Realist, not conformist analysis of the latest financial, business and political news

George Monbiot Isn’t Going To Be Happy

George Monbiot tells us two things. Well, OK, George is known to tell us more than just two things but we’ll stick with this pair for the moment.

Firstly, climate change is such a thing, a terror we know not what, that anything and everything must be done to contain it. Well, OK, I don’t agree – it’s a chronic problem no more – but this is Monbiot’s position.

Secondly, we need to stop planting vast forests of invasive species and instead allow the regrowth of Britain’s ancestral forests. I rather agree with this one. Sure, the Lake District is nice looking but it’s an entirely man made environment. Returning it to the broadleaf forests of 3,000 to 5,000 years ago seems fine to me.

Except:

Now a leading expert is calling for similar action again, arguing that if the UK is serious about offsetting its carbon dioxide emissions it must plant tens of millions of trees from imported species on open land.

John Healey, professor of forest sciences at Bangor University, says that relying on indigenous species such as oak and beech will make it impossible for the government to hit its climate goals. Britain will have no choice, he says, but to engage with the commercial sector in large-scale planting of imported conifers, despite fears of the impact on habitats and wildlife.

But of a bugger, that conflict there, isn’t it?

And the thing is, perhaps, if we would have to spruce up Britain to avoid it, a little bit of climate change is to be prefirred?

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Total
0
Shares
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
17 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
jgh
jgh
1 year ago

Grooaaannn!!!

Addolff
Addolff
1 year ago
Reply to  jgh

It’s as if he’s been taking lessons from The Sun subs isn’t it?

And Monbiot is a cunt. Quite happy to lecture everyone that they should give up ICE vehicles whilst he was living in London, but changed his mind when SWMBO decided she didn’t want her sprog(s) growing up in the diverse wonderland (shithole) that is London and went back to rural Wales. He was then quite happy to use fossil fuelled vehicles. Wonder if he has an ICE vehicle now he has another squeeze in Oxford……

Spike
Spike
1 year ago

Once you decide that we don’t have a duty to exercise dominion over the Earth but instead to leave it exactly the way we found it, it’s important to choose the right benchmark year. In my country, you can pick a species zero year so that (1) the black man wasn’t here, (2) the white man wasn’t here, and (3) the red man wasn’t here. Surely those implementing the policy won’t conclude that the browns are too recent an invasive species, though they do have it in for the yellows.

TD
TD
1 year ago
Reply to  Spike

If we want to go back before the red man, don’t the scientists also need to get some mastodons cloned?

Phoenix44
Phoenix44
1 year ago
Reply to  Spike

Strictly speaking the red man was yellow. The US belongs to the Chinese!

dodgy geezer
dodgy geezer
1 year ago
Reply to  Phoenix44

I thought that the Bering Straits invasion from the East pushed pre-existing inhabitants south – all the way down to Tierra del Fuego. Don’t know if there were any earlier inhabitants.

But why should we single out humans as special? Unicellular animals were surely here before us…

Phoenix44
Phoenix44
1 year ago
Reply to  dodgy geezer

Most scientists accept the likelihood of two migrations across the Bering Strait as being the only way the Americas were populated. But then again, Asia was populated by Ethiopians if you want to look at it like that!

dodgy geezer
dodgy geezer
1 year ago
Reply to  Phoenix44

The land was populated by walking jellyfish. We should all preserve the rights of the amoeba. Stop using disinfectant!

Addolff
Addolff
1 year ago
Reply to  Phoenix44

The genetic make up of ‘native Indians’ demonstrates that the US was populated by Europeans traversing the edge of the ice sheet from Europe to the US, not via the Bering Strait. I will post the link as soon as I find it.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago

“Returning it to the broadleaf forests of 3,000 to 5,000 years ago seems fine to me.” Whats so special about 3000-5000 years ago? What makes that tiny period of geological time the bit we should copy? How about what it looked like while covered with ice? After all it was covered with ice for far longer than it hasn’t been during the current interglacial. There’s nothing ‘natural’ about any state of the earth, its in constant flux (just very slowly by human standards). And anyway, if you want to get maximum growth rates in order to soak up CO2 you… Read more »

Bongo
Bongo
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Have you got a source for that Jim?
I’ve binged this tree and it doesn’t seem to thrive anywhere north of China and the USA, far below Lake District latitudes. It has very big leaves, so presumably crowds out CO2 uptake in other species in its shadow. Did the researchers take this into account when making their claims, I wonder.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Bongo

Only that a friend has one growing in her garden in rural west Wales. I reckon if it’ll grow there it’ll grow anywhere…….

John B
John B
1 year ago

Most atmospheric CO2 goes into the oceans (which contain 96% of our CO2), maybe we need to plant more oceans. 50% of CO2 emissions are absorbed by plants and the seas within 12 months. Existing plants absorb CO2. More plants does not mean more CO2 is absorbed, it means existing plants get less. In other words, planting trees really makes no difference. But if we must plant more of something to ‘offset CO2 emissions’, plant more food crops to feed people. Odd isn’t it that rich celebs and royalty will pay to have trees planted but not to have more… Read more »

TD
TD
1 year ago

Given that the UK is roughly on a latitude with Newfoundland and Labrador, albeit benefiting from a west coast rather than east coast climate, isn’t global warming likely to make England and much of Europe a little bit more pleasant?

Barks
Barks
1 year ago

There are two ends to the equation. Perhaps some thought be given to ditching the fanciful goals.

Fred Z
Fred Z
1 year ago

I prefer the meta-argument: Nearly all of the people pushing for huge efforts, taxes and regulations to ‘combat’ Climate Change / Global Warming are obviously both swivel eyed loons and arseholes.

Seeing and hearing them is like watching old videos of Hitler or Mussolini raving. Reading them is like reading Mein Kampf or Marx.

George Monbiot is a lunatic Arsehole and surely that is obvious to all.

Boganboy
Boganboy
1 year ago

As I like to point out, if God had meant us to be bothered by global warming, He wouldn’t have invented the air conditioner.

17
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x