Stammer loses it yet again.

Why would the planet die if net zero were to be reached? I mean, what a ridiculous statement. In the long run we are more likely to do irreparable damage if as a species we don't achieve net zero.

You utter fool. Net zero does not mean removing all the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, which would be disastrous if we could even do it which we cannot. Net zero simply means not adding to the carbon dioxide already there. Or simply by removing the same amount as we pump out by such things as reforestation.

I think you have exposed your ignorance by clearly failing to understand what is actually meant by net zero.

Well the difference is that I am concerned with the ability of families in the UK to be able to pay their energy bills - you couldn't care less as long as you can virtue signal even though it wont make a blind bit of difference to climate change..

If that is the wisdom of age so be it

The only utter fool here is you. I have better things to do today than feed your trolling ego.

You should work on your people skills, Shrieky.

I understand the political and social history of the UK pretty well actually, an unwelcome fact to some of those who don't like what I have to say.

Yep we agree again, but its not all or nothing. We might not be able to totally stop climate change by cutting our Co2 in the West, but we sure can make a difference.
When people on you tube talk about poor countries burning coal, they imply that because coal is so dirty it makes any attempts by us pointless. 
But they are lying in the most devious ways. They compare India to the UK,  when they should compare India to Europe. They talk of burning coal, but not HOW MUCH Co2 India produces. India burns coal for its industry but it doesn't heat millions of homes by burning gas. Its population if they own a vehicle at all have a moped, not an SUV. 

And if we continue on our current development of renewable we will find Asia using it, not because they care about global warming, but because its cheaper.