´óÏó´«Ã½

Paxo can do anything!!! From sorting out the lack of support from certain products purchased at M&S to breaking the siege of Gaza by Israel. Simply by getting an Israeli ambassador to speak volumes by not answering the question.

Right, Paxo can you know turn your energies to stopping the Whale hunt in Antarctica?

I went to a C of E school and to be honest I didn't carry on going to church for very long after I went to the school. I don't think this was a premeditated decision by my parents, but I am sure it was part of the thinking. However this was the case with probably 90% of the pupils at school. In fact some it was all a planned thing just to get into our school. But the alternative school which is the comprehensive down the road which is next to a council estate, had terrible problems with behavior and discipline and results are much much lower. I have now come to a decent uni, something which would have been statistically less likely if i had gone to the other school. So was this a morally wrong thing for my parents, or many other parents to do? I don't think so.

Pathetic dumbed down report on 'growth'. Why couldn't you focus on the economics, compare the different energy sources, look at the total costs and benefits, look at where the VC money is going and present it in a longer term perspective. The whole growth hook for the story was er zzzzzz

Ummmm have the "green" enconomists forgotten aboput the concept of competitive advantage? The multi-nationals will simply flee the EU for countries where the new emmisions requirements are not enforcable...i.e. China, India, Brasil, etc

Jeremy,

Just now heard the comment from Mr. Simms arguing over the zero growth and mentioning that persons living at £1 a day are happier than those driving a Ferrai here in developed world!! - Well ask him if he has actually asked that question to anyone earning and living £1 a day?? I am sure, if he does, Mr Simms will get a very rude shocking response. Reality is that about 80% of the world population want to grow to the level of developed world and the juggernaut is almost impossible to control.
Lets be practical about climate change and the important steps that need to be taken to reduce impact, not just come up with strange ideas (zero growth etc etc...) and portray it as revolutionary. Such ideas will be good for theoritical academics and just to keep them on the media limelight and die down when someone else comes up with a "workable" solution or another "theoritical revolutionary" ideas.

How many low energy light bulbs does it take to compensate for our wars or are the latter environmentally friendly?

Perhaps if we all eschewed underwear then it might have a small but significant effect on reducing global warming - however (economic) growth would be curtailed !!

The Blunt piece was like a parody of perceived ´óÏó´«Ã½ attitudes. I presume it was a genuine espousal of such attitudes via proxies since all concerned, so ready to exonerate a traitor, were not subjected to any kind of questioning of their views that I could perceive.

If landfill tax on ash from coal fired power stations is pushing up the priceof using coal, can the ash be used as a useful building or agricultural material and avoid the energy intensive process of producing those materials from processing mineral sources, thus cutting such energy demands associated with those processes ? Is the solution really to make the public a scapegoat and bombard them with propaganda, guilt and blame ? Embrace industry and work with them for solutions to the problems that can only be solved by those suitably equipped to deal with them. Energy policy should promote adoption of the most efficient technologies whilst still including the costs of waste disposal and the priceless health considerations of citizens in the decision making processes. A sustainable civilisation should be embraced by everyone, a fear driven society blaming others should not be the solution. Leaders in technology and industry should make the changes, and the public presented with a rational and realistic remit should be willing to accept this for the greater good. People will naturally resent prohibitions and rebel against them if legislative justifications are poorly made with inaccurate science and political josturing. Don't let the politicians sweep it under the carpet and throw it into the long grass. Get industry to make a use for it and boost trade of a valuable biproduct.

Negative growth will be forced on us in the near future by the peaking of the world's main fuel supplies, oil, gas and coal. When, will depend on the depth of the coming recession and how much of the world it takes in. The worse the recession, the longer the respite from peak fossil fuel.

The other problem we have, that economists are too dumb to see, is peak everything. Besides fossil fuels, our metals are running out, water is running short, the phosphorus that is essential for growing our food is running short, fertilizers are made from natural gas, which is running short, and food is running short because we are making it into fuel so that we can drive our cars!

We are facing geological constraints that cannot be overcome by economic means. The market cannot provide more oil if it doesn't exist in the ground. Even George Bush has realised that. We cannot get more oil from oil sands if it takes more energy to get it out than we get from it.

Neither can the market get us more metal from the ground if the ore isn't there to get. There is also the rate at which these commodities can be extracted which, in the case of oil at least, is limited by geological constraints.

When will economists realise that we only have one earth to live on and when we have exhausted its resources, there ain't nothing left!

"economy for a low carbon age." Is the world running short of Carbon too? :-) One thing Europe never runs short of...slogans. Sometimes I think that's all its got.

Am I the only person who felt a tinge of regret about the way we treated Blunt,the Queen's relative. The people who threw in their lot with the Soviets, like McClean, Burgess, Philby etc., were all from the high intelligence end of the spectrum....can you imagine the same group going down the george Bush road? Neither can I. Maybe our intelligence stalwarts backed the wrong side and after the fiasco of Iraq continue to do so.