The BBC is wrong, individual sacrifices cannot save a planet that doesn’t need saving at all – does Watt agree?

from climaterealism

Author: Linny Luken

The BBC recently published a post titled “Seven Proven Ways to Help the Planet in 2025,” claiming that the earth is threatened by global climate change due to human activities and listing what people can do in their lives. Seven changes by curbing emissions. Recommendations include: give up meat; stop flying; buy less clothes; reduce the carbon footprint of pet ownership if you have one; use alternative home heating technologies; support fossil fuel divestment; and reduce the use of plastic. While none of these proposals are novel, they will not achieve the goals claimed by the BBC because human activity does not threaten the planet through CO2 emissions, and because many of the proposals do not actually reduce emissions, or target those who would otherwise. Platoon is desirable and will not have any measurable impact. For reasons of brevity, this article will discuss only some of the BBC's recommendations in detail.

The BBC began by spreading fear, claiming that 2024 would “breach the critical threshold of 1.5°C for the entire year” for the first time, which, according to the authors, reinforced “the urgent need to rapidly cut global emissions.” As climate realism It has been discussed several times, including here , here , and here , that the 1.5°C threshold is arbitrary and meaningless as a scientific measurement and is simply a political tool. The Earth has warmed a lot in the past, and parts of the world have exceeded this mark for decades without catastrophic consequences. Now that the global threshold has been crossed, when the media promised that catastrophic events would follow, nothing has happened. There was no increase in extreme weather, and other predicted tipping points did not materialize.

The BBC said it was not too late even if the political threshold had been passed, insisting there was still time to make the rapid emissions cuts necessary to save the planet. The BBC acknowledges that most of the high-level emissions reductions it wants to see are beyond the scope of individuals and fall within the scope of big government decisions, but says individual efforts are still important.

The first in the list of suggestions is climate realism It’s been covered extensively before: “Eat a plant-based diet.” The BBC claims, “There is widespread agreement among science that one of the most effective ways for our species to change its behavior in order to save the global climate from increasing warming is to eat less Meat.” They claim that vegetarian diets produce less carbon dioxide. Existing real-world data refutes this claim.

For example, in terms of emissions claims, EPA data shows that the livestock industry actually accounts for only 3.9% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, while crops account for 10.2%. (see picture below)

Note also that agriculture accounts for a very small share of Americans’ total greenhouse gas emissions.

Next, the BBC recommends that people use public transport, trains and cars when traveling instead of flying. As an added bonus, according to the alarmists, “Flying less may also mean your trips are closer to home, further reducing carbon emissions.” If that's not self-righteous enough, people are advised not to travel far from home, The BBC highlighted a man who cycled from London to Sweden, which the BBC admitted “costs more than flying and takes longer”. For most people who need to travel for work or want to take a well-earned vacation, this is again completely out of the question. Most people don’t have enough time or money to travel long distances.

The BBC also recommends buying less clothes, using less plastic, and reducing the carbon footprint of keeping pets, either by avoiding them altogether or, hilariously, by feeding them “sustainable” foods such as fish and insects. Since many global fish stocks are overfished, placing greater pressure on global fisheries to feed pets is at least environmentally problematic. Advice on feeding insects to pets, climate realism The possible dangers of an insect-based diet proposed by climate alarmists have been previously discussed.

The BBC's next suggestion is to change the way people heat their homes, but most of their suggestions are either expensive or require major changes to civil infrastructure, such as using heat from sewers to heat homes. Obviously this isn't something the average person can actually do on their own, even though this is purportedly an article about an individual's efforts to reduce emissions. Predictably, heat pumps are one of the suggested alternatives to traditional boilers, but they do not work well all the time. They lose efficiency and effectiveness in cold weather, and some companies ironically recommend installing gas furnaces as a backup to avoid skyrocketing power bills. They are also an expensive option, again excluding those who are not well off.

The BBC's sixth recommendation is to lean towards environmental, social and governance (ESG) in pensions and investments, and fossil fuel divestment plans. The BBC points out that banks invest in fossil fuel companies, and “while the money you put in the bank won't be used directly for this purpose, experts say it can change their social license.” The BBC is actually saying, People should put pressure on banks and other institutions to stop supporting fossil fuel companies. All this accomplishes is raising the cost of necessary fuel, which will significantly increase costs across the board, only hurting ordinary people in the process. Meanwhile, countries like China that don’t care about emissions will continue to produce the same amount of carbon for zero ultimate benefit, as discussed in the guest article “The SEC’s Risky Plan to Decarbonize U.S. Financial Markets.”

Finally, the last tip is to reduce the use of plastic. While reducing waste is generally a good thing, single-use plastics undoubtedly have hygiene benefits. In healthcare settings, single-use plastics can reduce the risk of contamination and help hospitals maintain a sterile environment. Plastic films used in grocery stores to package food, in particular, prevent meat from spoiling, thereby reducing food waste. The BBC doesn't discuss emissions-related arguments much in this section, but rather discusses waste and oil use in general, so we won't go into that in depth.

Much of the BBC's argument focuses on emissions reductions, calling for actions that are unnecessary and do more harm than good; human emissions of carbon dioxide do not endanger the planet or make it uninhabitable. The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased and decreased over thousands of years, and today human emissions account for only 3.4% of annual emissions. The rest comes from natural sources. Calculated data found that human emissions of carbon dioxide may cause about 0.28% of the atmospheric gas-related warming effect on the earth. This is not worrisome. Despite more than a hundred years of moderate climate warming and steady increases in CO2 emissions, the alleged catastrophic effects have not occurred, so all the efforts advocated by the BBC article (when it comes to emissions) are more likely to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. , comfort and freedom than benefiting yourself or the planet.

Seeing how many of the most prominent and elitist climate critics actually live their own lives, rather than the lives they preach to others, one doubts they will continue to eat meaty four-star meals in room-sized walk-ins A wardrobe full of expensive food. They will continue to drive powerful fossil fuel cars while retaining electric vehicles as backup status symbols, appear in green virtue campaigns, and fly on private jets to luxury locations around the world while paying pet sitters to feed their purebreds Dog “animal companions” are the most expensive, trendy pet food and even human delicacies. They will do all this while advising the average working class to buy second-hand clothes, eat bugs, live in densely populated areas near railway lines, and not go on holiday. After all, elites know what is best, and citizens must make sacrifices to save the planet.