but it is true that Monbiot, like his guardian-toting urban faux-envirocommie peers, wants to impose authoritarianism and return us all to living in fucking caves (or cages)

``The CCC envisages not wild woods, but plantations, whose purpose is the discredited policy of “bioenergy with carbon capture and storage”.

This means growing wood to burn in power stations, then capturing and burying the carbon emissions. It is likely to cause more harm than good. Could the committee’s enthusiasm have anything to do with the fact that one of its members works for Drax, the energy company pioneering this disastrous technology? Throughout the report, business appears to come first; nature and climate last.``

BBC are saying that Northern nationalisation might not have any effect, because the same trains and staff will still be in service after the change

" It is likely to cause more harm than good." he asserts without evidence

Is he a climate change cultist?

All very well rewilding, but you need places to rewild, and you need to feed your population, which fucknuggets like him have been deliberately inflating the size of over the last 30 year

yes

Because nothing is ever good enough for them

Sadly I have to work with his acolytes

Which can be quite a chore

I’ve bought the Merch

It's worth buying just to piss remainers off

That’s why I bought it mainly

Plus needed a new tea towel

actually Eccles he cites these links with that statement:

Fuck that, £12 is half my food and entertainment budget for the week

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-05340-z
https://www.theccc.org.uk/about/committee-on-climate-change/
https://www.drax.com/press_release/world-first-co2-beccs-ccus/
but i haven't read them

all

They might be gibberish

Cant say for sure though without reading them

12 ain’t shit to me, I wish you favourable monetary luck ma dude

The first article, which is the only science paper he links to, does not back up his claim

It only says that rewilding and avoiding deforestation is more effective at sequestering CO2 than switching land use to biofuel

it's a long article and i haven't found the evidence for his claim

not gonna read the whole thing

Most of these cultists rely on appeals to authority

i.e. people believe it as true because he said it

Lmao

@Hopix fire all the staff

it's not the trains fault

personally, he is right in that the best thing to do is allow limited rewilding and move to low-intensity farming

this is best for habitat and ecosystem processes

Its just I've seen "sources" for climate change countless times that dont even represent the claim being made

but it's not possible unless you do something about population levels, and strategic approaches to energy and food production

none of which any party is willing to engage with for ideological reasons

so it's dead in the water as an idea

and so the bangladeshis will all drown and climate change will happen

because they think communism/globalism (delete as appropriate) is more important than action that works effectively without throwing the baby out with the bathwater

so fuck them all and enjoy the catastrophe is my view on the matter

Anyone read up on "Blue Labour"?

One thing that annoys me about this environmental stuff is his idea that environment managing is only something that climate deniers do.