tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225684640556187442.post-69422098631078573772008-03-24T16:55:00.000Z2008-03-24T16:55:00.000Zt's a good post, but you malign me slightly.<BR/><BR/>I do not say that Wales can somehow develop more intensively <I>and</I> meet her per capita share of the UK's emissions reductions targets. That would be impossible<BR/><BR/>What I'm suggesting is that the principle of Kyoto - that less developed countries meet less stringent reductions targets - is one that could usefully be extended within the UK.<BR/><BR/>Overall, the UK would still be expected to meets its CO2 reductions targets (60% of 1990 levels by 2050 - but I'm sure you will say this needs to be at least 80%), but while the South East might have to hit 70%, Wales could get to only 50% (assuming that made an overall net reduction of 60% - this is illustrative only). In that extra 10% would live activities that could increase Welsh prosperity relative to the UK average but which would be hard to do if the same reductions targets were required uniformly throughout the UK. Additional road building for hilly, sparsely populated areas might be one such activity. The precise targets would be measured according to per capital GVA, not just per capita.<BR/><BR/>So a balanced approach is neither business as usual, nor is it a case of sorting poverty first then going green. It is an attempt to do two things at once - meet the emissions reductions targets that you rightly say are so vital and pressing AND giving the poorer parts of the UK a little wiggle room to catch up if they need it. That is the balance - meeting social, economic and environmental goals simultaneously.<BR/><BR/>As you say, in global terms Wales is a very rich country. So she should still be expected to make significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. It's just even richer parts of the UK should do more still, such that the UK overall hits the necessary target, be that 60% or 80%.<BR/><BR/>That's not waiting for Surrey to do something first - it's expecting Surrey to do something more. After all, Surrey almost certainly emits more in the first place.Normal Mouthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07374935277497669293noreply@blogger.com