I think the green agenda was consigned to history by Presidential Decree yesterday. Given the traction that 'but China' (and others) whataboutery had already gained, there's little hope of meaningful progress to fight climate change in a world where politicians have no sense and less shame.Was interested to see that Labour ( or at least Rachael Reeves) seem to be supporting expansion of Heathrow Airport as well as Gatwick & Luton.
Not sure how this fits in with the Green Agenda being promoted for individuals eg heat pumps, Evs etc
The paradox of economic growth v green agenda?
Mixed messaging?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jan/21/heathrow-third-runway-rachel-reeves-sadiq-khan
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...unway-heathrow-airport-flatlining-growth.html
I'm hoping that Trump will discover he can't dictate what the rest of the world does. He might be drilling for oil with the aims of selling it to the rest of the world but that requires the rest of the world to want to buy it and if the rest of the world is sticking to c lomate targets and renewables are cheaper then he'll have a lot of oil with nobody (or few) to take it off his hands.I think the green agenda was consigned to history by Presidential Decree yesterday. Given the traction that 'but China' (and others) whataboutery had already gained, there's little hope of meaningful progress to fight climate change in a world where politicians have no sense and less shame.
Reeves seems to be going growth at any cost. Even if the cost is higher (eg destroying our climate) she's going for it. Yet to me she seems to be clutching at anything, no plan, just like a drowning person clutching and anything and everything.Was interested to see that Labour ( or at least Rachael Reeves) seem to be supporting expansion of Heathrow Airport as well as Gatwick & Luton.
Not sure how this fits in with the Green Agenda being promoted for individuals eg heat pumps, Evs etc
The paradox of economic growth v green agenda?
Mixed messaging?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jan/21/heathrow-third-runway-rachel-reeves-sadiq-khan
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...unway-heathrow-airport-flatlining-growth.html
Reeves seems to be going growth at any cost. Even if the cost is higher (eg destroying our climate) she's going for it. Yet to me she seems to be clutching at anything, no plan, just like a drowning person clutching and anything and everything.
Does not inspire confidence.
Ian
I agree. Apparently (from BBC Newsnight) the extra runway is more an attempt to turn Heathrow into a hub ie people fly A to B via/changing flights at Heathrow. Apparently benefits are massively higher expanding regional airports.Not sure I understand how Jet2 having more flights to/from London is going to improve "growth" in the North of England, Scotland, etc
UK is 'open for business'.So Rachel from Accounts is clutching at anything, trying to spin an impression in part that the UK no longer cares about climate pollution.
Hasn't every Chancellor from the year dot used those exact words? And thus do they have the desired effect?UK is 'open for business'.
Hasn't every Chancellor from the year dot used those exact words? And thus do they have the desired effect?
Repeating things ling proven not to work is hardly the smartest thing to do.
Ian
I'm hoping that Trump will discover he can't dictate what the rest of the world does. He might be drilling for oil with the aims of selling it to the rest of the world but that requires the rest of the world to want to buy it and if the rest of the world is sticking to c lomate targets and renewables are cheaper then he'll have a lot of oil with nobody (or few) to take it off his hands.
Even if fuel drops in price a lot domestically in the US, many there are suffering a cost of living crisis and rather than use more fuel they'll be spending money saved on other crucial aspects to life (eg healthcare, food, etc.).
Of course it won't be so absolute but I'm hoping his aims will be significantly frustrated because we won't all be doing what he says.
Ian
Maybe not as recent research has shown that the climate pollution from exported LNG has is worse than that from coal.He will sell LNG , Biden cancelled it- allegedly he had no knowledge that he had signed the stop on shopping LNG
Firstly, it's meaningless shite. Secondly, to quote Boris, fark business.Hasn't every Chancellor from the year dot used those exact words? And thus do they have the desired effect?