EU Gives Green Light for Two Insect Species to Be used for Human Consumption

[Sparko]

It doesn't stop at eating bugs...

Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-11771325/Climate-change-World-War-II-style-rationing-petrol-energy-meat-slash-carbon-emissions.html

Scientists claim World War II-style RATIONING of petrol, energy and meat could help countries slash their carbon emissions 'rapidly and fairly'

• Rationing petrol, energy at home and meat could tackle climate change - experts
• They say a WWII-style approach would help countries cut their carbon emissions

Climate change could be tackled with the help of a World War II-style rationing of petrol, meat and the energy people use in their homes, UK scientists say.

They claim that this would help countries to slash their greenhouse gas emissions 'rapidly and fairly'.

Researchers from the University of Leeds also said that governments could restrict the number of long-haul flights people make in a year or 'limit the amount of petrol one can buy in a month'.

They said that previous schemes put forward as a way to fight global warming – such as carbon taxes or carbon trading schemes – would not work because they favoured the wealthy, who would effectively be able to buy the right to pollute.

The experts also made a comparison with the need to limit certain goods as they grew scarce in the 1940s, adding that trying to achieve this by raising taxes was rejected at the time because 'the impact of tax rises would be slow and inequitable'

But rationing in Britain during the war was widely accepted, the authors wrote in their paper.

'As long as there was scarcity, rationing was accepted, even welcomed or demanded,' they said.

It wasn't until nine years after the war ended that rationing finished in the UK.

In much the same way as during World War Two, the researchers argue that carbon rationing would allow people to receive an equal portion of resources based on their needs, therefore sharing out the effort to protect the planet.

Lead author Dr Nathan Wood, who is now a postdoctoral fellow at Utrecht University's Fair Energy Consortium, said: 'The concept of rationing could help, not only in the mitigation of climate change, but also in reference to a variety of other social and political issues – such as the current energy crisis.'



The researchers add: 'Rationing is often seen as unattractive, and therefore not a viable option for policy-makers.

'It is important to highlight the fact that this was not the case for many of those who had experienced rationing.

'It is important to emphasise the difference between rationing itself and the scarcity that rationing was a response to.

'Of course, people did welcome the end of rationing, but they were really celebrating the end of scarcity, and celebrating the fact that rationing was no longer necessary.'

The problem with rationing energy, meat and petrol, the researchers point out, is that people might not be as willing to accept it as they would if resources were scarce, because they know there is an 'abundance of resources available'.

To tackle this, the researchers said, governments could regulate the biggest polluters, such as oil, gas and petrol, long-haul flights and intensive farming, which would therefore create a scarcity in products that harm the planet.

They added that rationing could then be introduced gradually to manage the resulting scarcity.

Fellow lead author Dr Rob Lawlor, of the University of Leeds, said: 'There is a limit to how much we can emit if we are to reduce the catastrophic impacts of climate change. In this sense, the scarcity is very real.

'It seems feasible to reduce emissions overall even while the lowest emitters, often the worst off, may be able to increase their emissions – not despite rationing, but because of rationing and price controls.'

Dr Wood added: 'The cost of living crisis has shown what happens when scarcity drives up prices, with energy prices rising steeply and leaving vulnerable groups unable to pay their bills.

'Currently, those living in energy poverty cannot use anywhere near their fair share of energy supply, whereas the richest in society are free to use as much energy as they can afford.'

The experts said one way to roll out the rationing scheme would be to use 'carbon cards', which would work like bank cards to keep track of a person's carbon allowance, rather than using ration cards.

Dr Lawlor said: 'Many have proposed carbon allowances and carbon cards before.

'What is new (or old, taking inspiration from World War II) is the idea that the allowances should not be tradable.

'Another feature of World War II-style rationing is that price controls on rationed goods would prevent prices from rising with increased demand, benefitting those with the least money.'

The experts believe that rationing would also encourage people to move to more sustainable lifestyles, rather than relying on fossil fuels.

'For example, rationing petrol could encourage greater use of, and investment in, low carbon public transport, such as railways and local trams,' Dr Wood said.

