|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Jan 24, 2023 20:36:33 GMT
That's not going to help us much now is it. Nothing is going to help us much at all until the likes of China and India take it seriously. We can all do our bit in this country but it’s a futile exercise really
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jan 24, 2023 21:44:37 GMT
That's not going to help us much now is it. Nothing is going to help us much at all until the likes of China and India take it seriously. We can all do our bit in this country but it’s a futile exercise really I was actually just making reference to the demise of the UK steel industry. Hence 'us'. I'm a big advocate for everyone doing their bit for the environment.
|
|
|
Post by superjw on Jan 26, 2023 10:06:05 GMT
That's not going to help us much now is it. Nothing is going to help us much at all until the likes of China and India take it seriously. We can all do our bit in this country but it’s a futile exercise really As a country we would make absolutely zero impact to the perceived climate change "problem" our contribution is so low that if you wiped the UK off the map nothing would change. But somehow, putting energy prices up and taxing the living daylights out of people in the name of saving the planet will do the job. As you have the big polluters in China and India alone being responsible for the majority, nothing we will ever do will mitigate their actions. On top of that is the developing nations that in order to combat their own poverty and leveling up, will turn to industry that will in itself create more carbon - thus making the problem worse than better. It's a complete fallacy. I'm all for reducing pollution on our planet but net zero is just bullshit. We should be innovating more rather than turning carbon into a taxable commodity
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Jan 26, 2023 13:47:43 GMT
Nothing is going to help us much at all until the likes of China and India take it seriously. We can all do our bit in this country but it’s a futile exercise really As a country we would make absolutely zero impact to the perceived climate change "problem" our contribution is so low that if you wiped the UK off the map nothing would change. But somehow, putting energy prices up and taxing the living daylights out of people in the name of saving the planet will do the job. As you have the big polluters in China and India alone being responsible for the majority, nothing we will ever do will mitigate their actions. On top of that is the developing nations that in order to combat their own poverty and leveling up, will turn to industry that will in itself create more carbon - thus making the problem worse than better. It's a complete fallacy. I'm all for reducing pollution on our planet but net zero is just bullshit. We should be innovating more rather than turning carbon into a taxable commodity If people didn't buy stuff from those countries then they wouldn't pollute as much, we are passing on our own carbon footprint across to them ignoring it's us that buys the shit from Amazon, plus stuff that runs our businesses and hence economy. Although China is still playing catch up, they do have some serious alternative energy projects going on, as well as a fair few halting the spread and greening the desert projects going on.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jan 26, 2023 14:44:40 GMT
Thanks for posting that - very interesting. I got my chemical engineering degree at Birmingham in the 60s. Good to see they are still world leaders in research. The problem is persuading those with the finance to invest in it, as I expounded at length on the Brexit thread.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jan 26, 2023 15:03:59 GMT
As a country we would make absolutely zero impact to the perceived climate change "problem" our contribution is so low that if you wiped the UK off the map nothing would change. But somehow, putting energy prices up and taxing the living daylights out of people in the name of saving the planet will do the job. As you have the big polluters in China and India alone being responsible for the majority, nothing we will ever do will mitigate their actions. On top of that is the developing nations that in order to combat their own poverty and leveling up, will turn to industry that will in itself create more carbon - thus making the problem worse than better. It's a complete fallacy. I'm all for reducing pollution on our planet but net zero is just bullshit. We should be innovating more rather than turning carbon into a taxable commodity If people didn't buy stuff from those countries then they wouldn't pollute as much, we are passing on our own carbon footprint across to them ignoring it's us that buys the sit from Amazon, plus stuff that runs our businesses and hence economy. Although China is still playing catch up, they do have some serious alternative energy projects going on, as well as a fair few halting the spread and greening the desert projects going on. You'll be pleased to hear that the vast majority of the UK's steel imports are from the EU with very little from China and India. But, you'll be sorry to hear that China's and India's steelworks are far more modern than Europe's or North America's and far less polluting. Virtually all of the latter's was built over 30 years ago, whilst the vast majority of China's and India's capacity is less than 30 years old. I have visited Indian works and they a " jaw dropping" compared to European and North American plants, a great many of which are in an appalling state. www.euronews.com/my-europe/2021/06/01/ex-owners-of-italian-steelworks-jailed-over-deadly-factory-pollutionwww.theguardian.com/cities/2017/feb/14/arcelor-mittal-failing-emissions-air-pollution-zenica-bosniaIn the UK Port Talbot is dubbed the most polluted British town, but it also has the M4 running through it.
|
|
|
Post by musik on Jan 29, 2023 1:46:55 GMT
When reading all the existing guidelines where you should throw this and that, in different containers and in different places, some within walking distance and some 10 km away from the big city, I wonder, seriously, how many people do all this and know about all this garbage collection?
Today I went 2 km to throw away my batteries and used bulb lamps.
