Britain sets world's toughest carbon laws. Can we and should we match them in the US?

Great Debates
1

So Britain takes the leadership role for the entire world. Hail Britannica and I thank you for this. They should prove or disprove all the arguments against stopping Global Warming from becoming catastrophic.

I believe they can meet their goals and show the rest of the world the way.

Here are some articles on the subject.
Britain Drafts Laws to Slash Carbon Emissions

Britain sets world’s toughest carbon laws

Blair unveils bid to cut emissions by 60%
Q&A: Climate change plans from BBC
I love this from the BBC Q&A:

Jim

2

One time bump for AM crowd.

3

I have several comments I could make, and I thought of posting yesterday, but I wanted to see if I could make a post that had some hard cites in it to back it up. I don’t know that I have time to that due to being busy…um, working on carbon reduction… But my off the cuff comments are:

  1. It’s a lofty and good goal.
  2. I don’t see how they can possibly do it and stay competitive without the rest of the developed world doing the same, and
  3. Good on them for trying at least.
4

Good question. Blair’s set a target of 2050, or in political terms far enough away that it’s not his problem. If by some miracle of science we manage to do it, and the idiot is still breathing, then he’ll claim credit for having the vision that led to it. If (more likely case) it never happens, and again he’s still with us, then he can claim his vision was foiled by the poor choices of his successors.

“The draft bill does not stipulate how the cuts should be made, or give specific reduction targets for individual businesses, councils and households.”

Says it all really. It’s just a pathetic attempt to try to regain something to be proud of out of his pisspoor reign.

5

The Environment Minister David Minibland, sorry I meant Milliband, was interviewed on the current affairs program Newsnight last night and admitted that under current Kyoto rules the UK can buy carbon credits from other countries to cover up to 50% of our yearly emissions.

So worst case scenario… 10% reduction when we’re already at 12%. No-lose scenario.

Also remember that Blair’s gone from front-line politics by the end of the year so what does he care if it’s an unobtainable goal.

6

Perhaps, or perhaps it’ll be a long term boost by forcing the British to adopt new technology faster than they otherwise would. I’m kind of sceptical of claims of economic DOOM from environmental regulations, given how standard they are.

And if they don’t manage to meet the declared goal, well, even a smaller reduction would be good.

7

Time will tell. Just from skimming things, if they really try and do this I don’t see how they can keep from crippling their economy, at least in the short term. Though maybe I’m missing something.

-XT

8

Could you explain in loose terms or detail what part of carbon reduction will cripple their economy?

Positives that I see:

  • Modernization of physical plants causing a construction boom.
  • A big boost to BP Solar that could grow their world market share in Solar related industries. BP Solar already has about 20% market share. This should now grow larger.
  • Revival of a moribund auto industry as they jump start low emission vehicles of all sorts.

Jim

9

Well, I haven’t looked deeply into it of course…just skimmed the link in the OP. Based on that though:

This part is what strikes me as the only real piece of data we can go by (at least, as I said, from the link in the OP…if someone has an implementation plan for how the UK is going to go about all this, we can take a look at that. I’m at work atm, so don’t really have the time for a search).

They want to reduce carbon emissions by 2020 (less than 13 years) by 26% and 60%(!!) by 2050. I assume they mean reduce their current emissions to those levels…not reduce their current emissions to 26/60% below 1990 levels…if they mean THAT its going to be even harder (though I seem to remember that due to their switch from coal they have already done a lot to reduce their old emissions…I may be misremembering here).

At any rate, those kinds of substantial reductions don’t come for free. I have no idea how they plan to reduce so much, but I’m guessing they will impose some high level ‘voluntary’ restrictions on emissions from their various industries, coupled with some kind of plan to reduce emissions from personal transport (cars and such). That all costs a LOT of money…and it could certainly lower the productivity of their industry, especially in the short term. Unless everyone follows suit ( :dubious: ), at least in the short term, the UK would lose productivity and this would have a negative impact on their economy. Whether in the medium and/or the long term this would be good is unknown…and unknowable. Depends on what they replace their current system with, and how productive and efficient it is, how much of a competetive edge it gives them down the road.

How do you predict this? Certainly in the short term they are going to take a hit. But lets say, as an example, they bite the bullet and take their buggy whip factories out of production and then modernize them with all the latest and greatest carbon emission controls and 10 to 15 years down the pike they are ready to go back to full production. What good will it do them when no one now wants buggy whips? Certainly this is an exaggerated comparison (on a lot of different levels…for one thing I doubt those industries will simply halt production while they modernize), but it illustrates how difficult it is to make such predictions…and what the various permutations might be by lowering your productivity in order to do this kind of thing. You may be completely right and 10 or 15 years down the pike the UK becomes a manufacturing powerhouse because of these steps…or maybe some country that doesn’t hold itself back will come up with new processes that make whatever they do completely obsolete.

