Britain could cut carbon emissions to zero in 20 years but only if people accept a virtual end to air travel and stop using fuel-driven cars, a report said today. Meat would also need to disappear off many menus and an “armada” of wind turbines built around the coast to achieve the goal, says the new research. Money would meanwhile be overtaken in importance by carbon credits traded by everyone using special smart cards. The radical vision was put forward by researchers and scientists from the Centre for Alternative Technology (CAT). They set themselves the task of seeing if Britain could cut fossil fuel emissions to zero by 2027, even assuming we only had our own resources to rely on. They claim achieving such a drastic cut in emissions is possible and may be the only way to tackle climate change, which is threatening to spiral out of control. CAT development director Paul Allen said: “What we are saying is that we need a huge programme, a bit like the US space project in the 60s. “When that was launched it was known to be a huge target, but the driving force to make it work was there. We think that zerocarbonbritain can do that again - it can give us a positive future. “It is a political challenge but we had the political willpower to abolish slavery even though lots of people said that would cost the economy too much.” In its report, the CAT suggests creating a market for carbon that affects every individual, household and company in the country. People would be given their own carbon credits called Tradable Energy Quotas (TEQs) and carry them on the environmental equivalent of the London transport Oyster card. Each year the free allocation would decrease as the country moves towards zero carbon, with the effect that the value of the quotas will go up. But every time consumers use fossil fuels, say by filling their cars up with petrol, they would lose these valuable credits, forcing them to choose low carbon alternatives. The resulting market would drive environmental change, providing the economic incentive to produce green products. One major effect, according to the authors, would be that electric, battery-operated cars would quickly overtake use of the internal combustion engine. Households would meanwhile be forced to invest in ways to make their homes energy efficient, and switch from gas to biofuels or renewable electricity. But there would also be “negative” effects in terms of the lifestyle that people currently enjoy. Air travel would become far too expensive unless the industry “pulls something out of the hat” and finds a green fuel. And the diet of the country would have to change to include much more organically-grown, locally-produced vegetables, and less meat. The result of the new “carbon economics” would be to cut energy use by half, and this new demand would then be met entirely by a green supply. Tens of thousands of wind turbines would be built, mainly around Britain’s shores, to provide 50% of the country’s new energy needs. The rest would come from a combination of biofuel “combined heat and power” stations, wave power, hydroelectricity and tidal schemes. Nuclear power could provide some of the demand at first, but the authors do not suggest building more because of the long-term cost and targets they provide to terrorists. For their report the authors used the “extreme” scenario that Britain was not trading with the outside world. They claim therefore that their vision is even more achievable in reality because Britain would be able to trade carbon credits, key resources and electricity. One of the lead authors, Tim Helweg-Larsen, said the target of zero carbon was a necessary goal to prevent the climate from going haywire. “We are in uncertain territory and we need to deal with the one thing that we can have an affect on and that is the reduction of greenhouse gases,” he said. “If I was explaining our plan to a taxi driver then I would say that we have put together the necessary components to move towards a zero carbon Britain. “And we feel that a zero carbon Britain is now necessary.”