And I've studied the guidelines online where the community says this:
The SAND used for cats to pee and shit in must be thrown at the end recycling station, since it's so f@ckin' dangerous we can't put it among the normal stuff and put it in the garbage can and wait for the garbage men with their huge garbage lorry to take it away, or walk to the recycle containers 400 meters from here.
But the End recycling station is 7 km from here. I don't have a cat, but some around here do have a cat - but I'm 100% certain they don't travel 7 km and 7 km back twice a week or so to throw away the cat sand.
I found out another thing I didn't know: the toffee paper and candy paper must be thrown at the same End recycling station, since it's very dangerous to put in the normal garbage where we find rotten food, condomes, napkins, a pair of worn out socks, some smaller mixed material containers, ice cream sticks etc.
I collect those papers, have done for fifty years. 🤠 But much more when I was younger.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 1, 2023 8:51:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Feb 1, 2023 13:35:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Feb 1, 2023 13:56:03 GMT
Nothing is going to help us much at all until the likes of China and India take it seriously. We can all do our bit in this country but it’s a futile exercise really As a country we would make absolutely zero impact to the perceived climate change "problem" our contribution is so low that if you wiped the UK off the map nothing would change. But somehow, putting energy prices up and taxing the living daylights out of people in the name of saving the planet will do the job. As you have the big polluters in China and India alone being responsible for the majority, nothing we will ever do will mitigate their actions. On top of that is the developing nations that in order to combat their own poverty and leveling up, will turn to industry that will in itself create more carbon - thus making the problem worse than better. It's a complete fallacy. I'm all for reducing pollution on our planet but net zero is just bullshit. We should be innovating more rather than turning carbon into a taxable commodity I'm not sure it's right to think that the 5th/6th largest global economy makes such an insignificant contribution to climate change, which is neither perceived nor questionable in its status as a problem. After all, we purchase and trade in vast quantities of goods from countries which emit far more climate changing gases than we do, so while we might not be directly emitting those gases through manufacturing processes, we are indirectly contributing through the demands of trade, out-sourcing our manufacturing and shipping. We can mitigate what China and India do by influencing what they produce and how. You won't get Chinese and Indian manufactured goods in the UK that don't meet our safety standards for example. Exactly the same approach can and is applied to environmental considerations. As developing nations become more manufacturing orientated, they will also have to comply with the relevant standards, and construct and run factories accordingly. It's not a fallacy nor bullshit. If we don't tackle climate change we'll probably make large parts of the planet uninhabitable for humans in this century. Billions of people will then move into what remains, which is likely to result, ultimately, in the collapse of civilisation, probably through warfare as countries close borders, try to hang onto what they've got and ignore other countries' problems. You might be lucky in that you're old enough to get away with not seeing it play out. Those 30 and under are likely to suffer some pretty unpleasant consequences of continuing to burn fossil fuels, increasing energy consumption and failing to reduce emissions. You can't keep shitting the bed if you haven't got a spare bed to move into.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 1, 2023 14:06:16 GMT
Yep, I watched that, quite interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 1, 2023 14:18:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by superjw on Feb 1, 2023 17:42:15 GMT
As a country we would make absolutely zero impact to the perceived climate change "problem" our contribution is so low that if you wiped the UK off the map nothing would change. But somehow, putting energy prices up and taxing the living daylights out of people in the name of saving the planet will do the job. As you have the big polluters in China and India alone being responsible for the majority, nothing we will ever do will mitigate their actions. On top of that is the developing nations that in order to combat their own poverty and leveling up, will turn to industry that will in itself create more carbon - thus making the problem worse than better. It's a complete fallacy. I'm all for reducing pollution on our planet but net zero is just bullshit. We should be innovating more rather than turning carbon into a taxable commodity I'm not sure it's right to think that the 5th/6th largest global economy makes such an insignificant contribution to climate change, which is neither perceived nor questionable in its status as a problem. After all, we purchase and trade in vast quantities of goods from countries which emit far more climate changing gases than we do, so while we might not be directly emitting those gases through manufacturing processes, we are indirectly contributing through the demands of trade, out-sourcing our manufacturing and shipping. We can mitigate what China and India do by influencing what they produce and how. You won't get Chinese and Indian manufactured goods in the UK that don't meet our safety standards for example. Exactly the same approach can and is applied to environmental considerations. As developing nations become more manufacturing orientated, they will also have to comply with the relevant standards, and construct and run factories accordingly. It's not a fallacy nor bullshit. If we don't tackle climate change we'll probably make large parts of the planet uninhabitable for humans in this century. Billions of people will then move into what remains, which is likely to result, ultimately, in the collapse of civilisation, probably through warfare as countries close borders, try to hang onto what they've got and ignore other countries' problems. You might be lucky in that you're old enough to get away with not seeing it play out. Those 30 and under are likely to suffer some pretty unpleasant consequences of continuing to burn fossil fuels, increasing energy consumption and failing to reduce emissions. You can't keep shitting the bed if you haven't got a spare bed to move into. I don't buy the planet being uninhabitable in large parts at all. There is so much reasonable debate on the climate of this planet over thousands of years that just seems to not be accepted at all anymore. Science tells us the planet has been far warmer with higher sea levels during the time of humanity. I firmly believe our climate changes, but it's not all down to us and we cannot stop it as is claimed. Just like with covid, only the science that fits a narrative is accepted. I can see through a lot of this by following money, if it were a real and