Everything we need to do to stop climate breakdown, we also need to do for national security. Energy saving, more renewables, more electricity storage and interconnectors, electrification of transport, heating, cooking and industrial processes, plant-based diets. We win on all fronts.

March 21, 2026 - 09:38 UTC

95
67
3168
The electrification of mass public transportation is great depending on the source of your electricity. If it's coming from nuclear, great. Coal? Not good.
1
0
0
EVs would emit less CO² over their lifetime even if the electricity came to 100% from coal. Nuclear is far more expensive than renewables and without massive subsidies there wouldn't exist a single nuclear powerplant on earth.
0
0
1
@georgemonbiot.bsky.social

Do you know what the cheapest thing would be? It would be the thing that would make every community quieter, healthier, and more economically vibrant.

Car free walkable communities.

You know what would save planet ecologies?

Local food production. Watershed […]
1
0
1
And the chemical plants, heavy industries and other sorts of factories would be right in the center so everybody can walk to work? Would take a nuclear war to turn all big cities into rubble so we can rebuild from scratch. Not that cheap though.
1
0
0
Lots I read these days from climate experts state there will be no climate breakdown but a managible progress towards a hotter/greener world with increase storm strengths etc. Where should we put our investment climate mitigation or net zero? I would welcome an answer.
3
0
0
You don't really read that from climate experts, do you?
1
0
0
The /greener told me you read to much from "climate experts" funded by the fossil fuel industry. We are already way to far towards climate mayhem that we can't avoid massive investment into mitigation. But if we don't reach net zero fast there's no chance to mitigate what's ahead of us.
0
0
0
We are using up the scarce resources of the world: petrol and gas, in particular. When they have run out we will have selfishly used, in 200 years, the entire stock of these fuels for millions of years. Unless we bequeath future generations an alternative mankind might not survive.
0
0
1
We have the technology. The heavy investment needed to switch would be heavy but would pay for itself quickly in almost every fiscal, political and social scenario. We would be some way to mitigating climate change. Kill oil, or kill us, its become that existential.
2
0
36
@bestforbritain.org reports that just one oil price shock is more expensive than the cost of hitting our Net Zero target
1
1
21
We don’t have the technology.
Eroi of green energy is to low to make it sustainable and we simply don’t have the materials or capacity to build this for everybody on this planet.
1
0
0
If all this happens, AI will die a slow painful death too
2
0
3
👏👏👏
0
0
1
There is a danger that mega-scale datacentres will exacerbate the short-term shortage of renewables and grid capacity. We need to prioritize electrifying transport and home heating.
0
0
2
Except the "plant-based diets" are nothing but greenwashing.