Certainly it could…and maybe this will be a good long term effect as you say. Then again, maybe it won’t…its difficult to predict such things.

True…though I’d like to see how they will dictate innovation in their auto industry. Just because you WANT low emission (and presumably high mileage) vehicles, engineering and manufacturing them is another proposition. What makes you think they won’t simply get their vehicles from Japan or elsewhere in Europe (or perhaps the US)…or some other country that hasn’t crippled their industries to meet these kinds of goals? After all, there will be a market there…so everyone is going to want to get in on the action, and many countries are much further ahead in this particular race.

-XT

10

What automotive industry ?

The whole thing is a ‘greener than thou’ joke

  • the Conservatives and Labour are playing a form of poker
11

Does Britain have no auto industry left now?
Is there any chance this could jump-start it?

I do see the game of chicken being played and for once I applaud it. The do seem to be trying to outdo each other on this issue and I have hopes that maybe the same concerns will drive the 2008 election in the US. Apparently Schwarzenegger on the Republican side and Gore on the Democratic side are in position to keep this issue on the front burner for the US. We know Nader will also push the issue forward. The Democratic candidate could easily grab this issue and run with it to completely minimize Nader’s impact on the 2008 election. I politician like McCain or Rudy Giuliani would probably propose a republican plan to compete with the democratic candidate’s plan.

xtisme, thank you for your thoughtful answer. I sincerely hope you are wrong and I am right but I understand your concerns now. I doubt Solar Panels and Wind Turbines should be compared to buggy whips. As long as BP or its competitors keep advancing the technology, the need for the products should remain. In BP favor, even if the EU or US makes the great break through on Fusion power in 5 years and reduces the need for Solar and Wind in the industrialize word, inexpensive Solar and Wind will remain in great demand in the developing world where power distribution and infrastructure is a bigger problem than build large power plants. Besides, I doubt anyone realistically expects Fusion any sooner that 2050. I fear it will take longer than that.

Solar is beginning to take some leaps forwards in both cost reduction and efficiency. The future is ‘bright’ for Solar.

Jim

12

What worries me is people chasing off in the wrong direction for the right reason.

I believe that it is very possible that we are in for a spell of global warming, and I know that there is nothing that the UK can do about it.

13

There’s still about 120,000 units a month produced in the UK.

http://www.themanufacturer.com/uk/detail.html?contents_id=7228

14

How do you know this? What qualifies you to **know ** this?

The general consensus is that human activity is impacting Global warming.
The UK is willing to take a leadership role and hopefully inspire the big problem countries like the US, India and China to think about the future. This is how the UK can do something about it. It is pretty simple really.

If you accept the consensus opinion of Scientists around the world you would understand that we can greatly reduce the threat of Global Warming.

Jim

15

EIther I did a poor job of explaining myself or you didn’t understand…I’ll grant that it was probably me. :slight_smile: I wasn’t saying solar power or wind turbines were going to become the equivelent of buggy whips…far from it. Though I doubt they will ever become the prime power generators (no in our lifetimes), I’m fairly certain they will have a role to play.

No, I was refering to the UK’s other industries. If they have to hold down production while they go green (which is going to take time and money), what COULD happen is that by the time they are modernized and ready to roll again the markets might have moved on…and they will be left with factories and such producing goods or services that are no longer needed because the money they WOULD have spent on innovation was spent on reducing their carbon foot print.

Well, I agree. I remember reading some time ago about a new process being developed in (I think) South Africa that looked especially promissing. Its just not ready for prime time yet. Right NOW, the only technology that is fully ready to implement that can significantly reduce our carbon footprint in power generation on the scales we are talking about here is fission. And I’m all for that…in fact, I’m hoping the US gets off our collective asses and starts a massive program of building nuclear power plants.

-XT

16

I agree that Blair is desperately trying to distract attention from the Iraq war and the ‘cash for honours’ scandal, which is how he will be remembered.

Anybody can set a ‘target’ for 2050 - it doesn’t mean anything will happen, or any money will be spent on it.

