The Koch anti-decarbonisation lobby have clearly chosen their attack line: affordability.
They will employ the following tricks:
1. Tot up capital costs but ignore running cost savings
2. Use out of date cost data, ignoring the plummeting costs of renewables and LZCs
1/
They will employ the following tricks:
1. Tot up capital costs but ignore running cost savings
2. Use out of date cost data, ignoring the plummeting costs of renewables and LZCs
1/
3. Quote their ridiculously inflated, 30-year cumulative cost (all "adds" and no "omits") as a single cost per household. To give the impression (a) householders will have to pay it and (b) pay it all in year 1. In reality, as with most infrastructure, the cost will be...
2/
2/
Met with government borrowing at an interest rate of around 0.75% (gilts) or effectively 0% (QE - the interest goes back to the government). So "£100K per household" is in reality £40K borrowing per household"
and an annual interest payment of £300... but starting at £10 in
3/
and an annual interest payment of £300... but starting at £10 in
3/
year 1, £20 in year 2, £30 in year 3 etc. If QE is used it will be ZERO.
I am happy to pay £10 to save the planet; but why not ask billionaires to pay a teeny bit of tax for a change?
So tweeps, PLEASE don't fall for the "we cannot afford net Zero" schtick. They are LYING!
4/4
I am happy to pay £10 to save the planet; but why not ask billionaires to pay a teeny bit of tax for a change?
So tweeps, PLEASE don't fall for the "we cannot afford net Zero" schtick. They are LYING!
4/4
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
