Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
User avatar
shpalman
Light of Blast
Posts: 4241
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
Location: One step beyond

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by shpalman » Fri Apr 23, 2021 10:50 am

molto tricky

User avatar
Fishnut
Dorkwood
Posts: 1184
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:15 pm
Location: UK

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Fishnut » Sat Apr 24, 2021 10:30 pm

Taiwan is suffering from the worst drought in 56 years. The consequences are far-reaching,
If this and other reservoirs in Taiwan dry up, it could be detrimental for the global electronics sector, because so many of the products people use are powered by semiconductors - computer chips - made by Taiwanese companies.

Around 90% of the most advanced microchips are manufactured in Taiwan.

They're key to objects ranging from ventilators to smartphones, and the pandemic has left demand high and supply tight.
According to this BBC report water is used to spray-clean the silicon wafers. One company uses 31,000 tonnes of water each day!
it's okay to say "I don't know"

User avatar
dyqik
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3732
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by dyqik » Sat Apr 24, 2021 10:50 pm

Also, there's already a global semiconductor shortage sure to CoVID, which has shutdown car production lines in the US, including Ford in the last week or two.

User avatar
shpalman
Light of Blast
Posts: 4241
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
Location: One step beyond

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by shpalman » Sun Apr 25, 2021 7:51 am

Also, I think there was already a chip shortage even before covid although I've lost track of why.
molto tricky

User avatar
shpalman
Light of Blast
Posts: 4241
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
Location: One step beyond

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by shpalman » Sun Apr 25, 2021 8:52 am

(more on the chip shortage is here)
molto tricky

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Light of Blast
Posts: 5781
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: nadir of brie

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Apr 29, 2021 2:31 pm

Germany the latest country to agree that young people are getting totally shafted by grown-ups' ineffectual gestures and outright mendacity:
Germany's climate change laws are "insufficient" and violate fundamental freedoms by putting the burden of curbing CO2 emissions on the young, its highest court has ruled.

It said the law failed to give enough detail on cutting CO2 emissions after current targets end in 2030.

"The provisions irreversibly offload major emission reduction burdens onto periods after 2030," the court said.

The government will now have to revise the law by the end of the next year.

The decision comes a week after the EU unveiled ambitious new climate change targets.

Under the law, which was agreed between member states and the EU Parliament, the bloc will cut carbon emissions by at least 55% by 2030, compared with 1990 levels.

Like the EU legislation, Germany's domestic climate change law also provides for a 55% reduction in greenhouse gases by 2030.

The 2019 law was agreed as part of Germany's response to the 2016 Paris climate deal, which aims to keep the global temperature rise well under 2C - and preferably to 1.5C - to prevent the worst effects of climate change.

But the German Constitutional Court said on Thursday that current measures "violate the freedoms of the complainants, some of whom are still very young" because they delay too much of the action needed to reach the Paris targets until after 2030.

"In order to achieve this, the reductions still required after 2030 will have to be achieved more urgently and at short notice," it said in a statement.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56927010


Most political targets seem to choose either 2030 or 2050 - either an ambitious target for the distant future with no sense of how to get there, or a bunch of clever accounting tricks to get good headlines by 2030 by kicking the can down the road.

It seems that politicians are more like babies, and need their hands held by civil society every step of the way. Legally-binding targets, set by scientists, with check-in points every 3-5 years, would be a good way to go.
He has the grace of a swan, the wisdom of an owl, and the eye of an eagle—ladies and gentlemen, this man is for the birds!

User avatar
Sciolus
Snowbonk
Posts: 589
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:42 pm

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Sciolus » Thu Apr 29, 2021 3:58 pm

That's a good result. We'll see it makes any difference.
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 2:31 pm
Legally-binding targets, set by scientists, with check-in points every 3-5 years, would be a good way to go.
So, the UK carbon budget approach?

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Light of Blast
Posts: 5781
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: nadir of brie

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Apr 29, 2021 9:38 pm

Sciolus wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 3:58 pm
That's a good result. We'll see it makes any difference.
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 2:31 pm
Legally-binding targets, set by scientists, with check-in points every 3-5 years, would be a good way to go.
So, the UK carbon budget approach?
Yes, in theory - I'm looking forward to seeing the updated version.

As always the devil is in the details, and what really matters is total emissions ever - I struggle with interesting under the curve in my head so depend on others' analysis. For me, the key desirables are net zero by 2050 at the very latest (given a sensible definition of net), but also early sharp declines, rather than business as usual with low-carbon pie in the 2040 sky.

We really need good models from progressive countries to roll out globally, with support for developing economies.
He has the grace of a swan, the wisdom of an owl, and the eye of an eagle—ladies and gentlemen, this man is for the birds!

User avatar
Fishnut
Dorkwood
Posts: 1184
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:15 pm
Location: UK

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Fishnut » Mon May 10, 2021 10:15 am

When judicial instruments fail:

Logging exempt from environment laws despite destroying threatened species’ Victorian habitat, court finds
In its judgment on Monday, the court found the initial judgment – including that VicForests had breached the code of practice by not complying with the precautionary principle in some forests – was factually correct.