Nothing.
0
0
0
On Southern Rail we have had electric trains for nearly 100 years
A hundred years ago we had electric trams then electric trolley buses
Thankfully the electric trains have not been scrapped
0
0
7
What on earth are all these wars doing to hasten climate change? No one seems to be commenting on it!
0
0
1
Add to that lots of new jobs to Speed up the transition. New professions young people will train for and have a career. Let the fossil fuel industry continue to be run by old fossils as it dies out.
0
0
1
Rachel Carson published "Silent Spring" in the early 1960s. I have a B.S. in Environmental Health. Humans as a whole don't seem interested in saving themselves, other species, or the planet. Focus locally for change.
0
0
3
I didn't have to pan out this way. We are extremely lucky that it has, just as we are extremely lucky that renewables are the cheapest energy humanity has ever had.
0
0
0
And every bit of ecological recovery we achieve, every move from private to common, every decentralisation. Greater resilience in our food supply and infrastructure. One top of all that every single one of those things improves our quality of life, our mental and physical resilience and wellbeing.
0
0
0
Govt. (or local business under licence) should fund switch to home salary + battery by charging cost +10%. Paid for by homeowner out of energy bills, capped at no more than their current bills. After 5/10 years paid off and they own the infrastructure/have cheap power. Local jobs and accountability
0
0
0
We need a world war level of commitment to answer global warming, and don't anyone fucking DARE call it "climate change."
0
0
0
You had me up until the plant based diet
0
0
0
Genuine question: how does a plant-based diet improve national security? Seems to be the odd one out.
1
0
3
You get ‘more food per hectare’ if you’re plant based. That must help.
0
0
3
As the price of gas sets the price of electricity in the UK, it is indeed a race to get us off gas. It will save every house hold about £1000 pa? - As long as there aren't any more crazy Hinkley contracts.
0
0
0
Yep. I've been saying this to those who are negative about 'green' energy for years. I explained I'm 100% up for renewable independent energy due to the outside UK powers having too much control it's a disaster waiting to happen for National Security. Points at the world relations as example of this
1
0
0
I recommend the book Bright Green Lies.
0
0
0
Every street could be a power station if we made an effort to make each roof solar.
1
0
7
(We could get rid of the big energy arseholes if we did this as well, and create thousands of jobs installing and maintaining.)
1
0
8
Yeah, except the plant-based diets... Agriculture has destroyed more habitat than land clearing for any other purpose. And the health cost of carb diets is incalculable: All modern chronic diseases derive from fake post-industrial plant 'food'.
1
0
3
though the greatest destruction of habitat in food production terms linked to livestock farming. Approx half- calories grown are fed to livestock and UK imports soya to feed them. Just went back to some excellently researched stats in George Monbiot's book Regenesis.
0
0
3
Also in the political arena. Stopping corruption by the oil companies is achievable with government by Citizens Assemblies selected by sortition. Possibly by the Greens, but they'll be defeated the next election along, and we're back to corruption again.
The party we need is By The People.
0
0
2
100%. We need energy and food security.
0
0
0
But have you considered that non-polluting energy production is gay?
0
0
1
And it's all so beneficial for all of us. A genuine no-brainer. We just lack leadership from those we entrust with leadership.
0
0
0
We need to tackle ultra processed foods, whether meat based, veggie or vegan.
0
0
2
Best we can do is completely whore ourselves to American and Despot Arab interests whilst selling every bolt to every other conman in existence.

Secondly we'll jump very late and very expensively onto the biggest Ponzi schemes in existence again to the benefit of foreign interests.
0
0
2
Sadly it's not gonna happen. Evil has won.
0
0
0
It’s too late. Not being snarky. 3c guaranteed.
0
0
0
...and compatible with a next phase capitalism.

Hormuz at least has an upside.. despite a whole pile of downside.
0
0
1
Sell it as a sovereignty issue. The right can’t argue against that. Sovereignty doesn’t just need to be from other countries. Sovereignty is desperately needed from corporations
0
0
1
A classic, but it just keep getting right-er
2
1
80
Ah - I was going to post that but you beat me to it!
I think the best every climate change cartoon.
The author was Pultizer prize-winning Joel Pett, sacked in 2023 along with two other cartoonists.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_Pett
0
4
11
Can rt? (I prefer to ask before I rt from a comment thread)
1
0
0
This war has made the infrastructure of fossil fuels, usually taken for granted, very visible and it seems so fragile (turns out it's all very flammable!)
0
0
1
The convergence is fascinating — turns out planetary anxiety and national anxiety have basically the same prescription. Makes you wonder if our brains are wired to solve collective action problems once we frame them right.
0
0
1
indeed
0
0
0
No one in government is an effective communicator. I believe most of Labour want to do this, but no one can articulate it, not even Ed Milliband.
0
0
0
It feels like a no-brainer and an ideal opportunity to grab with both hands. If people only opened their eyes and ears!
🙏🌍🙏
0
0
6
Yeah but..drill baby drill!
We had a fuel crisis in the 70s successive governments have done nothing since..cars be ame more fuel efficient..thats about it.
We need a brave government to kick the shit out of the fossil fuel lobby...sadly more concerned with fuel price than the planet
0
0
0
Overhauling agriculture to use fewer chemicals and more strategic planting to replenish the soil.
0
0
1
Wrong.
Not a single electrician believes this. (Besides the one that lie to you and only care about money.

We need to go back 50 years and start using LESS energy.
1
0
1
0
0
0
And Nuclear of course ?
1
0
0
No. Why would anyone want higher electricity bills. And the uranium supply chain isn't that stable too.
1
0
0
George, you are so right ! Such a pity that government has foresight only occasionally now ☹️
0
0
1
We must demand leaders who think this way.
0
0
0
Only, we become VERY dependent on 1 energy carrier. If that breaks down NOTHING works anymore. Think of Spain some time ago. Think of Russion sabotage and hackers of delicate electronics!!
0
0
0
Unfortunately most people would rather go to war than have to change
0
0
1
The more the government funds national security, in the widest sense of the idea, the less likely it is that the economy will collapse.
0
0
2
And we get a healthier environment as a bonus.
0
0
0
One of the biggest tragedies of the wave of UK privatisations is that is has utterly destroyed security.