dire threat that sea levels rise or parts of countries would be "uninhabitable" you would be able to get a mortgage or loan within miles of any area like that. Not a chance in hell would financial institutions take that risk of it were a real and immediate threat. What I see this as is the climate change "business" ultimately it's a money making machine. It's designed to generate billions out of taxing people and that's exactly where we will end up - making the rich even richer. Turning carbon into a commodity just shows its all about the money. My view, in 50 years time we will have a poorer quality of life than we do now, not able to travel abroad (except for the rich) with domestic travel severely restricted alongside personal purchasing. The first step is to price people out via "carbon taxing" will anything have changed with the climate? Of course not. We cannot keep the climate of this planet within a "range" decided by a group of environmental experts - even if we wiped ourselves off this earth right now, the planet will do its thing and still change. Now if we talk pollution, that is a real problem for this planet and everyone needs to "clean up" as a whole. Our oceans are a dumping ground for many countries and our reliance on plastic needs to pave way to more sustainable materials. As well as investing more in energy production and making it affordable for the masses. I would agree other countries and their manufacturing techniques need to change, but in reality that will lonky work if the costs of those goods don't end up spiraling out of control and completely out of range for normal people.
|
|
|
Post by superjw on Feb 1, 2023 18:02:19 GMT
Whilst I was in Greece last year, I saw something about the entire country being powered by renewable energy for a few hours. Impressive really.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Feb 1, 2023 20:56:40 GMT
I'm not sure it's right to think that the 5th/6th largest global economy makes such an insignificant contribution to climate change, which is neither perceived nor questionable in its status as a problem. After all, we purchase and trade in vast quantities of goods from countries which emit far more climate changing gases than we do, so while we might not be directly emitting those gases through manufacturing processes, we are indirectly contributing through the demands of trade, out-sourcing our manufacturing and shipping. We can mitigate what China and India do by influencing what they produce and how. You won't get Chinese and Indian manufactured goods in the UK that don't meet our safety standards for example. Exactly the same approach can and is applied to environmental considerations. As developing nations become more manufacturing orientated, they will also have to comply with the relevant standards, and construct and run factories accordingly. It's not a fallacy nor bullshit. If we don't tackle climate change we'll probably make large parts of the planet uninhabitable for humans in this century. Billions of people will then move into what remains, which is likely to result, ultimately, in the collapse of civilisation, probably through warfare as countries close borders, try to hang onto what they've got and ignore other countries' problems. You might be lucky in that you're old enough to get away with not seeing it play out. Those 30 and under are likely to suffer some pretty unpleasant consequences of continuing to burn fossil fuels, increasing energy consumption and failing to reduce emissions. You can't keep shitting the bed if you haven't got a spare bed to move into. I don't buy the planet being uninhabitable in large parts at all. There is so much reasonable debate on the climate of this planet over thousands of years that just seems to not be accepted at all anymore. Science tells us the planet has been far warmer with higher sea levels during the time of humanity. I firmly believe our climate changes, but it's not all down to us and we cannot stop it as is claimed. Just like with covid, only the science that fits a narrative is accepted. I can see through a lot of this by following money, if it were a real and dire threat that sea levels rise or parts of countries would be "uninhabitable" you would be able to get a mortgage or loan within miles of any area like that. Not a chance in hell would financial institutions take that risk of it were a real and immediate threat. What I see this as is the climate change "business" ultimately it's a money making machine. It's designed to generate billions out of taxing people and that's exactly where we will end up - making the rich even richer. Turning carbon into a commodity just shows its all about the money. My view, in 50 years time we will have a poorer quality of life than we do now, not able to travel abroad (except for the rich) with domestic travel severely restricted alongside personal purchasing. The first step is to price people out via "carbon taxing" will anything have changed with the climate? Of course not. We cannot keep the climate of this planet within a "range" decided by a group of environmental experts - even if we wiped ourselves off this earth right now, the planet will do its thing and still change. Now if we talk pollution, that is a real problem for this planet and everyone needs to "clean up" as a whole. Our oceans are a dumping ground for many countries and our reliance on plastic needs to pave way to more sustainable materials. As well as investing more in energy production and making it affordable for the masses. I would agree other countries and their manufacturing techniques need to change, but in reality that will lonky work if the costs of those goods don't end up spiraling out of control and completely out of range for normal people. You're right that the climate of the planet changes anyway, regardless of human interaction. There are various natural cycles which affect our climate. Ice ages come and go, sea levels rise and fall and each change is accompanied by large population fluctuations in human beings (and other animals). The point now is that we are influencing change at a rate which might not be reversible and that there are 8 billion of us heavily reliant on a modern, food-intensive, energy-hungry, technology-dependent lifestyle which might not survive extensive areas of the planet where crops no longer grow and people migrate in their billions to avoid starvation. Have a read of The Uninhabitable Earth by David Wallace Wells. It's not climate propaganda, it actually ends on a positive note, but it does clearly spell out what is likely to happen as the Earth continues to warm. You mentioned loans and mortgages. Those companies are already turning down applications where increased risk of flooding, erosion, wildfires and other climate related consequences are becoming more apparent, same with insurance companies. Try getting insured next to a river these days! I don't see the approach to climate change as purely a tax 'con'. Although I agree that some people will get rich through various climate related schemes. Don't some people always manage to exploit things? Covid contracts being the obvious recent example. That's sadly the greedy nature of some people but, in itself, it doesn't invalidate the crisis.
