Lock or does the planet get it? Guardian proposes’ accidentally ‘Covid-like stalemate to achieve Paris’ climate goals – RT World News

Helen Buyniski is an American journalist and political commentator at RT. Follow her on Twitter @ velocirapture23

If carbon dioxide emissions do not decrease with the equivalent of a global exclusion “About every two years” for the next decade, the earth will heat up to apocalyptic levels, a team of researchers at the University of East Anglia warned in a Nature article published on Wednesday.

This apparently made some Guard fanatics so excited about the Guardian staff that they originally put the piece under the title “To achieve a global exclusion for two years to achieve Paris’ CO2 targets, it must be met.” After the headline was mercilessly dragged for such fear porn, it was changed to “Equivalent to the decrease in Covid emissions required every two years – study” with an explainer who “Experts say” that “Equivalent drop in emissions over a decade” will be “Need to keep safe limits of global warming.”

Despite the call for “Completely different methods” to achieve and sustain the emission reduction of the pandemic, lead researcher Corinne Le Quéré nevertheless insisted that climate change is not a “Side issue. It cannot be about one law or policy, it must be the core of all policies. ”

Every strategy and every plan of every government must be consistent with tackling climate change.

While Le Quéré did not come out and suggest that people be arbitrarily deprived of their freedoms every two years to please a climate model, the other one will “Strategic actions” she said some of the gains from the pandemic have already been implemented – and in many cases have been implemented for years. From town planning to incentive “Active transport” (walking and cycling) and growing public transport, to promote remote work where possible, her proposals were not exactly new – and probably not to convince anyone that they were adequate enough.

Also on rt.com
World Economic Forum shouted on Twitter for suggesting that Covid-19 closures are ‘improved cities around the world’.

‘There is a real contradiction between what governments say they do to do [to generate a green recovery], and what they do, ” Le Quéré told the Guardian and mentioned the phenomenon “Very worrying.”

Her co-researcher Glen Peters was more explicit on what latitude countries should move away from fossil fuels on their own time, and asked that “Structural changes” to move economies to renewable energy.

Some on social media, see the “Silent sharing” said out loud on the first issue of the Guardian article, a “I told you so” moment. The threat of ‘climate lock-in’ has been varied and “Listen” months by the mainstream media.

… others initially assumed it had to be satire, because no one would put anything on their nose –

… except maybe for the World Economic Forum, which was actually praised for what barricades did to cities – presumably transformed into uninhabitable hives of pieces where one can no longer even take a Broadway show – earlier this week, it was removed tweeting under public pressure.

The WEF posted a video showing the “Silence” and clearer air – and lack of people, even though they did not say the part out loud.

Also on rt.com
Lockdown is not ‘quietly’ improving cities’, admits the World Economic Forum and deletes its much ridiculous tweet

Do you think your friends will be interested? Share this story!