Sam Alvis

My defence of CCUS where I say I think CCUS is bad you mean?

3rd time see if you get it - I think CCUS is bad policy

But your guesswork is clearly superior to the Climate Change Committee’s analysis! I suppose they have think tank brain too? Unlike your pure mind unblemished by evidence?

You still argue a straw man. Any evidence the govt has abandoned NZ?

Is it realistic to think it would contribute to net zero. Clearly!

I’m not sure why you think you’re being smart here. Once again waiting for anyone to point out any evidence of Keir Starmer ABANDONING net zero.

Once again pointing out I literally said I think CCUS is bad policy. Engineered removals are expected to be 14% of emissions reductions by 2042 of which CCUS is a smaller percentage again. It is at a reasonable level of tech maturity given that timeline. Is it expensive. Yes. Will it get cheaper. No

What part of I think CCUS is a bad policy are you struggling to get? It is an immature tech. Its emissions reductions are expected well into the future - even if you rate the tech it’s not reducing emissions now but it doesn’t have to! Govt has done everything required to hit the next carbon budget!

You’re proving my point dude. I am simply saying that the article has zero assessment of the governments emission reductions or their projection - it is all about how they’ve abandoned net zero then NOTHING in the article is about emissions. It’s just a vibe - one you’re echoing.

I literally say I think CCUS is a bad policy but the whole point was the article says they’ve abandoned net zero. CCUS is one way of getting to net zero. Nothing in the article is about what the government is doing to reduce emissions. You can debate how they are but not that they are!

I disagree on the first point - untargeted taxes by a mid sized economy won’t increase the provision of anything clean!

These are not
Polanski’s policies and if they were I don’t know how you get to 80GW of offshore wind for example without all the things the current govt is doing!

The fundamental point is the carbon budgets and our total emissions and criticism of the government fails to look at the only metric that matters!

CCUS is a decarb policy. You may disagree with it - I do I don’t think it’s value for money but you can’t say they’ve abandoned net zero and then point to a carbon reduction policy. Swift boxes regardless of your view nothing to do with emissions! Planning protections also accelerate renewables

That isn’t the same as the party having policies to accelerate the transition and in fact has a strong record of opposing renewable developments. Behaviour only gets you so far particularly in the most proximate carbon budgets which rely on clean power and electrification

Could the govt has talked more about climate impacts and the policies it was actually delivering - yes. Could it have done much more decarb policy? Not really! They’re broadly inline with the carbon budgets.

This is total nonsense and has no regard for any actual policy content it’s just a vibe. Meanwhile I’m yet to see a single decarbonisation policy from Polanski that isn’t wealth taxes but apparently that’s acceptable?

He didn't

It’s not. Its political results are that of a standard European democracy in 2026, mediated through a worse electoral system.

Blaming net zero policies for rising bills is completely unfounded. They have soared mainly because of global conflict and gas prices. But there is a fairer way to cut costs by shifting levies off bills and onto progressive taxation.

🎥@harryqp.bsky.social on #politicslive 👇

Totally which I think the research question is - if your energy costs were zero would you industry be fine / internationally competitive - and I think as you say mostly the answer is no

.. or more likely to invest in electrifying their capital.

And given the ££ behind BICS you definitely can’t do both and the objectives are different - growth v security. So on balance I’d use the money for prospective new manufacturing and have other sectoral capital support to foundations.

govt is stuck on the investment response of energy support. There’s a bunch of electro-intensive things we want to attract (eg batteries) and low-matin foundation industries we want to protect (steel). But it’s not clear to me subsidising energy attracts the former or makes the latter competitive..

Yeh the delta between what the govt has actually done and what people think they've done (i.e. what govt has told them) is vast - massively increased public investment in multiple parts of the transition. But (from polling coming soon) the prevailing view of left defectors is a govt of austerity.

Climate is clearly an opportunity here if the government didn't think it was fringe. These voters put climate in their top 3 issues, and I haven't seen Polanski outline any climate policies? Just refers back to wealth taxes. His party meanwhile stops solar, wind and transmission where its needed

Net Zero Society: scenarios and pathways A report designed to help policy makers test the UK’s net zero strategy against scenarios for how society could look in future.

This was the starting point for our net zero scenario work www.gov.uk/government/p... society will change, that will impact emissions. Governments between now and 2050 can choose to try and shape those changes or not, but some change will happen.

Congrats JP - on both parts of this post

Which all starts to make it look a lot more like smoking if you ever did want to bring in sticks - less fashionable/alternatives available (though I don’t think you need them)

Existing trends are going to do most of this. Vegetarian rates far higher 16-24 than over 60s. Beef falling faster which is what you need. And presumes no innovation in cultured meats which frankly - *points at batteries* so policy need gets smaller and going with the grain (pun intended)

If you’re planning your week, still time to come to sign up for the event @johnspringford.bsky.social and I are doing at Nesta towers tomorrow (Tuesday) evening.
6pm start, in person or online, great speakers, lots of wonderful attendees.

Sign up here:

www.nesta.org.uk/event/gettin...

To understand what is happening in UK science policy you need to understand a bit of history.

Which also helps understand why people are making arguments in particular directions.

A little thread.

Isn’t this partly just the minimum wage in the denominator?

The Hundred: IPL-linked teams 'not considering Pakistan players' Four sides in The Hundred with links to the IPL are not expected to sign players from Pakistan in next month's auction.

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricke...

This is a total disgrace, would make the tournament worse and will contribute to the steady (enforced) decline of Pakistani cricket.

Getting Britain out of the hole: a plan for the economy Analyse Britain’s current economic strategy and the policy changes necessary to increase growth and productivity.

If you'd like to see @acjsissons.bsky.social, @soumayakeynes.ft.com. @rcolvile.bsky.social, Stephanie Flanders and me talk about how to fix Britain's economy in London on Tuesday, here are the details
www.nesta.org.uk/event/gettin...