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Feb 1, 2023 21:34:05 GMT
I don't buy the planet being uninhabitable in large parts at all. There is so much reasonable debate on the climate of this planet over thousands of years that just seems to not be accepted at all anymore. Science tells us the planet has been far warmer with higher sea levels during the time of humanity. I firmly believe our climate changes, but it's not all down to us and we cannot stop it as is claimed. Just like with covid, only the science that fits a narrative is accepted. I can see through a lot of this by following money, if it were a real and dire threat that sea levels rise or parts of countries would be "uninhabitable" you would be able to get a mortgage or loan within miles of any area like that. Not a chance in hell would financial institutions take that risk of it were a real and immediate threat. What I see this as is the climate change "business" ultimately it's a money making machine. It's designed to generate billions out of taxing people and that's exactly where we will end up - making the rich even richer. Turning carbon into a commodity just shows its all about the money. My view, in 50 years time we will have a poorer quality of life than we do now, not able to travel abroad (except for the rich) with domestic travel severely restricted alongside personal purchasing. The first step is to price people out via "carbon taxing" will anything have changed with the climate? Of course not. We cannot keep the climate of this planet within a "range" decided by a group of environmental experts - even if we wiped ourselves off this earth right now, the planet will do its thing and still change. Now if we talk pollution, that is a real problem for this planet and everyone needs to "clean up" as a whole. Our oceans are a dumping ground for many countries and our reliance on plastic needs to pave way to more sustainable materials. As well as investing more in energy production and making it affordable for the masses. I would agree other countries and their manufacturing techniques need to change, but in reality that will lonky work if the costs of those goods don't end up spiraling out of control and completely out of range for normal people. You're right that the climate of the planet changes anyway, regardless of human interaction. There are various natural cycles which affect our climate. Ice ages come and go, sea levels rise and fall and each change is accompanied by large population fluctuations in human beings (and other animals). The point now is that we are influencing change at a rate which might not be reversible and that there are 8 billion of us heavily reliant on a modern, food-intensive, energy-hungry, technology-dependent lifestyle which might not survive extensive areas of the planet where crops no longer grow and people migrate in their billions to avoid starvation. Have a read of The Uninhabitable Earth by David Wallace Wells. It's not climate propaganda, it actually ends on a positive note, but it does clearly spell out what is likely to happen as the Earth continues to warm. You mentioned loans and mortgages. Those companies are already turning down applications where increased risk of flooding, erosion, wildfires and other climate related consequences are becoming more apparent, same with insurance companies. Try getting insured next to a river these days! I don't see the approach to climate change as purely a tax 'con'. Although I agree that some people will get rich through various climate related schemes. Don't some people always manage to exploit things? Covid contracts being the obvious recent example. That's sadly the greedy nature of some people but, in itself, it doesn't invalidate the crisis. Insurance is one area where climate change is costing people in the UK now. It's not just flooding- there was a surge in subsidence claims in 2022.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Feb 1, 2023 21:58:50 GMT
I don't buy the planet being uninhabitable in large parts at all. There is so much reasonable debate on the climate of this planet over thousands of years that just seems to not be accepted at all anymore. Science tells us the planet has been far warmer with higher sea levels during the time of humanity. I firmly believe our climate changes, but it's not all down to us and we cannot stop it as is claimed. Just like with covid, only the science that fits a narrative is accepted. I can see through a lot of this by following money, if it were a real and dire threat that sea levels rise or parts of countries would be "uninhabitable" you would be able to get a mortgage or loan within miles of any area like that. Not a chance in hell would financial institutions take that risk of it were a real and immediate threat. What I see this as is the climate change "business" ultimately it's a money making machine. It's designed to generate billions out of taxing people and that's exactly where we will end up - making the rich even richer. Turning carbon into a commodity just shows its all about the money. My view, in 50 years time we will have a poorer quality of life than we do now, not able to travel abroad (except for the rich) with domestic travel severely restricted alongside personal purchasing. The first step is to price people out via "carbon taxing" will anything have changed with the climate? Of course not. We cannot keep the climate of this planet within a "range" decided by a group of environmental experts - even if we wiped ourselves off this earth right now, the planet will do its thing and still change. Now if we talk pollution, that is a real problem for this planet and everyone needs to "clean up" as a whole. Our oceans are a dumping ground for