First, let’s note that St. Greta didn’t get her Nobel Prize, with a scorching hot take by Newsweek
https://twitter.com/atheistcritique/status/1182681000033300480
Perhaps they should have mentioned that St. Greta’s Sweden only sees 36% of its citizens believing that climate change is mostly caused by Mankind. Anyhow, over to the BBC
Climate change: Big lifestyle changes are the only answer
The UK government must tell the public small, easy changes will not be enough to tackle climate change, warn experts.
Researchers from Imperial College London say we must eat less meat and dairy, swap cars for bikes, take fewer flights, and ditch gas boilers at home.
The report, seen by BBC Panorama, has been prepared for the Committee on Climate Change, which advises ministers how to cut the UK’s carbon footprint.
It says an upheaval in our lifestyles is the only way to meet targets.
The new report, called Behaviour Change, Public Engagement and Net Zero, amounts to an extensive “to-do” list for government.
It says subsidies for fossil fuels have to go and taxes on low-carbon technologies must be cut.
It also urges the government to consider introducing a carbon tax, increasing the prices of carbon-intensive products and activities.
They want the government to be nags
The Committee on Climate Change’s official recommendation to government is that a 20% cut in red meat and dairy is needed – the emissions from the other 80% will have to be matched by CO2 that has been captured and stored permanently in order to meet the net zero ambition.
The report implies a bigger shift in diets could be needed, and says one way to get people to change will be to emphasise the health benefits this could bring.
Another will be to give people much more information on the environmental impact of different foods. It calls for mandatory carbon impact labelling on products, on till receipts, and via shopping websites and apps.
There couldn’t possibly be a backfire when citizens get tired of being nagged, right? Especially by the same people who excuse all the violence by Islamic extremists, right?
Well at least its not as bad as Obama being given the nobel peace prize for being born and then Obama trashing Norway for their laughing at him for getting the prize based upon the whims of ONE MAN who told the rest of the board to FF off and gave him the prize.
Wetland’s words were published in the midst of a recurring debate on the independence and the make-up of the Nobel committee, whose five members make fully autonomous decisions but are appointed by the Norwegian parliament…..from the Guardian.
Obama administration rebuked Norway over Nobel peace prize, diplomat says
• President’s chief of staff scolded diplomat over ‘fawning’ award
• Diplomat describes day as his ‘most embarrassing at the UN’
Actually little Ms. Greta was granted a big favor by not receiving this award. In the short term sure, who wouldnt want the award but in truth even Obama did not want the award forced on him because it indicated to the world that a president who inherited two wars was going to be a peacenik rather than the MIC crony he turned out to be and 8 years later we were still in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, and several other countries.
All five American soldiers were Green Berets, said two United States military officials. The attack took place 120 miles north of Niamey, the capital of Niger, 2017,,,In fairness to Obama this was under Trump but still I hardly think Trump authorized this to happen a few months after taking over. Most likely more MIC involvement trying to get weapons into NIGER to kill more human beings.
tweeterer Brian James doesn’t understand the Nobel Peace Prize. And repeats the fine whine that she is being used by others.
Anyway, wasn’t Trump expected to win for his work making the world safer from Iran, North Korea, Russia, and now Turkey?
https://i2.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2019/10/Screen-Shot-2019-10-10-at-1.41.56-PM.png?w=1160&ssl=1