Depressing how little media coverage this got. Almost as if the media just want to report what politicians say. Not question answers report reality www.theguardian.com/environment/...
We have to call out how years of lobbying (&funding) by fossil fuel industry continues to ensure many on right-wing persist on referring to net-zero as a cost, not a source of profit, jobs & security www.theguardian.com/environment/...
Our final task: respond to DEFRA’s wood burning consultation - deadline 19th March.
This is a rare chance to tell the government about the real-life impacts of neighbourhood burning.
Our guide to responding:
www.mumsforlungs.org/news/respond...
Thank you to all our amazing #CleanAirCrowd!
Oil and gas prices are set on international markets beyond UK control
North Sea is not credible solution:
❌ output too small to make any difference
❌ will decline irrespective of new licences
Renewable generation and net zero tech 🔑 to bring energy independence
eciu.net/media/press...
Yes. Paper advocates analysing risk non quantitatively when quantification not possible or mis-leading (also in principles in king et sl)
Yes, but these are knowledge assessments with confidence estimates. If you start with a value, eg we want to avoid small island States being uninhabitable due to sea level rise, what is chance of that (as function of time, emissions, or T)? See Simon sharpe erl paper on telling the boiling frog
See principles in King etval global risk assessment
Eg it doesn't say what a 2 m sea level rise would do to our societies
Take 8.3.3 in ar6 spm. That is an assessment of evidence not of risk to something policy makers value.
You're of course right that IPCC AR6 contains risk info. But it is an assessment of knowledge not a risk assessment. A risk assessment starts more with what you value, and then risk to it (as function of time, T, or emissions).
Let's meet to discuss. Email me
Great to see ITV covering this, and two @nebriefing.bsky.social speakers interviewed too
One reason it calls for media comms. Public demand is one key thing for gov action
Its one reason the article includes need for media comms. Public demand is a key route to gov action
The richest man owns X.
The second and third richest men control Google.
The fourth richest man owns Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp.
The fifth richest man owns The Washington Post.
And now the sixth richest could soon take over both Paramount and Warner Bros.
See the problem here?
More on the need for a global assessment of avoidable risks
climate.leeds.ac.uk/news/leeds-r...
Agreed. Labour members supported change - but party leadership did not listen
We really need a better voting system!
More on our call for a global assessment of avoidable climate change risks.
www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/new...
I was going to say "Where's his suit?" but someone beat me to it!
Major threats to our well being from climate change can be avoided, or hugely reduced, by rapid action.
Our Nature comment calls for a global risk assessment, effectively communicated to governments, the media and the public, to make clear what is at stake.
www.nature.com/articles/d41...
When I saw Spain floods, I wondered if it would hit our food. UK heavily dependent on Med, where climate changing fast. UK can survive without strawberries in Feb. But set to get worse until we stop Fossil fuels & reach net zero, see @nebriefing.bsky.social @profpaulbehrens.bsky.social talk
Denmark is a poster child of the energy transition.
Yesterday I gave the opening keynote at Green Summit 2026. One message stood out: energy policy is industrial policy and increasingly geopolitics.
The next phase isn’t about targets, but competitiveness, resilience and execution at scale.
France. Mozambique and Bali floods have barely made uk news. We'll see if these do
notorious radical left communist rag says tax the rich
These two women are suing Andrew Tate, alleging he raped them. Here they visit the social media companies that created Tate. Please share.
*one voice altered to disguise identity
Less renewables means higher prices.
www.rechargenews.com/opinion/tony...
So we either (i) trust Yusuf-I that Jenricks is a liar, (ii) trust Yusuf-II that he is not - but that means Yusuf called Jenricks a liar even though he didn't know him or know he was a liar, i.e. Yusuf is a liar.
So either way Reform leaders are liars.
So we either (i) trust Yusuf-I that Jenricks is a liar, (ii) trust Yusuf-II that he is not - but that means Yusuf called Jenricks a liar even though he didn't know him or know he was a liar, i.e. Yusuf is a liar.
So either way Reform leaders are liars.
The Telegraph has even printed the article in its print edition this morning (albeit somewhat buried at the end of its Business section)
