{"id":255024,"date":"2023-04-28T10:51:45","date_gmt":"2023-04-28T08:51:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=255024"},"modified":"2023-04-28T10:51:55","modified_gmt":"2023-04-28T08:51:55","slug":"absolute-zero-plan-means-no-new-normal-cars-most-airports-gone-and-half-the-beef-by-2030","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=255024","title":{"rendered":"Absolute Zero plan means no new normal cars, most airports gone, and half the beef by 2030!"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From JoNova<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Jo Nova<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

People are waking up to the dark side of the\u00a0Absolute<\/em>\u00a0Zero plan<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The totalitarian wet dreams of a UK government consortium of academics are lighting up the internet. As Benny Peiser and Andrew Montford <\/em>from NetZeroWatch<\/a> say \u2014 people are starting to pay attention in a big way:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The realities of Net Zero are also hitting home for the general public. The threat that the project represents to livelihoods and liberties is becoming more evident by the day. Recently, the mathematician Norman Fenton tweeted an excerpt from a Government-funded report<\/a><\/strong> that set out what Net Zero U.K. might look like: no airports, no shipping, no beef and lamb to eat, and most food imports eliminated. Sounds grim, doesn\u2019t it? Lots of people thought so, and the tweet went viral, garnering over three million views.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\u00a0Prof Norman Fenton thread<\/a>\u00a0that got 3.4 million views on Twitter is, would you believe, about a 2019 UK Government funded research report. Who knew the masses could get that excited about a 31 page prehistoric report on energy policy, but holy-cajoley: it\u2019s a wake up call of just how savage the Absolute Zero plan aims to be. And this matters more than you might think. Without magical new technologies the current Net Zero targets can only be achieved with\u00a0Absolute Zero emissions.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The totalitarian wet dreams of a UK government consortium of academics are lighting up the internet. As Benny Peiser and Andrew Montford <\/em>from NetZeroWatch<\/a> say \u2014 people are starting to pay attention in a big way:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The realities of Net Zero are also hitting home for the general public. The threat that the project represents to livelihoods and liberties is becoming more evident by the day. Recently, the mathematician Norman Fenton\u00a0tweeted an excerpt from a Government-funded report<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0that set out what Net Zero U.K. might look like: no airports, no shipping,no shipping and lamb to eat, and most food imports eliminated. Sounds grim, doesn\u2019t it? Lots of people thought so, and the tweet went viral, garnering over three million views.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\u00a0Prof Norman Fenton thread<\/a>\u00a0that got 3.4 million views on Twitter is, would you believe, about a 2019 UK Government funded research report. Who knew the masses could get that excited about a 31 page prehistoric report on energy policy, but holy-cajoley: it\u2019s a wake up call of just how savage the Absolute Zero plan aims to be. And this matters more than you might think. Without magical new technologies the current Net Zero targets can only be achieved with\u00a0Absolute Zero emissions.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

With no new magical inventions this is \u201cthe Gap\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How much will the totalitarians end up getting \u2014 as much as we we let them<\/em><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

That report from the UK FIRES<\/a> research programme is rather tamely called Absolute Zero: <\/strong><\/a>Delivering the UK\u2019s climate change commitment with incremental changes to today\u2019s technologies<\/strong><\/em>, as if we just need baby steps to get there.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But instead, as Fenton highlights, the key points are all mapped out in gruesome detail \u2014 just as if a well funded group of academic ideologues unleashed their fantasies with no constraints. The acceleration is breathtaking: all airports except Heathrow, Belfast & Glasgow need to close by 2030. There will be no flying at all by 2050. As far as cars go, there needs to be no new petrol\/diesel cars by 2030; by 2050 road use is restricted to 60% of today\u2019s level.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

All the things you love like food, heating and energy will be restricted to 60% of today\u2019s level by 2050. So life will be a lot colder and hungrier unless there\u2019s a lot fewer people to share it with. And naturally the \u201915 minute\u00a0prisons<\/del>\u2018, I mean \u2018cities\u2019 are key to all of this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is The Great Reset in glossy grand bureaucratic art:<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Click to see the chart. Seriously\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Source:\u00a0UK FIRES<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s much closer to real policy than you might think<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s only a research report, not an act of Parliament (yet), but as Norman Fenton points out, Net Zero is morphing into Absolute Zero, because Absolute Zero is what has to happen if the UK current Net Zero policy is going to achieve targets that are already set in legislation<\/em>:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fenton:<\/strong>  And for those who still think the absolute zero agenda is not baked in to Govt thinking, note that it only differs from the official net zero agenda in its 2030 objectives (i.e. the speed at which it must happen). The 2050 objectives are the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026 In other words, the inhumane FIRES project strategy is simply a realistic statement of what is required to meet the UK Govt\u2019s insane net zero 2050 target as enshrined in the 2019 Climate Change Act amendment (which every political party supported but nobody voted for).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Net Zero has to morph to Absolute Zero<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Julian Allwood is one of the authors and a Cambridge University Engineering Professor and he\u2019s scathing about the reality of the current \u201cNet Zero\u201d plans which rely on future discoveries. He said all this in 2021<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The government\u2019s roadmap<\/a> is based on a \u201cfantastically religious belief\u201d, Allwood<\/a> said, that fledgling, future technologies can deliver the 68 per cent cut in emissions that needs to be made in the next nine years to keep the country\u2019s COP26<\/a> pledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cNet-zero doesn\u2019t mean anything\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As a result, he argued that we should be aiming for \u201cabsolute zero\u201d rather than net-zero by 2050.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This sentiment was echoed by prominent philosopher Timothy Morton\u2026 The tub represents the atmosphere and the water atmospheric carbon \u2026 You\u2019ve still got the bath full of water,\u201d he said. \u201cThat\u2019s the problem. We have to actually get the bath down lower.\u201d \u201cNet-zero doesn\u2019t mean anything,\u201d Morton continued. \u201cOne of the translations of net-zero by 2050 is: I support mass extinction.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Absolute zero requires giving up cement and air travel<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201c\u2026there\u2019s huge potential for innovation. But it\u2019s not the innovation of magic beans fertilised by unicorn\u2019s blood, which is all that\u2019s in the political climate today. It\u2019s new businesses that are truly compatible with zero emissions.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The same guys that complain about the religious faith of Net Zero fantasies are the ones who have a religious faith that CO2 is a problem in the first place, O\u2019 Believers of Holy Climate Models!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fenton was interviewed by Laura Ingraham a few weeks ago:<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n