Last "Yes" is worrying me

so I make a "No" for a balance ...

I just had a lot how "last CO2" arrangment and targets look like and it ain't pretty . I guess we might be in luck this year due to COVID ...

so CH missed it's CO2 reduction over last decade.

" Domestic greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced overall by 20 per cent as compared with 1990 levels, by 2020. The Federal Council may set sector-specific interim targets."

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/climate...gets-/45876054

and also - whenever new cars are more "clean" and "efficient" we seem to compensate it via either km driven or amount of cars on the road and CO2 is same % of total pollution as it was back in 1990 (absolute numbers are looking a bit better of course).

Transportation : 15.148 mTons in 1990 - 14.848 mTons in 2020 .

About that new car, hoover: it depends. The grey energy for producing it needs to be taken into account. If it‘s very thirsty, then switching would probably be ecological anyway. We don‘t have a car any more, but back when it was still an issue, I remember finding the Auto-Umweltliste helpful that the VCS publishes evey year: https://www.verkehrsclub.ch/ratgeber...o-umweltliste/

Curley, about the anti-terror law: I see what you mean. I‘m leaving it empty. Seems it‘s going to be accepted with no difficulties anyway.

My biggest hope is for the CO2 law to pass. The two agrarian initiatives look like lost causes already. Pity, because though our environment in Switzerland does not pose a health hazard to humans, pesticides are a big problem for biodiversity. Central Europe has lost an estimated 4/5 of its birds (individual ones, not species) in the last two centuries and an estimated 3/4 of its insects over the last half-century. Biodiversity is worst in areas of intensive farming. It does make one think. We are part of the food chain - though of course we‘ve modified it, being the world’s ultimate invasive species. Of the biomass of the world‘s land mammals, 36% are humans, 60% livestock and 4% wildlife. (Quoted on various tree-hugging sites and few conventional news sites excepting the good old Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/environm...-mammals-study - it seems the original publication is this: https://www.pnas.org/content/115/25/6506)

Also, pesticides are not harmless and we haven‘t always been good at noticing their dangers early enough. Parkinson‘s was recognized as an occupational disease - affecting farmers that had used pesticides - in France several years back and recently in Quebec. The pesticides in question, Paraquat etc., have been banned in Switzerland for many years but are still sold in poorer countries, despite well-documented, significant human toxicity. Public Eye has been attempting to put an end to this practice for years. There is also the issue of GMO crops depending on Roundup. https://www.publiceye.ch/de/themen/pestizide

If I read that correctly, that‘s a yes to the CO2 law. Seriously: thank you.

ääääähhhhm, nope.
Canton Solothurn has problems and reported January 2020 (more than a year ago already) that 160000 people drink water which no longer meets the legal demand.
<<Der Wasserverbund Seeland etwa, von dem unter anderem die Berner Städte Biel und Lyss Trinkwasser beziehen, musste Ende 2019 wegen Pestizidrückständen vier von fünf Grundwasserfassungen schliessen. «Wir haben 70 Prozent unserer Leistungsfähigkeit eingebüsst und haben damit ein gravierendes Problem»>>
The Seeland Water Association, for example, from which the Bernese cities of Biel and Lyss, among others, obtain drinking water, had to close four of five groundwater wells at the end of 2019 due to pesticide residues. "We have lost 70 per cent of our capacity and therefore have a serious problem."

There is more detailed info here, sorry only in German and French. But DeepL can help you.

Please form your opinion on facts. It's still your own opinion in the end.

__________________
It's all a matter or perspective.
So move your butt and look at it from the other side

Don't leave it empty, make a line in the box to clearly express your abstention from voting on this subject.
Rather safe than sorry

Good to do that as it gives a clearer picture of the opinion over all than just not handing in the paper. It also counts for voter participation.

I do not live there but I do have a two-chamber reverse osmosis water filter which is claimed to remove 98% of unwanted additives.

Sadly if it’s in the same order as the poll above, not.

On CO2 Marton still believes the oil lobby.

The Epidemiegesetz is an emergency measure and as such limited to 6 months.

The covid-19 law isn't in effect yet, but not acting it out would either have wreaked the economy (no support payments, no temporary employment available in most cases thus hundreds of thousands of layoffs and, by now, unemployed) or the population (see the trajectory from last october with exploding case numbers) and thereby the economy, too.

So, I believe with the parliament's Ok, it's already acted out since last august or september when the 6 months for the Epidemiegesetz had run out.

Thank god!

Tom

I just fail to understand how higher taxes will change the climate.

Let me explain that on my example

Last year I was up to renewal of my Oil heating system - and after all it would have been about 30K CHF

Now, also every year I'd consume about 3000L oil.

Oil price already rose 6% from CO2 tax few years back and is set to raise again since CH didn't meet it's Paris target CO2 reduction (even so CO2 reduction happen entirely only in house emission anyway !)

That likely will increase price by another 10% and it will continue. So where would that oil-added-CO2-tax go ?

CO2 tax sponsors "green" initiatives which gave me back 6k CHF.

After all the calculation 43k heat-pump breaks even after 4years .

Without incentives (assuming stable oil price of 75CHF/100L) it would break even at around 18-years .

I took Heat-pump - as not only clean but more economical solution - I also will get back one room in the cellar of appox 30'000L of volume back for use when removing 20'000L tank.

Calculation includes switching from Elektro - water- heater to heat-pump

Hope it helps.

Can you confirm these would clean toxins that are noted in the article - Chlorothalonil ?

I have provided link to the article and stated it's not the case - than replay was exactly as you see it . Not that I care - however I made very strong statment however it's ignorance that prevailed.

Thank you for taking time to proof check the facts curley

I tend to agree. Rather than taxing middle class Swiss for their two weeks away in the Canaries, they should be taxing the executive jets based on the aircraft weight or capacity (not on fuel, they just will just make an extra stop, burning even more fuel).

I hope my current large car would still last another 5-years and than I'd have no need one - so that's the idea .. however new shiny toys are tempting.

Hoover1 gives a nice example.

Or on aviation, to go just a tiny way to levelling the playing field between aviation and ground transport. For example, Jet-A1 costs about CHF 0.40 per litre. Compare that to the price of diesel (which is a basically identical fuel).

Clearly they need to lower fuel taxes for us normal folks.

Tom

I find the whole Swiss approach to the carbon tax to be comical.

They give over two-thirds back to us, how does that help anything?

They are very reluctant to go into details of how they will spend the remainder, I had expected the supporting blurb to have a long list of achievements - maybe they just build plush offices.

If I was in charge I would be more imaginative. I would stop the return to us and use the whole amount for visible things. You could, for example, probably equip 30,000 households annually with free solar panels - just have an annual lottery to select the lucky ones.

What I would like to see is a requirement for all new buildings to be self-sufficient in energy plus 20%. And a subsidy program to do the same for existing buildings. Too many boring roofs here.