Less carbon reduction and more pollution = global warming
George Osborne is a man placed in a responsible position. Trouble is, he is likely to try and overturn the decisions of the Climate Change Committees and their equivalents in many nations by lowering carbon reduction levels.
While colleagues openly look to global warming as a boon to their capitalist cronies (how, we haven't figure, yet!), he collaborates in increasing it. To attract those with the ageing belief that climate change is all natural, UK Conservative politicians have the same tack as the most biased of American Republicans.
It is of course the American coal and their odd way of fracking their way to more global warming that is finding its way to Europe. On Thursday, 2027's agreed carbon budget was clarified by a British Committee as complying with the European emissions targets. Meanwhile Mr Osborne indicates dissent, asking for a further review to be published next year.
"There is no legal or economic justification to change the budget," quotes the UK Climate Change Committee's David Kennedy. "Rather, the budget remains cost-effective, with manageable costs and impacts, given our assessment of EU developments."
In Brussels, PM. David Cameron hopes to push for the adoption of new targets of a 40% emissions cut, with even more, if other non-EU countries also increase their efforts on cutting greenhouse gases. A lot of companies also put massive effort into the development of new renewable energy technologies. Without government cooperation, their future would not be worth investing in.
On a different note, Friends of the Earth put in their ha'penn'th with a revealing opinion about the Chancellor of the Exchequer's motivation: "This is a timely and welcome warning shot across the bows of the anti-green Chancellor who's made no secret of his desire to water down the UK's commitment to tackling climate change."
Gareth Stace of the EEF( the biggest British manufacturing organisation), on the other hand, said, "The rest of the EU has not followed our lead and we are still waiting on agreement of the EU 2030 climate package, which is uncertain and delayed. We would therefore question how the committee can make an informed judgement now that the 2025 target will be in line with our EU and global competitors, when significant uncertainness remain."
This means they are claiming that the UK cannot be competitive, given the current EU uncertainty. Manufacturers need clarity about how the government will negotiate the 2030 cuts in emission targets, which David Cameron is insisting should be 40%. The Energy Secretary responsible is a Lib-Dem, not a Conservative, meaning that party politics are irresponsibly confusing the whole argument.
The key issue seems to be how cost-effective the methods of cutting emissions really are, but these new technologies need to be allowed to develop.