories and so on, and renewables could supply a larger percentage of energy needs.
    As it is, world population will increase at least until the mid 2080s – Beyond the lifetimes of most of us living today – when it will have increased to at 10 and a half billion people. That fact alone would make a return to a lifestyle of several centuries, even thousands of years ago, totally impossible.
    People who advocate net zero and no use of fossil fuels at all should practice what they preach. In reality though, that is impossible, certainly for decades to come.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *