So the greens want us to freeze in the dark and have nothing left

to throw on the fire for heat.
"We are constantly battling against increases of wealth... There's a very fundamental problem here that no one really wants to talk about."

Stuart Bond of WWF told the Beeb: "Our claims on emissions are simply a big lie.

"There is no way the government can hope to achieve any of its emissions targets without cheating unless it changes its policies on encouraging flying and hoping to satisfy people's insatiable demands for buying more and more stuff."
Put in plain language: "We want you to not be able to buy things just because you want them, we want you to be poor. Because poor people tend to be easier to control, and we need to control what you buy and what you do."

As to how that should be done, Bond was reluctant to give specifics(gee, I wonder why?). But he said there was a need for a "strategic plan to set out very clearly how the UK will become a low carbon economy by 2050... at the moment there is no central priority for environmental issues. Consumers' consumption of goods is the driver of emissions. The continued pursuit of GDP, of economic growth - that is a mantra that we must question."
"All you damn peasants, stop buying and making things! We mean it!"
"We need to live within 450ppm CO2," he went on. "That's going to mean a very large cut - 80, 90 per cent - in emissions, within 40 years. We need to increase energy efficiency, sure, but it won't do to just put in a few energy-saving light bulbs. We need to think bigger."
"You need to make do with less, because we say so! It's all to make Mother Gaia smile upon us, so do what you're told!"
Bond also considered it essential that limited wealth and resources be distributed more equitably around the world.
Now, why isn't that a surprise, after the 'central priority', i.e. Central Planning, comment?
"We need to make this work for all," he said, "not just the privileged in developed countries."
"It's not enough to keep third world peoples living in dung huts and cutting wood to cook with; we ALL(except us elites who need modern stuff to keep you in line) need to be living like it's 1599. Maybe 14."

Asked if this wasn't, in the end, going to mean a fairly hair-shirt lifestyle for us Brits - no cars, no tumble dryers, fewer showers and iPods and so on - Bond said that "economic wealth isn't the same as happiness or directly linked to quality of life ... It's about a quantity lifestyle - more and more stuff - versus quality".
"We say you will be happy peasants, living in your eco-villages. You WILL be happier without all those electric conveniences and power tools and such(and a lot easier to control, but let's not mention that for now), just like the piss-poor nativesGaia-friendly peoples in third world countries are with their dirty water and smoke-filled huts. We SAY you will be; so let it be written, so let it be done!"

Bond was also sceptical about the chances of a technological solution appearing - for instance nuclear-fusion power, so far harnessed only in the form of H-Bombs. Working fusion reactors, if they could be built, might offer abundant and effectively inexhaustible energy without carbon emissions.

"The idea of a technological fix is one we should be cautious about," he said. "So often there are unintended consequences or trade-offs. Look at the 'paperless office' - there's now more paper, not less. Look at biofuels. I'd be wary of believing that a technology solution will arrive in time.
"Dammit, stop looking for actual working ways to produce abundant, cost-efficient energy! WE DO NOT WANT YOU TO HAVE THAT, don't you understand?"

And take note of this at the bottom about the 'government and campaign group WWF:
*The one-time World Wildlife Fund, set up in the Sixties to protect endangered species. Nowadays it has widened its remit considerably, and like the multinational arms goliath BAE says that its title letters no longer refer to specific words.
Hmmm, I wonder if they're still raising money as the World Wildlife Fund? This is the group that, back in the late 60's/early 70's commissioned a study to show how endgangered the leopard was in Africa so they could use that information to raise more money. The study came back saying the leopard, in sub-saharan Africa was nowhere near endangered, and some regions had so many they were a pest. So the WWF tried to completely bury the study while they went on pleading for money to 'save the leopard'. Seems they've decided to more openly declare themselves watermelons, now.