It was good you spoke truth to the R4 audience. It was disappointing that Amol failed to dig into the ideas you put forward regarding the centrality of equity. That last bit felt rushed. I think were he to interview you for his "Radical" podcast, there could be time to elucidate the reality we face.

🧵
"In the UK the top ten percent of energy users use five times more than the bottom ten percent. So equity is absolutely at the heart of the climate agenda. Until we start to have that dialogue, about the deep inequities in our society, we will continue to fail on climate change." - Kevin Anderson.

Brilliant interview. Such a relief to hear the situation spelt out so clearly - both the climate problem and social inequalities.

Absolutely fantastic contribution by @kevinclimate.bsky.social on Radio4's Today program this morning.
Pointing out that tackling the climate challenge without tackling social and economic inequity -both on a national and international level- is an illusion.
Expensive, futile window dressing.

Interesting to see those plots for a nation’s total carbon footprint, including consumption-based emissions & international aviation/shipping. It’s often claimed the UK has halved its emissions since 1990, but add these other sources & that drop falls to just 20%, or around 0.6% per year on average.

Interesting to see those plots for a nation’s total carbon footprint, including consumption-based emissions & international aviation/shipping. It’s often claimed the UK has halved its emissions since 1990, but add these other sources & that drop falls to just 20%, or around 0.6% per year on average.

In general they pore over the data & draw their conclusions from it. There are inevitably areas of disagreement, uncertainty, choice of boundaries, etc, but I suggest most are doing an intellectually challenging job with care & diligence. Thankfully science is broadly apolitical, unlike mitigation.

Thanks for your support.

Attached was my reply; though no doubt his ad hominem attacks will continue.

It seems what you are saying is that distance will increasingly have consequences for those who don't take it into account in their life planning. That seems a fair read of the climate situation.

That's fate. Things can't go on as they are.

I typically turn to @robinlamboll.bsky.social for solid insight into the remaining carbon budgets. Robin takes a careful, unbiased approach to the climate science and communicates it clearly. That said, he will no doubt be swamped with work, so may not be able to reply directly to your post.

It's a huge literature: but this is a good entry point: "Is Green Growth Possible?"
www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....