Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

EU Aims To Be 'Climate Neutral' By 2050 (bbc.com)

Posted by msmash on from the greater-good dept.

AmiMoJo writes: The European Union says it is aiming to become the first major economy to go 'climate neutral' by 2050. Under the plan, emissions of greenhouse gases after that date would have to be offset by planting trees or by burying them underground. Scientists say that net-zero emissions by 2050 are needed to have a fighting chance of keeping global temperatures under 1.5C this century. The EU says the move will also cut premature air pollution deaths by 40%. The EU says that this can be done with existing technologies such as solar and wind energy which would have to be ramped up to provide 80% of electricity. Energy efficiency measures such as home insulation would also need to be boosted to reduce energy consumption by half by the middle of the century.

24 of 205 comments (clear)

  1. Interesting approach by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Funny

    have to be offset by planting trees or by burying them underground.

    How does burying trees underground help reduce emissions?

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    1. Re:Interesting approach by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 5, Funny

      have to be offset by planting trees or by burying them underground.

      How does burying trees underground help reduce emissions?

      If they bury the trees, they can't be cut down to be burned, duh!

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
  2. Assuming.... by Zorro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There will even be an EU in 2050.

    1. Re:Assuming.... by jellomizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well seeing how much of a pain Brexit is, with UK having been only mostly in the EU (kept its own currency) I expect most other nations after seeing the trouble it is, probably will not want to bother to leave the EU.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Assuming.... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Brexit has pretty much killed off the other "leave" movements in the EU. Everyone has seen that the milk and honey fantasy was impossible. They know their politicians won't do any better, and see how the EU has presented a united, strong front the whole way through.

      There will be some economic harm, but in some ways Brexit has actually been a benefit to the EU. As well as discouraging anyone else thinking of leaving, it's created an opportunity to reform and move ahead without Britain holding it back.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Assuming.... by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 2

      Some countries, especially ones for whom EU rules and laws have never set well with them, might look upon the UK leaving as a signal that it's time to bail out themselves. Consider that the solidarity that the EU represents is almost as important to Europe as NATO when it comes to the outside forces that would threaten EU countries (namely Russia).

    4. Re:Assuming.... by dargaud · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes. The brits have always wanted the butter with the butter's money. They kept asking for 'exception' on all the disadvantages while keeping all the advantages of EU. They should have been kicked out of EU long ago. Well, it's done now, I wish them well, but I'm not holding my breath for them.

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    5. Re:Assuming.... by Zumbs · · Score: 2

      If Greece, Italy, and Spain still had their own currencies, these would have been falling in value compared to the currency of Germany. This would make their goods more competitive, and would quite likely have reduced the impact of the crisis in 2008 on those three countries and made it easier for them to get over the crisis. The Euro bars them from reducing the value of their currency, which has made German industry a lot of money as it is highly competitive.

      --
      The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
  3. Re:U.S. is way ahead of them. by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Score: +5, Sarcasm.

    See: SUVs, fossil-fuel based power plants such as coal, anti-science President and wasteful American way of life.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  4. talk is cheap by e432776 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My observation is that governments around the world, at all levels, are great at making pronouncements, less great at accomplishing the stated goals. Recent example, note EU not on track: According to the UN, most major polluters are not on track to meet their Paris goals.

    In addition to the EU, Rwanda also launched a climate change mitigation plan today Rwanda launches national plan for Paris Agreement on climate change

    Another day, another set of cheap pronouncements.

    1. Re:talk is cheap by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      The EU is already doing a lot to reduce its emissions. The much hyped increase in the last year is just a correction after the economic downturn of 2008, but the trend is still firmly downwards and it's undeniable that a lot of money and regulation is going in to addressing the issue.

      Also note that the targets are set by each country, so if the EU really wanted to meet them it could just set easy ones. Most EU countries were ambitious and set their goals low enough to be a challenge, to create the impetus to act.