Recently Blair forced through the renewal of our nuclear ‘deterrent’ (an estimated cost of up to £20bn). Apparently these submarine weapons are needed to fight Al-Qaeda and North Korea. :rolleyes:

The latest budget for the 2012 London Olympics will be £9.3bn - four times the original estimate of £2.4bn. :smack:

17

I agree with almost everything you said, but I am trying to figure out which British industries will take the big hit and why you think it will be for so long. The number one thing the UK can do is in the power industry. Cleaning up power production is the single largest factor. More Fission, Clean Coal, more Gas and a lot more Wind and Solar will be big helps.

Setting very strict energy efficiency guidelines will not hurt industry and might even help it a little as most of the large appliances that the British buy are imports and maybe a brand new manufacturing sector could evolve in the UK for the very efficient appliances. As an example, America had pretty much lost it entire CRT industry, but LCD panels driven by new HD standards are being made in the US.

I already mentioned cars. The auto industry in Britain cannot get much worse. Therefore, this at least has a chance to revitalize it.

Having my say, what British industries are in danger by complying with the new law if it goes through, as it appears it will?

Jim

18

If put under stress to produce ,there may be strides made in technology. A first world economy that goes whole hog into cleaning itself up may be the front runner for the next generation. It may have positive future effects. I wish the US would toughen up and go for it.

19

You mean like building nuclear power plants, hydroelectric plants and wind farms? Good luck with that. We tried. Nuclear power plants produce radioactive waste, hydroelectric plants annoy the fish, and birds are too stupid to fly around wind turbines. We could have cut our coal burning in half if eco-terrorists weren’t trying to stop civilization from moving forward.

And if we could import some of the little turbo-diesels from Europe and grow our own bio-fuel it would drastically reduce CO2 emissions. How frickin hard is that to do? We don’t have to reinvent a damn thing. I would love a turbo diesel 1.8L with hybrid assist as a daily driver. Put the batteries in the empty space around the front fenders so they don’t take up useful space. Stick a solar panel hood on it so it can sit there 8 hrs/day soaking up fuel economy while I’m at work. Make it a station wagon and sell it for $15,000. Done. Got my checkbook ready to buy it.

20

@WhatExit
I’m afraid I live in the UK and can assure you that the chance of anything boosting our manufacturing sector is just about zero.

A few cars are built here, but the companies are foreign owned, British domestic appliances generally turn out to be rebadged imports. Our labour costs are very high and we have a grossly over valued currency.

Sure James Dyson might design some energy efficient washing machine (his current one seems a bit of a flop) but you can be sure that it will be manufactured in Malaysia.

Turfing out existing refrigerators etc and replacing them with new ‘energy efficient’ models is like spending $100 to save $10 a year (and that is optimistic). All white goods are already marked up for energy efficiency, mainly because the Germans do it - and their kit is the best, so it has become a de facto standard.

Companies like BP employ things like Public Relations agencies, and they’ve figured that it is better to run with the hounds. They are a bit more sophisticated than companies like Exxon who commission bogus research.

Even if the UK became totally carbon neutral it would not make a jot of difference, the figure that is bandied around is that we account for 1.6% of global anthropogenic carbon output, and one does not need a slide rule to see that global output is rising in places like China and India at a rate that will dwarf anything we do.

This ‘green’ stuff in the UK is a blind, the Conservative Party is using it as a way of diverting attention from its real policies - basically it is keeping its powder dry for the run up to the next election. This puts Blair’s mob on the spot, so they are trying to be greener than the Conservatives. Their idea of ‘green’ is to set ridiculous targets and bang taxes on anything that they can call carbon inefficient.

We currently pay about $10 per gallon for petrol, they want to bump annual road tax up to $800 per year for something like a Landrover (basically a SUV in the USA) and they are seriously looking into ‘road charging’ per mile using GPS. Local councils are gearing up for charging us per lb for household waste disposal and they’ve slapped ‘carbon’ taxes on airline tickets.

We in the UK are way ahead in the game, we are being taxed and bullied in the name of saving the planet.

Of course nothing really useful is coming out of it, if you want to get rid of an old refrigerator then round my way you have to pay $60 for the council to take it away and stick it in a huge pile of rotting fridges that are doubtless leaking CFCs. You see nobody has actually got around to building plants for cleaning them up.

Oh, yes, and in a few months time if you want to sell a property then you’ll have to pay $500 for some jerk to do an energy efficiency survey, a bit of paper that is no use to the vendor or the purchaser.

I don’t mind doing sensible things, stuff like cleaning up rivers, putting filters on power plants, getting lead out of petrol and banning CFCs. I even approve of planting trees to prevent soil erosion and don’t mind paying farmers for doing nothing. What really worries me is we are getting belted round the head and getting nothing in return.