Re: Public figures are queuing up to slam Boris Johnson’s despicable pit closures comment 📂 Archived Message
Posted by Ian M on August 7, 2021, 6:09 pm, in reply to "Public figures are queuing up to slam Boris Johnson’s despicable pit closures comment"
So odd whenever this 'Thatcher was an environmentalist' line gets trotted out. People forget to mention the massive increase in road building and the expansion of north sea oil and gas. Carbon brief did a couple of historical analyses of UK energy use back in 2015: https://www.carbonbrief.org/five-charts-show-the-historic-shifts-in-uk-energy-last-year https://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2015/01/uk-coal-use-to-fall-to-lowest-level-since-industrial-revolution/ Total use has declined since the 70s, and related ghg emissions have gone down BUT look at the 'industry' line on this graph:
This rather gives the game away, because the other part of the Thatcher revolution was the outsourcing of industrial production to countries where labour was cheaper and regulations less stringent. If you take into account fossil fuel use and ghg emissions embedded in all the goods manufactured overseas, esp in China and then shipped over here, then you'll find that both have increased markedly since the 1970s, as common sense would indicate from the huge increase in consumer goods and complex technology since the that time. Otherwise the class aspect of fossil fuel use and industrialism in general is an interesting one. It seems undeniable that many working class gains have come about because of the massive amount of cheap energy from fossil fuels lessened the load that traditionally fell on their backs. Of course it cuts both ways because many sources of income dried up or became centralised & inhuman after they were industrialised, and job losses to automation and outsourcing continue to the present day. As for the future (if there is a future for energy production) I'd say the workers have to be honoured and allowed to lead the way towards appropriate use. Rising had an interesting interview in April with a coal union leader in the US where he made the point that miners weren't opposed to 'renewable' tech per se but that switching over to that kind of work would entail a massive loss of income and hard-won workplace benefits, to the point where most would no longer be able to support their families. In other words any kind of large scale switch will require massive government subsidies. Check it out:
Also related, this XR discussion about working class environmentalism which touches on the question of coal:
cheers, I
|
|