Britain to ban new petrol cars and vans by 2030 on road to net zero emissions

Because nothing much needs to change, which is (partly) what was so funny about the debate surrounding it.

Of course you can't do them storming straight out of the gates. It just doesn't work like that. But sure, you can do them perfectly.

How?

- You provide incentives for attractive alternatives. - You invest in those alternatives and you invest in contextual drivers that make the transition more appealing. For instance, you provide an integrated plans for urban planning that cover different concerns. - You emphasize the benefits of those alternatives on an individual level. - You make a compelling narrative why the status quo is holding the individual back. - You diversify your narrative to to identify / appeal with as many different social groups as you have to.

That's just the content. Then there's also your political position. Whether your part of a power elite, or your not, you still need tactics to garner support, whether you like it or not. Alinsky's 12 rules for radicals, for instance, is a classic example in that regard.

The automative industry or the meat industry didn't just happen simply because individual consumers out of their own accord. They also happened because consumers where incentivized to buy in a 'modern' lifestyle with a heavy focus on cheap and convenience during the 20th century as opposed to more traditional, localized ways of living; and because those industries that supported this cultural shift were directly and indirectly subsidized. For instance, cities got covered in highway infrastructure in the 1950's and 1960's paid for through public funding and public policy making.

Public governance is about figuring out feedback loops in social, economical and political dynamics and finding ways to bend them towards your agenda.

Banning cars in city centers is already happening in European cities. The usual argument is to make living in the city more comfortable or make the city more attractive for commerce driven by regional or international tourism (both of which having their own drawbacks and tensions).

> From about 3,000 years ago to about 100 years ago, sea levels naturally rose and declined slightly, with little change in the overall trend. Over the past 100 years, global temperatures have risen about 1 degree C (1.8 degrees F), with sea level response to that warming totaling about 160 to 210 mm (with about half of that amount occurring since 1993)

This is hearsay. You were not there 3000 years ago, or even 100 years. You have been told a story and are re-telling it to me. Why should I believe it? I know how people can mislead into lying with statistics, for their work, etc to prepare information that is not accurate. I just don't have any faith in science. (I love the scientific method, but that's a different story, that pales into insignificance when funding is involved.)

> In 2018, the all-species index in the UK, based on the aggregated population trends of 130 breeding species, was 11% below its 1970 value.

We have had industrial farming methods take off at that time, and we do throw some awful stuff on the soil - I'm prepared to believe that this is probably fair data. However, how can I know this is really true?

Do you really think I advocate for no action to be taken? Taking your first sentence at face value it appears you believe in an all or nothing approach.

Also, and again I know this is a sensitive area so I understand why you are coming across this way, but comments like 'you should be much more worried about this problem than you are' are unnecessary and divisive.

I am extremely worried about climate change. That is why I am concerned by extreme 'all or nothing' impractical approaches that will simply achieve nothing. I prefer something to nothing.

>in ten years you folks will need to be in a position to switch to a technology which is already reasonably viable so better get scaling

Do you consider needing to upgrade 400,000 substations and installing charge points along ~200,000km of roads within 10-20 years reasonably viable?

My whole issue with this is not that we should take NO action, it's that for any action taken we should either:

a. Speak honestly about the actual efforts required to make it happen and then take that action (e.g. start the substation upgrade, start installing the chargers), b. Take more practical action that requires less drastic work.

The option being touted is:

c. Ban non-electric cars by 2030 and hybrids by 2035, say absolutely nothing about the VAST £100's of billions required investment to make that feasible, feel good and move on.

Do you think option c is more or less likely to result in anything changing? I think this requirement is likely to just get rolled back and ignored.

"translate into pressure on all governments globally to build credible plans for decarbonisation"

I actually agree with this, but I don't think unrealistic plans that ignore actual costs are any kind of solution.

I absolutely do NOT advocate putting off addressing climate issues. I personally believe in taking as much of a global approach as possible (if China refuse to stop using dirty coal plants everywhere, economically divest from them for example), correctly counting the CO2 cost of e.g. electric cars/renewable energy from raw material to functional capacity, not just discounting all CO2/other nasty climate gases from production and taking as practical an approach as we can.

I am also a realist and realise that if a country was to go all in on what many deem necessary and suffers a colossal economic impact that'll likely discourage any other country from taking that or probably much action at all.

It's a hard problem that feels like it needs drastic immediate action but the problem is made harder from the fact that that is simply not possible, I'm sorry.

Those who truly are worried about this should be being as practical as possible in order to get as much change into the world as they can.

A longer article about that point - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/feb/02/oil.business1 (nothing about the outcomes though)