Ferries
Ports
Energy
Pharmaceuticals
Chemicals
Telecommunications
Water and sewerage
Trains
Airports

All critical during crisis or war.

Hinder maritime and the UK starves to death.
0
0
5
Plant-based diets should be first and foremost on that list. Far too many environmentalists already take too soft of an approach when it comes to that necessary fundamental change.
0
0
7
The rising costs of oil and fuel during conflict highlight the urgency of accelerating a shift to renewables and energy-saving measures for security.

theboard.world/article/inflation-2026-oil-war-tax/
0
0
0
The losers of this most obvious restructuring of our energy ecosystem are the petrostate dictators and oil oligarchy. And the banks and insurance companies who finance / enable them. And they have the money and control the media discourse alongside buying the political classes around the world.
1
0
27
They can't be trusted with the future of our country. Renewables give power to local people. We should have community energy generation in every part of the United Kingdom.
2
0
2
Watched question time this week, and the focus was on "gas is super expensive, let's do tax cuts on it" rather than "let's just stop using the expensive thing". Caroline Lucas and Wes streeting we're good, but it seems such a simple argument to make
0
0
0
We should promote eating Less Meat- Meat Banners are LOSERS!
0
0
0
We don't have brave leaders though - they're all bought and paid for by those who don't care
0
0
1
And to save money for everyone. Fossil fuels are soooo expensive!
1
0
34
Electronic components are oilbased.
Don’t be this stupid
0
0
0
Better late than never!
0
0
0
I want solarpunk, tbh. It looks so badass. Airships, floating gardens, flowers everywhere.
0
0
0
Bonus!👍
0
0
0
I was thinking that earlier. This could be a game-changer if played right.
0
0
0
But noooo trump thinks wind turbines cause cancer ( real reason they take $ out of billionaires pockets).
0
0
1
Was agreeing all the way until plant based diets.

I’ve got chickens in my garden - best eggs you’ll ever have. Yolks are dark yellow, far darker than even “free range open air” supermarket eggs.

Also got rabbits, but since they’ve got names, they’re off limits…
1
0
1
Yes, the eggs are better because chickens in such conditions eat so much of the ecosystem. I kept them as a child, and watched them consume everything that crossed their path.
1
0
0
Absolutely, all of those!

And new nuclear is too far in the future, too uncertain to deliver, too expensive and too costly for the economy to contribute to any of the above.

bsky.app/profile/juliebygraves.bsky.social/post/3mffpqhjfr22i
2
0
5
Sizewell is also adding to water bills via the water recycling transfer and storage project.
0
0
1
#energysky
0
0
1
Plus, we avoid incentivizing despots to bomb fossil fuel infrastructure, which also tends to be bad for the environment.
0
0
10
Absolutely 👍
0
0
0
No, no, not on all fronts.
Doing that would severely damage the power of the billionaire class and they might all run away to Dubai...
0
0
0
universal income would be helpful.
0
0
0
You had me until you threw in plant based diets. I’m not against that at all but your point gets lost when you just make it a Christmas wish list.
1
0
0
Even when you factor in the impact of growing animals for consumption?
0
0
2
This.

Unpopular opinion:
Economics will save us.
2
0
3
More capitalism will not solve the problems capitalism caused in the first place
1
0
0
Yup. That’s why China are going all out on EVs and renewables.
0
0
6
Amazing that all these thing you mention are opposed by Trump and the Republican Party. Certainly, the production of electrical power via any means other than the burning of fossil fuels is considered as an abomination.
0
0
0
@georgemonbiot.bsky.social yeah, but having a future is bad for the economy(*) or smt.

(*) ultrarich ppls umpteenth lux yacht, private jet, private island, survival estate etc
0
0
2
Actually, factory farming is the largest contributor to climate change. Larger than most others combined.

