"Car Ownership Cannot Be Sacrificed In The Fight Against Climate Change, Tony Blair Said In Beijing"

Car ownership cannot be sacrificed in the fight against climate change, Tony Blair said today in Beijing, despite a projected tripling of traffic in China over the next decade.

In a report forecasting 150m cars on China's roads, which will produce a fifth of global exhaust emissions by 2020, the former UK prime minister said it was impractical to expect governments to curb sales. "I think the way we consume has to change, but I think it is completely unrealistic to say to people you can't have a car, you can't use a motorbike. It is just not going to happen," he said.

Instead, he said, the focus should be on developing low-carbon technology and expanding the manufacturing and infrastructure for hybrid and electric vehicles. He was talking at the launch of a new report by his Climate Group, which suggests the world's most populous nation is taking the lead in many fields of low-carbon industry.

While many environmentalists stress the need to curb consumption worldwide to deal with global warming, Blair emphasised change rather than sacrifice. "We are changing the way we live not so that we don't consume and get the material benefits that people like ourselves actually enjoy, but we are changing it so that we do so in a way that is sustainable," he said.

EDIT

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/aug/20/tony-blair-cars-china

Well, I guess we know what's not on the table then, don't we?

It's hard to imagine any meaningful change coming before widespread collapse...

The politicians who are not betrayers of their people can probably be counted on one hand.

n/t

Old habits die hard.

...a car or posterity...gee...that's a toughie. I'm going with the car.

:sarcasm:

Nice to see Blair is consistent, tough. He's still a corporation-fellating twit.

:sarcasm:

I mean, it's not like he's been wrong about much before, right?

Wealthy people will probably drive cars until the roads fall apart. Then they'll use servants carrying sedan chairs.

I think he is a piece of shit for his relationship with Bush, but all I see is someone saying that cars are a part of the world we live in (they are) and that if we want to use them and other modern conveniences, we need to move to sustainable (that has a very specific meaning) way of satisfying those wants.

I realize it doesn't fit with doomer preferences, but it seems like a reasonable stance to me. While I have an intense dislike of Blair's stance (and Blair) for enabling Bush and Iraq, he did take climate change seriously enough to cut subsidies to the coal industry in England and throw strong support behind wind.

I have never once, not for a second, seen any anti-nuke consumer car CULTist as anything but an apologist for consumption mentality.

Regrettably the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is not a function of what bourgeois consumers "accept."

The cornerstone justification for which is the need for "more and bigger". Everything I do and advocate for (with the truth) is the antithesis of your accusation, everything you do and advocate for (with a steady stream of falsehoods) is to build "more and bigger".

how about asking the millionaires
to pay something before taking
cars away from the poor

I think it's time for China to return to bikes for regular transportation.

except for business trips.