Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Absurd to force climate policy through courts *Democracies* must coerce costly switch through legislation Not courts demanding Shell reduce consumer emissions 45% bc non-binding Paris agreement Relevant to re-read my oped: https://financialpost.com/opinion/bjorn-lomborg-make-climate-policy-in-legislatures-not-courts …https://www.wsj.com/articles/shell-ordered-by-dutch-court-to-cut-carbon-emissions-11622038961 …
Realistically, such a court order simply means Shell will sell 45% less, leaving others to supply the rest
Or Shell transferring its legal jurisdiction, assets and business outside the NL
Like direct shipments from tryanny?
It's just theatre to give the public the illusion that they are doing something.
The easiest way to cut, is to sell assets, which will still be producing carbon
Why do you say "realistically" others will just sell more oil? Look at what's happening with coal as its "social licence" is lost - new coal pants cancelled and, now the technology is available, a rapid transfer to renewables Realistically, the same will happen with oil.
It's not government overreach, it's court overreach. Government does not agree, and might even appeal (as a shareholder). Issue is that technically this is a verdict thats not possible based on the "no law, no sentence" principle as dictated by constitution. It will be overturned
Next to that, these climate "warriors" are risking 10's of thousands of jobs. They are risking housing opportunities (cant build) etc. It increases poverty and inequality in the middle class, which history shows is a dangerous thing to do. Eventually it will lead to unrest/worse
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
