The "Global Unified Target" essentially means that the average global Joe should be at the carbon impact level of the average Indonesian. I wonder if this is also valid for the House-of-Lords committee members that came up with this report? 📰👉
committees.parliament.uk/publications/3…
committees.parliament.uk/publications/3…
"Departments from across government should use the full range of policy levers—incl. regulatory & financial (dis)incentives, development & adaptation of physical & choice environments, and communication & engagement—to enable changes to the most impactful climate [..] behaviours"
“COVID messaging on the first lockdown across society shows what a successful public communications campaign looks like for behaviour change.”
Average Joe "told by science" (& some Business School prof) that he's "living beyond his means" - but "switching to a more plant-based diet" is his "single biggest way to reduce environmental impact on the plant" [?!] Kind of contradicts what's shown in the 1st tweet of this🧵!👆
The switch to plant-based diets creates a carbon gain of a mere 1 to 6% at best.
For dietary policy, expect "systemic interventions", eco-labels, .... But no meat/dairy #tax (yet). The committee thinks it is "not the right moment" (even if "it may be ultimately necessary").
For dietary policy, expect "systemic interventions", eco-labels, .... But no meat/dairy #tax (yet). The committee thinks it is "not the right moment" (even if "it may be ultimately necessary").
Somewhat related thread:
https://twitter.com/fleroy1974/status/1551152472844025856?s=20&t=0Ynr-RnCMyS0pK4XyMqrNw
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