many countries and our reliance on plastic needs to pave way to more sustainable materials. As well as investing more in energy production and making it affordable for the masses. I would agree other countries and their manufacturing techniques need to change, but in reality that will lonky work if the costs of those goods don't end up spiraling out of control and completely out of range for normal people. You're right that the climate of the planet changes anyway, regardless of human interaction. There are various natural cycles which affect our climate. Ice ages come and go, sea levels rise and fall and each change is accompanied by large population fluctuations in human beings (and other animals). The point now is that we are influencing change at a rate which might not be reversible and that there are 8 billion of us heavily reliant on a modern, food-intensive, energy-hungry, technology-dependent lifestyle which might not survive extensive areas of the planet where crops no longer grow and people migrate in their billions to avoid starvation. Have a read of The Uninhabitable Earth by David Wallace Wells. It's not climate propaganda, it actually ends on a positive note, but it does clearly spell out what is likely to happen as the Earth continues to warm. You mentioned loans and mortgages. Those companies are already turning down applications where increased risk of flooding, erosion, wildfires and other climate related consequences are becoming more apparent, same with insurance companies. Try getting insured next to a river these days! I don't see the approach to climate change as purely a tax 'con'. Although I agree that some people will get rich through various climate related schemes. Don't some people always manage to exploit things? Covid contracts being the obvious recent example. That's sadly the greedy nature of some people but, in itself, it doesn't invalidate the crisis. Suffered the river insurance thing in East Anglia, lived next to the Great Ouse, last flooded in 1941 and the Denver Sluice kept the floods out anyway but the insurance premiums wanted, when they'd actually take the risk, were eye watering.
|
|
|
Post by musik on Feb 2, 2023 1:44:05 GMT
Contradictions everywhere. The info in our garbage room in the back yard says we can't throw away the advertisment we've got in the mail, since it's glossy paper. But when we get to the garbage station 400 meters away it says we can't throw it away in a container there either.
Back home when we read online about where to throw it away, it says in the usual garbage bin in a garbage room, which we're not allowed to according to the landlord.
Another weird thing is CAT SAND. We are not allowed to throw it in our ordinary plastic bag and put it in the garbage room ; and we are not allowed to carry it to the garbage station 400 meters from here, there is no container there for cat sand - so I got the information presented: we have to go by car, by bus, by bike or walk ... 7 km and 7 km back to throw it. Eehhh ... Seriously? I don't think ANYONE does that. Lucky I have no cat. Yet.
There are simply TOO MANY rules about where to throw this and that away. And sometimes the info overlaps or is contradictive.
I threw away some magazine holders the other day, hard plastic ones. But since they hadn't been filled with food I wasn't allowed to throw it away among "Plastic" at the garbage station 400 meters away from here. So I had to throw it in the garbage room here , as long as it didn't require extra room, it had to get into the garbage container. Otherwise it had to be labeled (grovavfall) rough garbage(?) and brought 7 km by me.
And the Christmas tree, they won't take that either, so you have to transport it yourself.
A full time job
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Feb 2, 2023 10:42:58 GMT
Contradictions everywhere. The info in our garbage room in the back yard says we can't throw away the advertisment we've got in the mail, since it's glossy paper. But when we get to the garbage station 400 meters away it says we can't throw it away in a container there either. Back home when we read online about where to throw it away, it says in the usual garbage bin in a garbage room, which we're not allowed to according to the landlord. Another weird thing is CAT SAND. We are not allowed to throw it in our ordinary plastic bag and put it in the garbage room ; and we are not allowed to carry it to the garbage station 400 meters from here, there is no container there for cat sand - so I got the information presented: we have to go by car, by bus, by bike or walk ... 7 km and 7 km back to throw it. Eehhh ... Seriously? I don't think ANYONE does that. Lucky I have no cat. Yet. There are simply TOO MANY rules about where to throw this and that away. And sometimes the info overlaps or is contradictive. I threw away some magazine holders the other day, hard plastic ones. But since they hadn't been filled with food I wasn't allowed to throw it away among "Plastic" at the garbage station 400 meters away from here. So I had to throw it in the garbage room here , as long as it didn't require extra room, it had to get into the garbage container. Otherwise it had to be labeled (grovavfall) rough garbage(?) and brought 7 km by me. And the Christmas tree, they won't take that either, so you have to transport it yourself. A full time job Surprised about your Christmas tree issue. In North Yorkshire the green bin collection, for which we pay extra, is suspended during the winter 3 months, but there is a special collection round the last week of January specifically to collect Christmas trees. If you haven't bought a green bin licence, I'm sure a neighbour, who has one, wouldn't object to someone putting a tree in their bin.
