The idea that Britain can lead by example in fostering a low-carbon economy is just idealistic poppycock. Britain accounts for less than 2pc of emissions globally. Whatever it does is going to make next to no difference.We can meet Blair's (erroneous) renewables targets using gas, which is going to get cheaper. Huhne is bound to lose the political battle against Osborne.
Also questionable is the notion that by spending so heavily on renewables, Britain will end up leading the world in green industries. Most of the wind turbines are at present imported, and in any case, no industry based almost entirely on subsidies for its viability is likely to be sustainable in the long term.Warner makes his case on the basis that in straitened times we can't afford solutions more expensive than necessary, so his case stands whether or not you think there is a CO2 "problem" which needs a "solution" at all. This blog doesn't.
And Lord Leach, a Tory peer, has felt able to dismiss Sir David Attenborough's views on climate change as not "worth listening to". As far as we know, he has not yet been drummed out of polite society.
Another change on the way is the rising economic power of the BRIC economies. Jim O'Neill's new book on the subject, The Growth Road, is being promoted with extracts in The Telegraph. Today he demonstrates why you shouldn't bother with his book, arguing that
There could be a case for allowing Russia to eventually join the EU. If Russia is to achieve its potential, surely a positive minded Europe should seek to welcome the country into the EU. Of course, the same could be said of Turkey....If his grip on European affairs is that sound, forgive me if I distrust his analysis of more far-off places.
The case for the EU's existence rests largely on the amount of trade between member countries. If Russia remains as important in terms of trade and fulfils its BRIC potential, then including Russia inside the EU would make a great deal of economic sense.
0 comments:
Post a Comment