Really want to make a difference? Stop eating meat. It can set climate change back 30 years, giving us time to work on the rest.

www.reuters.com/business/environment/factbox-how-food-agriculture-contribute-climate-change-2023-12-02/
1
0
4
We have to stop using chemical fertilizers og thereby stop depleting our soil. It is vital!
0
0
0
Yep. And we can add genAI to this list.
0
0
17
I get fed up with people who don't understand that privatisation of infrastructure, meant government also giving up control of any form of strategic planning for the UK.
0
0
64
Maybe you could just leave other people alone?
0
0
0
Cept the oligarchs and billionaires don’t win, so we’re not allowed it.

When’s the revolution starting????
1
0
4
I’m ready to start it… You in?
1
0
1
Yes, kiddo, but the latter must be done now, TOMORROW, and the former (and all other things) can only be done whenever the other task is completed: be it in 20 years or in 200 years.
0
0
0
This. And also renewable is going down so fast in costs and going up so fast in profitibality. The financial investment community knows this. Venezuela, Iran are the last attempts to get as much bloodmoney as possible out of the fragile and thus profitable military fossil supply chain as possible.
1
0
1
But do not think renewable and smart grids will give governments power. The reality will be that big tech with AI to manage the new renewable energy flow will also manage governments.
0
0
1
Just my tuppence worth but I think the sheer number of people and other animals, that inhabit the planet will wipe out any good these things may do.
Nobody seems willing to address, or even mention, that part of the equation.
0
0
2
We talked about all of this starting in the 1970's. Some countries took action. USA did not.
0
0
1
This has always been the case. The fact that energy is seen as woke rather than about security is our fault. We on the left always try to dress our politics up as morality, and it turns out that it can be rather off-putting to people who don’t share our exact morality.
3
0
6
I think it's important to emphasise that fossil fuels are inherently finite and that those who don't want us to transition away from them want to leave us without power.
1
0
1
the left didn't characterise ourselves as woke moralists
1
0
2
No, it is not our fault. We face full-spectrum fossil fuel propaganda from almost every corner of the media.
1
0
14
💯 agree. Climate and energy security do equal national security.

But we only get there if Govt makes the tough funding calls; taxing the wealthy properly and treating transitioning as critical infrastructure spend.

On diet, whole foods, yes. But not all plant based foods are equal.
0
0
7
Y'know, about this time, the fossil fuel lobbies may think that they're winning, but they're not, if they reckon we're all just going to agree with their doctrine and continue as "normal" they got another thing coming, they also know that we know that. Lets all do what we can and wallop them :)
0
0
7
but the windmills! they’re so loud! and they kill birds! /s
1
0
1
Didn't I read that cats kill more birds than turbines? In which case the logical conclusion is to throw cats at turbines to save the birds.
1
0
1
We should all remember (if it’s possible) before trump destroyed the oil based supply chains…

He wreaked economic havoc upon renewables from windmills to batteries.

Can someone please check his ass… there’s got to be a Putin’s tattoo!
0
0
1
Worth remembering that all the measures you mention protect our “national security” at much more than a military level:! Our national health, education, food and quality of life are dependent on that sustainability.
0
0
2
And what do we do about the world conflicts and military destruction that must be blowing all climate goals out of the water?
0
0
1
...and solar panels must be fully recyclable, cannot contain Antimony and PFAS.

solarge.com/en/
0
0
0
This, this, this:

bsky.app/profile/did:plc:y73y2f2s33ytjlurp2aah4x6/post/3mhlbikrxos27
0
0
3
Do we know how much the UK government subsidises the Fossil fuel industry in terms of subsidies and tax breaks?
Also why our government does this as it gives no benefit to customers but boosts the profits of the companies.
0
0
1
The regime in the U.S. sure is making the case for switching to renewables whether they realize it or not!
0
0
2
Every bit of fossil fuel you burn, you are burning money.

It’s the most non sensical thing to do with money.
0
0
15
Using the money spent on wars (usually boiling down to resources) to improve everyone's lives instead would help.
0
0
1
One thing that needs to be countered on an evidential basis is the idea that local microgeneration is a good idea. In my view continuing interconnect infrastructure investment with a wide energy mix is greener, more sustainable and secure.
2
0
1
Any reason solar panels on roofs, for example, aren't a good idea?
2
0
1
Yes, provided that isnt code for "burn gas forever".
1
0
1