|
|
|
Post by musik on Feb 2, 2023 10:56:28 GMT
Contradictions everywhere. The info in our garbage room in the back yard says we can't throw away the advertisment we've got in the mail, since it's glossy paper. But when we get to the garbage station 400 meters away it says we can't throw it away in a container there either. Back home when we read online about where to throw it away, it says in the usual garbage bin in a garbage room, which we're not allowed to according to the landlord. Another weird thing is CAT SAND. We are not allowed to throw it in our ordinary plastic bag and put it in the garbage room ; and we are not allowed to carry it to the garbage station 400 meters from here, there is no container there for cat sand - so I got the information presented: we have to go by car, by bus, by bike or walk ... 7 km and 7 km back to throw it. Eehhh ... Seriously? I don't think ANYONE does that. Lucky I have no cat. Yet. There are simply TOO MANY rules about where to throw this and that away. And sometimes the info overlaps or is contradictive. I threw away some magazine holders the other day, hard plastic ones. But since they hadn't been filled with food I wasn't allowed to throw it away among "Plastic" at the garbage station 400 meters away from here. So I had to throw it in the garbage room here , as long as it didn't require extra room, it had to get into the garbage container. Otherwise it had to be labeled (grovavfall) rough garbage(?) and brought 7 km by me. And the Christmas tree, they won't take that either, so you have to transport it yourself. A full time job Surprised about your Christmas tree issue. In North Yorkshire the green bin collection, for which we pay extra, is suspended during the winter 3 months, but there is a special collection round the last week of January specifically to collect Christmas trees. If you haven't bought a green bin licence, I'm sure a neighbour, who has one, wouldn't object to someone putting a tree in their bin. I'm sure the landlord for this family house with 29 apartments altogether in Sweden where I live could have paid an extra fee, but obviously haven't. I wouldn't mind paying an extra (£5) 65 SEK per month or so for this special service, so we didn't have to walk that long every month with heavy stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 2, 2023 11:56:12 GMT
I'm not sure it's right to think that the 5th/6th largest global economy makes such an insignificant contribution to climate change, which is neither perceived nor questionable in its status as a problem. After all, we purchase and trade in vast quantities of goods from countries which emit far more climate changing gases than we do, so while we might not be directly emitting those gases through manufacturing processes, we are indirectly contributing through the demands of trade, out-sourcing our manufacturing and shipping. We can mitigate what China and India do by influencing what they produce and how. You won't get Chinese and Indian manufactured goods in the UK that don't meet our safety standards for example. Exactly the same approach can and is applied to environmental considerations. As developing nations become more manufacturing orientated, they will also have to comply with the relevant standards, and construct and run factories accordingly. It's not a fallacy nor bullshit. If we don't tackle climate change we'll probably make large parts of the planet uninhabitable for humans in this century. Billions of people will then move into what remains, which is likely to result, ultimately, in the collapse of civilisation, probably through warfare as countries close borders, try to hang onto what they've got and ignore other countries' problems. You might be lucky in that you're old enough to get away with not seeing it play out. Those 30 and under are likely to suffer some pretty unpleasant consequences of continuing to burn fossil fuels, increasing energy consumption and failing to reduce emissions. You can't keep shitting the bed if you haven't got a spare bed to move into. I don't buy the planet being uninhabitable in large parts at all. There is so much reasonable debate on the climate of this planet over thousands of years that just seems to not be accepted at all anymore. Science tells us the planet has been far warmer with higher sea levels during the time of humanity. I firmly believe our climate changes, but it's not all down to us and we cannot stop it as is claimed. Just like with covid, only the science that fits a narrative is accepted. I can see through a lot of this by following money, if it were a real and dire threat that sea levels rise or parts of countries would be "uninhabitable" you would be able to get a mortgage or loan within miles of any area like that. Not a chance in hell would financial institutions take that risk of it were a real and immediate threat. What I see this as is the climate change "business" ultimately it's a money making machine. It's designed to generate billions out of taxing people and that's exactly where we will end up - making the rich even richer. Turning carbon into a commodity just shows its all about the money. My view, in 50 years time we will have a poorer quality of life than we do now, not able to travel abroad (except for the rich) with domestic travel severely restricted alongside personal purchasing. The first step is to price people out via "carbon taxing" will anything have changed with the climate? Of course not. We cannot keep the climate of this planet within a "range" decided by a group of environmental experts - even if we wiped ourselves off this earth right now, the planet will do its thing and still change. Now if we talk pollution, that is a real problem for this planet and everyone needs to "clean up" as a whole. Our oceans are a dumping ground for many countries and our reliance on plastic needs to pave way to more sustainable materials. As well as investing more in energy production and making it affordable for the masses. I would agree other countries and their manufacturing techniques need to change, but in reality that will lonky work if the costs of those goods don't end up spiraling out of control and completely out of range for normal people. How many people were on the planet and pillaging its resources back then though, not 8 billion that we have now, they didn't have an earth overshoot day back then and could roam about more freely.