      Having said that it's true that certain countries could do a lot more. The UK recently cut the incentives for EVs, for example. I expect post-Brexit many other schemes will go out the window too.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:talk is cheap by fatwilbur · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is one area I always gave Trump credit for - calling out the Paris agreement as silly and not achievable. Whatever his motivation, he was the only person being realistic about it, because he was the only "non politician" of the group, who typically are more interested in making grand pronouncements.

      I read that the EU is close to reporting that my country, Canada, is nowhere close to meeting it's Paris commitments. So basically, our real world performance has been no different from the US, but Trudeau talks a great hot-air game and so gets all the credit vs. criticism for Trump.

  5. Re:U.S. is way ahead of them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Better in what? Education? Quality of life? Access to affordable healthcare? Crime? Environment?

    Do tell.

  6. Cat by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

    The European Union says it is aiming to become the first major economy to go 'climate neutral'

    You mean first major country. The EU is a federal government with member states, and by 2050 will have grown enough in power will be similar to the Unites States government, with member countries little more than anachronistic states like New Jersey and Idaho.

    It took 150 years for this in the US, and that's with a constitution in theory granting the government limited powers and no others. 30 more years for the EU is very doable.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  7. Re:U.S. is way ahead of them. by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

    It's called American Capitalism and what makes us better then anyone else in the world.

    When?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  8. Re:U.S. is way ahead of them. by fred6666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The U.S. has already reduced carbon faster than the EU.

    Wake me up when the U.S. has reduced carbon enough to get per capita emissions lower than the EU.

  9. Not going to happen without Nuclear by sinij · · Score: 2

    This is not going to happen if they keep shutting down nuclear power plants.

    1. Re:Not going to happen without Nuclear by jwhyche · · Score: 3

      It all depends on what they replace them with. They could shut down old designs from the '70s and replace them with new more modern designs. Not that I believe this is where they will go but it could happen.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    2. Re:Not going to happen without Nuclear by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      I would be interested in where you got this number from. I hope you are taking into account we are talking about Europe and not the US. The laws would be different there so the regulations that stifle the building of modern reactors in the US wouldn't be the same.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    3. Re:Not going to happen without Nuclear by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      Don't believe me? Look at the prices for the reactors under construction. The real prices, not the fake ones they presented at the beginning.

      No, I'm going to take you at your word. I see no reason to fact check you because I know that you are correct. New reactors cost an ass load to build and most of that cost is before the first brick is laid. You have to fight your way through mountains of red tape, and legal challenges by the anti nuke kooks. Then there is the cost of the pepper spray that you will need to clear the hippies off the land.

      But my point is the actual cost of the structure and shit probably wouldn't be that much if it wasn't for so much regulations. If the hippies hadn't shutdown research in the '60 and '70 things would be better.

      Oh well, despite all the anti nuke kooks research continues, abet at a slower pace. New designs will be coming out of the east where they don't have such issues. The real question we should be asking will these new Chinese reactors be safer than what we have now?

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  10. Re:U.S. is way ahead of them. by jwhyche · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seems to be working well for you. I tell you what, since you think that it is such a bad thing why do you move someplace like Iran or Venezuela and lets see how you do there?

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  11. Re:U.S. is way ahead of them. by jwhyche · · Score: 2

    But he is not in any of these countries. He is in the US and complaining about the system he takes advantage of.

    But you are correct. I'll amend my OP, and he can move to France, Germany, or any of the countries you mentioned.

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  12. Re:U.S. is way ahead of them. by jwhyche · · Score: 2

    I know AC don't get mod points but those of us with accounts too. I actually get lots of mod points. When I do get them I do read at below +2, like I should. I've had something like 45 mod points in the last few days. I will reset to my normal +2 reading level when I'm sure I will not be getting any more for awhile.

    So you shouldn't be to concerned about my credibility, sir sock.

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  13. Re:U.S. is way ahead of them. by jwhyche · · Score: 2

    Rick, I think you have finally lost your mind. Looks like you are coming more unhinged every day. Some of that stuff you wrote in your journal is pretty disturbing. I'm going to wander off now. I would suggest professional help.

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.