The study has been published in the journal Ethics, Policy & Environment.

Full study at https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...5.2023.2166342

© Copyright Original Source

[seer]

It doesn't stop at eating bugs...

First, I doubt that it would ever be accepted in the US. Second, I doubt that rationing will effect the elite...

[Sparko]

First, I doubt that it would ever be accepted in the US. Second, I doubt that rationing will effect the elite...

Yeah the elite would still have their planes and mansions for a while until the poor rebel and cancel them. Like the French Revolution. Heads will roll.

I don't think this nonsense would be accepted anywhere truthfully, but it shows how disconnected from reality the far left is. They live in some imaginary dystopia where the world is ending in a few years and they seem to really believe that. And they think that they are truly saving the world with this sort of nonsense. When in fact they would be destroying it. They would send us back to the dark ages to "save us"

Unfortunately as crazy as they are, they seem to get politicians to actually go along with some of their nutty ideas.

[rogue06]

Yeah the elite would still have their planes and mansions for a while until the poor rebel and cancel them. Like the French Revolution. Heads will roll.

I don't think this nonsense would be accepted anywhere truthfully, but it shows how disconnected from reality the far left is. They live in some imaginary dystopia where the world is ending in a few years and they seem to really believe that. And they think that they are truly saving the world with this sort of nonsense. When in fact they would be destroying it. They would send us back to the dark ages to "save us"

Unfortunately as crazy as they are, they seem to get politicians to actually go along with some of their nutty ideas.

ad2945bf-06f0-481a-9eff-5835ae4f6ef5.jpg

[Starlight]

Scientists claim World War II-style RATIONING of petrol, energy and meat could help countries slash their carbon emissions 'rapidly and fairly'

At face value it strikes me as an interesting idea. I didn't live through rationing though, so would be intrigued to hear from those who did.

Although I think ideas like this inherently play into incorrect ideas that individuals need make sacrifices in their quality of life to prevent climate change.

It is not the carbon emissions of the individual people that are problematic, it's those of large companies. A CEO in a board room can make a decision to change a company's practices in a way that impacts far more on climate change than well-meaning individuals making sacrifices in their daily lives ever could, and in a way that won't affect people's quality of life.

[seer]

It is not the carbon emissions of the individual people that are problematic, it's those of large companies. A CEO in a board room can make a decision to change a company's practices in a way that impacts far more on climate change than well-meaning individuals making sacrifices in their daily lives ever could, and in a way that won't affect people's quality of life.

And where is your evidence, that the powerful and elite, they very men that walk the halls of Davos, will do any such thing?

[rogue06]

And where is your evidence, that the powerful and elite, they very men that walk the halls of Davos, will do any such thing?

It's not like they lead by example as each arrives and leaves in a private jet after dining on lobster and caviar.

Maybe they'd be more convincing if they "jet pooled" and grabbed some fast food.

[seer]

It's not like they lead by example as each arrives and leaves in a private jet after dining on lobster and caviar.

Maybe they'd be more convincing if they "jet pooled" and grabbed some fast food.

Not going to happen. Though I think John Kerry finally gave up his private jet. After he was shamed...

[Sparko]

At face value it strikes me as an interesting idea. I didn't live through rationing though, so would be intrigued to hear from those who did.

Go visit your buddy socialist countries like Venezuela and Cuba and ask them about rationing.

[rogue06]

Not going to happen. Though I think John Kerry finally gave up his private jet. After he was shamed...

He sold the jet earlier this month. Let's see if that means he stopped flying in them or if he started using military aircraft instead.

[Ronson]

He sold the jet earlier this month. Let's see if that means he stopped flying in them or if he started using military aircraft instead.

I just went and looked it up. Apparently, it was sold (in August) to a company that is situated at the same airport the Kerrys/Heinzes kept it at. So it is housed in the same location. The new owners asked that it not be tracked anymore, to remove it from the FOI Act.

One might suspect that it was sold to cover his elitist butt from obvious hypocrisy, but now he leases it from an independent company. If he was serious about eliminating the carbon footprint from that aircraft, he should have scrapped it.