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Feb 2, 2023 14:33:48 GMT
Yes, there always has been climate changes throughout the history of the world, but the rate at what's happening now has never been as great as it is now. Those previous changes have happened over thousands/millions of years and the plants/animals were able to adapt naturally to whatever was happening. We now have a population of 8 billion humans and all are vying for the earth's resources that modern societies need. But the one resource we do have that crosses all boundaries is water. Ice melt will raise sea levels and that will mean mass human/animal migration to a world that is seeing ever increasing loss of land. It will also change the oceans and massively affect the fish and plantlife that are needed for a stable planet to exist. As I said in my first sentence, it's happening too fast and in my opinion it's already too late to stop this change. So the best we can hope for is that we manage to stop the speed of the event. What we won't stop is what is already happening. Wildfires and drought are already out of control. A perfect example of this is what we saw happening in Pakistan where a third of that large country became flooded. Rising sea levels will see those events happening more frequently.
But let's concentrate on humans. Despite sea levels rising, a severe lack of fresh water is fast diminishing. Wars will be fought over it. They already are. Nothing less than a massive production of desalination plants throughout many parts of the world will solve that problem and those plants will have to be a combined worldwide cooperative project. At the moment, every country affected by drought that has rivers running through it will build dams to preserve their own supply. Those dams will further exacerbate the problem because the country next down the course of the river will be receiving even less water, so they'll build dams, and the one below that is even more affected. Eventually that river, if it's long enough, will become starved of water and will become uninhabitable. So, at some point, wars will begin because those dams will have to be destroyed by one of the countries down river to try and get the water flowing again.
Glaciers are melting at an alarming rate all over the planet. When the world was normal those glaciers switched on and off depending on the seasons. Now the planet is warming, there's no off button to stop them continuing to melt throughout the year. And when they're gone, the waters than ran from them will stop and all those countries that relied on them for fresh water will become barren. We really are up shit creek any way you look at it.
Maybe a massive meteor like the one that killed off the dinosaurs is needed. The Earth will reboot and start again. Either that or the Earth will become like the planet Mars. So for the climate deniers, it's time to wake up and smell the coffee. That's if you can find enough water to make a cup of coffee.
OS.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Feb 2, 2023 15:25:11 GMT
I don't buy the planet being uninhabitable in large parts at all. There is so much reasonable debate on the climate of this planet over thousands of years that just seems to not be accepted at all anymore. Science tells us the planet has been far warmer with higher sea levels during the time of humanity. I firmly believe our climate changes, but it's not all down to us and we cannot stop it as is claimed. Just like with covid, only the science that fits a narrative is accepted. I can see through a lot of this by following money, if it were a real and dire threat that sea levels rise or parts of countries would be "uninhabitable" you would be able to get a mortgage or loan within miles of any area like that. Not a chance in hell would financial institutions take that risk of it were a real and immediate threat. What I see this as is the climate change "business" ultimately it's a money making machine. It's designed to generate billions out of taxing people and that's exactly where we will end up - making the rich even richer. Turning carbon into a commodity just shows its all about the money. My view, in 50 years time we will have a poorer quality of life than we do now, not able to travel abroad (except for the rich) with domestic travel severely restricted alongside personal purchasing. The first step is to price people out via "carbon taxing" will anything have changed with the climate? Of course not. We cannot keep the climate of this planet within a "range" decided by a group of environmental experts - even if we wiped ourselves off this earth right now, the planet will do its thing and still change. Now if we talk pollution, that is a real problem for this planet and everyone needs to "clean up" as a whole. Our oceans are a dumping ground for many countries and our reliance on plastic needs to pave way to more sustainable materials. As well as investing more in energy production and making it affordable for the masses. I would agree other countries and their manufacturing techniques need to change, but in reality that will lonky work if the costs of those goods don't end up spiraling out of control and completely out of range for normal people. Unlike the other threads I've chatted shite on, I actually know about this. I honestly think a huge amount of money and effort has been put into tricking people. A big trick by all the industry groups was to make some people think that scientists are only accepting a "narrative" or whatever. But it's the companies and think tanks who are literally paid to trick people who are bullshitting everyone. Not the scientists, who are literally paid to find out what's really happening. I'm pretty sure there's no serious consensus about Earth being uninhabitable tomorrow, but there's a small chance that this century places will sometimes get too hot for the human body to survive without AC or similar. And insurance wise, parts of California are basically uninsurable for wildfire and plenty of US coastal areas only get policies because the taxpayer bails them out.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Feb 3, 2023 8:15:45 GMT
