10-02-2020, 11:14 AM
From the Telegraph: "In an interview last week, Environment Secretary Michael Gove dodged questions about the cost of banning petrol, diesel and hybrid cars. Ministers use carefully chosen words to describe the public cost of Net Zero, vaguely referring to “1-2 per cent of GDP by 2050”. This is because the estimates they refer to only apply to 2050, as an FOI reveals. They ignore the years 2020-2049, conveniently omitting the expense of overhauling national infrastructure in the interim.
I cannot estimate the price of dismantling every gas cooker, retrofitting some 26 million homes, building a vast network of electric car charging points, and so on. Suffice to say it will be a mind-boggling sum – and that is before negotiating the tricky politics......Given zero progress on commercial electric flights, net zero would likely mean halting air travel for the many – with exceptions for a wealthy few, such as those attending important events like the Oscars or Davos. Though we do not share the revolutionary iconoclasm of our Gallic neighbours, the gilets jaunes protests – sparked by surging fuel prices – give a taste of the class resentment this could trigger......
"But why not put Net Zero to a referendum, in which costs, benefits and risks may be properly debated? Major changes require public consent. If we are serious about democratic renewal, the environment should be put to the vote too."
i.e. would you vote to be poorer, have less freedom, higher energy costs and a far less competitive economy?
I cannot estimate the price of dismantling every gas cooker, retrofitting some 26 million homes, building a vast network of electric car charging points, and so on. Suffice to say it will be a mind-boggling sum – and that is before negotiating the tricky politics......Given zero progress on commercial electric flights, net zero would likely mean halting air travel for the many – with exceptions for a wealthy few, such as those attending important events like the Oscars or Davos. Though we do not share the revolutionary iconoclasm of our Gallic neighbours, the gilets jaunes protests – sparked by surging fuel prices – give a taste of the class resentment this could trigger......
"But why not put Net Zero to a referendum, in which costs, benefits and risks may be properly debated? Major changes require public consent. If we are serious about democratic renewal, the environment should be put to the vote too."
i.e. would you vote to be poorer, have less freedom, higher energy costs and a far less competitive economy?