• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Everyone in Britain could be given a personal 'carbon allowa

A

Anonymous

Guest
Everyone in Britain could be given a personal 'carbon allowance'
Everyone in Britain should have an annual carbon ration and be penalised if they use too much fuel, the head of the Environment Agency will say.

Published: 7:00AM GMT 09 Nov 2009
Comments 374 | Comment on this article

It would involve people being issued with a unique number which they would hand over when purchasing products that contribute to their carbon footprint, such as fuel Photo: GETTY
Lord Smith of Finsbury believes that implementing individual carbon allowances for every person will be the most effective way of meeting the targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
It would involve people being issued with a unique number which they would hand over when purchasing products that contribute to their carbon footprint, such as fuel, airline tickets and electricity.

Related Articles
Copenhagen climate change deal could be two separate treaties
New nuclear power stations within 10 years
The great natural gas conundrum
Sainsbury's to go greener with carbon dioxide
Miliband fast-tracks nuclear plants
Climate change commitments of different countries
Like with a bank account, a statement would be sent out each month to help people keep track of what they are using.
If their "carbon account" hits zero, they would have to pay to get more credits.
Those who are frugal with their carbon usage will be able to sell their unused credits and make a profit.
Lord Smith will call for the scheme to be part of a "Green New Deal" to be introduced within 20 years when he addresses the agency's annual conference on Monday.
An Environment Agency spokesman said only those with "extravagant lifestyles" would be affected by the carbon allowances.
He said: "A lot of people who cycle will get money back. It will probably only be bankers and those with extravagant lifestyles who would lose out."
However, some have criticised the move as "Orwellian" and say it will have a detrimental impact on business.
Ruth Lea, an economist from Arbuthnot Banking Group, told the Daily Mail: "This is all about control of the individual and you begin to wonder whether this is what the green agenda has always been about. It's Orwellian. This will be an enormous tax on business."
Under the Climate Change Act, Britain is obliged to cut its emissions by 80 per cent on 1990 levels by 2050. This means annual CO2 emissions per person will have to fall from about 9 tonnes to only 2 tonnes.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
It would involve people being issued with a unique number which they would hand over when purchasing products that contribute to their carbon footprint, such as fuel Photo


VeriChip (CHIP), the company that markets a microchip implant that links to your online health records, has acquired Steel Vault (SVUL), a credit monitoring and anti-identity theft company. The combined company will operate under a new name: PositiveID.

The most obvious criticism to be made of the deal is that it potentially allows PositiveID to link or cross-check patient health records (from the HealthLink chip) to people’s credit scores. One assumes that the company will put up firewalls to prevent that

http://industry.bnet.com/pharma/10005250/verichip-buys-steel-vault-creating-micro-implant-health-recordcredit-score-empire/
 

Broke Cowboy

Well-known member
Look - it is a Brit idea - therefore it is bound to be expensive, likely will make someone in the elite rich - probably many - and it will definitely be stupid.

When you run out of credits - and you have no money to pay the inflating credits (and they will inflate) - you go hungry - or it breeds a huge underground economy similar to Canada's once they brought in the GST - that would be typically Brit.

What a great way to take funds from a front line country and send it all to third world countries.

Below is a typical Brit interpretation of law - just to give you an idea how they think.

BC



http://www.thisissurreytoday.co.uk/news/Ex-soldier-faces-jail-handing-gun/article-1509082-detail/article.html

Ex-soldier faces jail for handing in gun Friday
November 13, 2009, 13:45

A former soldier who handed a discarded shotgun in to police faces at least five years imprisonment for "doing his duty".

Paul Clarke, 27, was found guilty of possessing a firearm at Guildford Crown Court on Tuesday – after finding the gun and handing it personally to police officers on March 20 this year.

The jury took 20 minutes to make its conviction, and Mr Clarke now faces a minimum of five year's imprisonment for handing in the weapon.

In a statement read out in court, Mr Clarke said: "I didn't think for one moment I would be arrested.

"I thought it was my duty to hand it in and get it off the streets."

The court heard how Mr Clarke was on the balcony of his home in Nailsworth Crescent, Merstham, when he spotted a black bin liner at the bottom of his garden.

In his statement, he said: "I took it indoors and inside found a shorn-off shotgun and two cartridges.

"I didn't know what to do, so the next morning I rang the Chief Superintendent, Adrian Harper, and asked if I could pop in and see him.

"At the police station, I took the gun out of the bag and placed it on the table so it was pointing towards the wall."

Mr Clarke was then arrested immediately for possession of a firearm at Reigate police station, and taken to the cells.

Defending, Lionel Blackman told the jury Mr Clarke's garden backs onto a public green field, and his garden wall is significantly lower than his neighbours.

He also showed jurors a leaflet printed by Surrey Police explaining to citizens what they can do at a police station, which included "reporting found firearms".

Quizzing officer Garnett, who arrested Mr Clarke, he asked: "Are you aware of any notice issued by Surrey Police, or any publicity given to, telling citizens that if they find a firearm the only thing they should do is not touch it, report it by telephone, and not take it into a police station?"

To which, Mr Garnett replied: "No, I don't believe so."

Prosecuting, Brian Stalk, explained to the jury that possession of a firearm was a "strict liability" charge – therefore Mr Clarke's allegedly honest intent was irrelevant.

Just by having the gun in his possession he was guilty of the charge, and has no defence in law against it, he added.

But despite this, Mr Blackman urged members of the jury to consider how they would respond if they found a gun.

He said: "This is a very small case with a very big principle.

"You could be walking to a railway station on the way to work and find a firearm in a bin in the park.

"Is it unreasonable to take it to the police station?"

Paul Clarke will be sentenced on December 11.

Judge Christopher Critchlow said: "This is an unusual case, but in law there is no dispute that Mr Clarke has no defence to this charge.

"The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant."
 
Top