On the 7th March, Prime Minister Boris Johnson stated that he would not abandon UKs’ vow to reduce carbon emissions despite the concerns growing over Russian oil and gas. Mr. Johnson indicated that the UK was looking at using more domestic energy resources, he added the UK needed to invest in more nuclear and renewable resources.
There are rising concerns about energy availability. Solar and wind energy resources in the United Kingdom appear to be insufficient. Without the wind and the sun, how would Britain’s lights stay on? Most people then agreed that a backup should be in place, whether it be nuclear or natural gas. The Net Zero Scrutiny Group (NZSG) has also been pushing for the resumption of shale gas fracking.
The Net Zero Scrutiny Group (NZSG), MPs have been campaigning to reconsider the UK’s net-zero policy. The NZSG claims that the cost of reaching net-zero is too high, the plans are too quick, and Britain will not be able to afford it by 2022. In an email to BBC News, Mr. Mackinlay said, “It would be more sensible to ‘backload’ Net Zero closer to 2050 than to ‘frontload’ it now, as we’re attempting to do.”
Despite the increasing prices for oil/gas and the increasing demand for energy supplies, conserving our climate, making it our priority should be on the list. With UK government’s latest reports, it estimates a temperature rise of 2°C by 2100, flooding to increase by 27% by 2050 and 40% by 2080. Although the cost of net-zero (£1.4tn) could be significant but not exceptional. The failure to control climate change would cause much larger costs if not started now.
Energy resources are an important aspect of our living as we need energy in every basic step during our day. However, we would not even be existing if it’s not for our climate. Pushing away the choice of being able to preserve climate change might push it too far to the point it will be completely difficult to achieve results. It’s better to start small than to start with nothing.