You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion
What is net zero and why is it necessary?
Former Community Member
Decarbonising quickly and effectively to hit our net-zero target by 2050 requires urgent, clear and decisive leadership. Our short video looks at the skills requirements for delivering this target and breaks down the results from our recent Skills for net zero and a green recovery survey. Watch the video and sign in to let us know your thoughts in the comments!
I am totally unqualified to comment on Climate change. Personally I am more concerned about the damage being done to our planet by the continuous need for more of every rare resource going be it pangolin scales or cobalt, copper, diamond, tantalum, tin, gold etc much of which is mined in third world countries with minimal if any environmental controls.
However I do feel competent to comment on the hype surrounding our climate change emergency. The BBC was force to apologise a few years ago for allowing a government minister to pass negative comments on Climate Change as he was not qualified, but every news outlet reports Greta Thunberg's comments as gospel. I am not aware of any qualification she has on environmental science.
A few years ago a UK University, I forget which one as my memory for names is very poor, after a thorough investigation was forced to admit that some of the figures in a paper supporting the temperature increases of climate change had not been "calculated" correctly, others said they were deliberately falsified. More recently I read that there had not been any issue at all and the investigation had found the figures to be accurate.
A saw some figures a few years ago which claimed to prove that solar panels could never during their lifespan compensate for the CO2 and environmental damage from their production if used North of Spain. Given the changes in technology I would like to see the figures for the current solar panels.
I would like to see properly argued and proven case for and against climate change with proper debate and proven figures backing it up as I am fed up with the immediate castigation of anyone silly enough to ruin their career by making any negative comment about the current Climate Change Emergency bandwagon. I read that many scientists admit that the best way to get funding is to ensure that their research proposals include climate change issues.
Where is the proper scientific debate about the causes and consequences of climate change, which has been happening for at least a few million years, and engineering debate about the solutions to the problems?
I am totally unqualified to comment on Climate change. Personally I am more concerned about the damage being done to our planet by the continuous need for more of every rare resource going be it pangolin scales or cobalt, copper, diamond, tantalum, tin, gold etc much of which is mined in third world countries with minimal if any environmental controls.
However I do feel competent to comment on the hype surrounding our climate change emergency. The BBC was force to apologise a few years ago for allowing a government minister to pass negative comments on Climate Change as he was not qualified, but every news outlet reports Greta Thunberg's comments as gospel. I am not aware of any qualification she has on environmental science.
A few years ago a UK University, I forget which one as my memory for names is very poor, after a thorough investigation was forced to admit that some of the figures in a paper supporting the temperature increases of climate change had not been "calculated" correctly, others said they were deliberately falsified. More recently I read that there had not been any issue at all and the investigation had found the figures to be accurate.
A saw some figures a few years ago which claimed to prove that solar panels could never during their lifespan compensate for the CO2 and environmental damage from their production if used North of Spain. Given the changes in technology I would like to see the figures for the current solar panels.
I would like to see properly argued and proven case for and against climate change with proper debate and proven figures backing it up as I am fed up with the immediate castigation of anyone silly enough to ruin their career by making any negative comment about the current Climate Change Emergency bandwagon. I read that many scientists admit that the best way to get funding is to ensure that their research proposals include climate change issues.
Where is the proper scientific debate about the causes and consequences of climate change, which has been happening for at least a few million years, and engineering debate about the solutions to the problems?
