Zero is worth fighting for
Georgina Wadley argues that "Zero in a real-world is an unattainable target" (BDN, 3/9). Even if getting to zero is not possible, in cases like domestic violence, a non-zero target would be unacceptable. In the case of climate change, it sounds like Georgina may be confusing net-zero with zero.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The target of net-zero emissions doesn't mean no emissions; it means the emissions produced are countered by the emissions withdrawn (by plants and the ocean). At the moment, the emissions produced exceed those withdrawn and are rising steeply.
The NASA graph at climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ shows how CO2 levels have not been this high for 800,000 years.
Putting one's faith in Jesus may be comforting, but it's still up to us to use our "God-given" intelligence to solve the climate problem we have created. This is the message of groups like Christians Together for Climate.
Ray Peck, Hawthorn, Victoria
How far do freedoms go?
if someone has a medical exemption from having a COVID vaccination, what does that mean in practice? If fully vaccinated adults are given more freedoms, do those freedoms also extend to those with a vaccination exemption?
Sue Boyton, Pambula
Phones an essential service
It seems strange that both Telstra and Optus both do not think that people with phone problems are not considered during this lockdown. Surely a working phone is an essential service, especially for singles living alone and people with health issues. Can someone put pressure on these organisations to provide service to the community?