But it found that VicForests’ logging was exempt from national environment laws even if it did not comply with the RFA [Regional Forests Agreements].
If I'm understanding the article correctly, the court decided that even though the Victorian government forestry agency (VicForests) has broken the law it doesn't matter because it's not subject to that law. So it can log away, even in areas where endangered species live, with nothing to stop them.
it's okay to say "I don't know"

User avatar
Woodchopper
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3171
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Woodchopper » Mon May 10, 2021 10:31 am

Fishnut wrote:
Mon May 10, 2021 10:15 am
When judicial instruments fail:

Logging exempt from environment laws despite destroying threatened species’ Victorian habitat, court finds
In its judgment on Monday, the court found the initial judgment – including that VicForests had breached the code of practice by not complying with the precautionary principle in some forests – was factually correct.

But it found that VicForests’ logging was exempt from national environment laws even if it did not comply with the RFA [Regional Forests Agreements].
If I'm understanding the article correctly, the court decided that even though the Victorian government forestry agency (VicForests) has broken the law it doesn't matter because it's not subject to that law. So it can log away, even in areas where endangered species live, with nothing to stop them.
I think a bit different. My reading is that it broke the Regional Forest Agreement. However, that agreement didn't have the status of a law.

User avatar
Fishnut
Dorkwood
Posts: 1184
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:15 pm
Location: UK

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Fishnut » Mon May 10, 2021 10:49 am

Woodchopper wrote:
Mon May 10, 2021 10:31 am
Fishnut wrote:
Mon May 10, 2021 10:15 am
When judicial instruments fail:

Logging exempt from environment laws despite destroying threatened species’ Victorian habitat, court finds
In its judgment on Monday, the court found the initial judgment – including that VicForests had breached the code of practice by not complying with the precautionary principle in some forests – was factually correct.

But it found that VicForests’ logging was exempt from national environment laws even if it did not comply with the RFA [Regional Forests Agreements].
If I'm understanding the article correctly, the court decided that even though the Victorian government forestry agency (VicForests) has broken the law it doesn't matter because it's not subject to that law. So it can log away, even in areas where endangered species live, with nothing to stop them.
I think a bit different. My reading is that it broke the Regional Forest Agreement. However, that agreement didn't have the status of a law.
You might be right. It's really confusing, at least to me!
it's okay to say "I don't know"

User avatar
discovolante
After Pie
Posts: 2575
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by discovolante » Mon May 10, 2021 11:06 am

Yeah that seems to be right.

Sort of related but not quite the same, this episode of Local Zero podcast is primarily about discussing citizens assemblies but also goes into the tension between national and local targets, and argues local authorities should be given more power and responsibility to reduce emissions - it's not particularly party political so there isn't really any commentary on certain parties' behaviour around those kinds of issues but it does flag up the problems on both sides.

I do wonder if, now that quite a bit of awareness has been raised about the fact that climate change is A Thing and maybe a tad less, but still some, awareness on the technical 'solutions' for it, there is scope to bring in some legal education about climate change and environment related law. I mean that's an incredibly complex topic, and will vary from region to region, and sector to sector, and I certainly don't know much about it myself, but even a broad brush approach could perhaps steer people towards exerting pressure in the right places. And by 'people' I mean people who are already engaged to some extent.
socialism is when the government does stuff

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Light of Blast
Posts: 5781
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: nadir of brie

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Bird on a Fire » Mon May 10, 2021 12:29 pm

discovolante wrote:
Mon May 10, 2021 11:06 am
I do wonder if, now that quite a bit of awareness has been raised about the fact that climate change is A Thing and maybe a tad less, but still some, awareness on the technical 'solutions' for it, there is scope to bring in some legal education about climate change and environment related law. I mean that's an incredibly complex topic, and will vary from region to region, and sector to sector, and I certainly don't know much about it myself, but even a broad brush approach could perhaps steer people towards exerting pressure in the right places. And by 'people' I mean people who are already engaged to some extent.
I think educating people on what instruments are already available to them to pressure for change would be incredibly valuable. I've seen it work very well with wildlife stuff, for example.

People like ClientEarth and Good Law Project have been doing great stuff with high-profile cases at the national level, but I think some kind of "activist toolkit" highlighting useful policy levers that people could pull on at a local level could be very helpful.
He has the grace of a swan, the wisdom of an owl, and the eye of an eagle—ladies and gentlemen, this man is for the birds!

User avatar
Fishnut
Dorkwood
Posts: 1184
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:15 pm
Location: UK

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Fishnut » Mon May 17, 2021 8:26 pm

I wasn't sure where to put this but this thread seems as good a place as any.

Time to Get Angry: Beyond the Cosy Consensus in British Nature Conservation
Much of the public discourse around nature conservation is focused on encouraging people to “connect” with nature and appreciate the birds and wildlife that can be found in their local area. And by this measure nature conservation in the UK has been very successful. Indeed, in the UK we often congratulate ourselves on our supposedly high levels of environmentally literacy... But we in the UK are in no position to lecture anybody: biodiversity loss, bird population declines, and the destruction of nature have intensified at precisely the same time that the number of Brits ostensibly concerned about these things has dramatically increased. Simply “caring” about nature is clearly not enough.

...

Consider, for example, the decline in farmland birds. You don’t need me to tell you that resident farmland birds such as Skylark, Grey Partridge, Yellowhammer, Tree Sparrow and Corn Bunting have all experienced catastrophic declines over the past half century. What is more, we know exactly why these birds have declined. It’s because of what is euphemistically called the “intensification” of agriculture. But what does “intensification” really mean? It means changes in land use arising from a push to increase yields as much as possible so as to maximise profit margins. The correct word for this is capitalism... We call it “intensification” rather than “capitalism” in part because the latter sounds too confrontational and too political for the conflict-averse mainstream of UK bird conservation.
it's okay to say "I don't know"

Post Reply