I don't buy the planet being uninhabitable in large parts at all. There is so much reasonable debate on the climate of this planet over thousands of years that just seems to not be accepted at all anymore. Science tells us the planet has been far warmer with higher sea levels during the time of humanity. I firmly believe our climate changes, but it's not all down to us and we cannot stop it as is claimed. Just like with covid, only the science that fits a narrative is accepted. I can see through a lot of this by following money, if it were a real and dire threat that sea levels rise or parts of countries would be "uninhabitable" you would be able to get a mortgage or loan within miles of any area like that. Not a chance in hell would financial institutions take that risk of it were a real and immediate threat. What I see this as is the climate change "business" ultimately it's a money making machine. It's designed to generate billions out of taxing people and that's exactly where we will end up - making the rich even richer. Turning carbon into a commodity just shows its all about the money. My view, in 50 years time we will have a poorer quality of life than we do now, not able to travel abroad (except for the rich) with domestic travel severely restricted alongside personal purchasing. The first step is to price people out via "carbon taxing" will anything have changed with the climate? Of course not. We cannot keep the climate of this planet within a "range" decided by a group of environmental experts - even if we wiped ourselves off this earth right now, the planet will do its thing and still change. Now if we talk pollution, that is a real problem for this planet and everyone needs to "clean up" as a whole. Our oceans are a dumping ground for many countries and our reliance on plastic needs to pave way to more sustainable materials. As well as investing more in energy production and making it affordable for the masses. I would agree other countries and their manufacturing techniques need to change, but in reality that will lonky work if the costs of those goods don't end up spiraling out of control and completely out of range for normal people. Unlike the other threads I've chatted shite on, I actually know about this. I honestly think a huge amount of money and effort has been put into tricking people. A big trick by all the industry groups was to make some people think that scientists are only accepting a "narrative" or whatever. But it's the companies and think tanks who are literally paid to trick people who are bullshitting everyone. Not the scientists, who are literally paid to find out what's really happening. I'm pretty sure there's no serious consensus about Earth being uninhabitable tomorrow, but there's a small chance that this century places will sometimes get too hot for the human body to survive without AC or similar. And insurance wise, parts of California are basically uninsurable for wildfire and plenty of US coastal areas only get policies because the taxpayer bails them out. It's not so much the direct effect of climate change on the human body that will make large parts of the planet uninhabitable, after all, we're already there with huge parts of it. It's the fact that the crops on which our entire society depends and which have evolved to grow in a range of temperatures and water requirements will no longer do so. I agree that a lot of money has been spent on tricking people into denying climate change. I posted a link earlier that showed that, to no-one's great surprise, Big Oil has known about climate change from burning fossil fuels since the early 70s and has been engaged in a campaign of denial ever since. I agree with OS that we're already fucked. Especially since very little is actually being done to reduce oil consumption and emissions continue to rise. The fundamental problem is twofold: no-one really wants to believe anything bad can happen, that human exceptionalism again (see the film Don't Look Up for the perfect demonstration of it) and secondly, because of the first one, politicians tinker but are too scared to act decisively. Hard to believe when you think about the ultimate consequences but they would genuinely rather stay in power than risk being voted out by taking those tough decisions, despite the fact that their inaction will eventually destroy us all!
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Feb 3, 2023 11:36:34 GMT
That's not going to help us much now is it. Nothing is going to help us much at all until the likes of China and India take it seriously. We can all do our bit in this country but it’s a futile exercise really While China is a mass producer of waste etc, the US produce far more on a per-person level. It’s a bit unfair to use other metrics in my opinion as it doesn’t account for population and country size. According to this, the US produces ~10x more CO2 per Capita than India and roughly twice as much as China. The UK produce 3x more per Capita than India, but less than China: www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/Not sure where they got their data from. In 2021, a study showed the U.K. ahead of China in per Capita emissions: www.statista.com/chart/24306/carbon-emissions-per-capita-by-country/So, I think it’s very reasonable to question statements that throw blame elsewhere when at the individual-level, the issue is still very much one that the UK contributes heavily to.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Feb 4, 2023 11:55:08 GMT
Good article in today's Daily Telegraph about how Exxon knew it was damaging the planet but covered up the research.
Dozens of lawsuits in the US against numerous oil and gas companies in which they're are accused of deceit and responsibility for climate damage. All a bit after the horse has bolted, really. As always, if governments had acted at the time, several decades ago, we'd probably not be in the climate crisis we currently find ourselves in.
(Although, there's also no doubt we'd have had millions of people going on about "over-reacting" and "climate hysteria", just like they do now, despite the overwhelming evidence).
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Feb 6, 2023 2:21:36 GMT
That's not going to help us much now is it. Nothing is going to help us much at all until the likes of China and India take it seriously. We can all do our bit in this country but it’s a futile exercise really I think it's a bit like fridges, TVs, computers, phones, electric cars... rich people buy new things and fund tech development and bigger factories, so prices go down. The UK has bought enough offshore wind power to make it cheap. Europe did the same for solar. With the lower prices China's going nuts building renewables.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 22, 2023 13:41:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Feb 22, 2023 15:53:48 GMT
Nothing is going to help us much at all until the likes of China and India take it seriously. We can all do our bit in this country but it’s a futile exercise really I think it's a bit like fridges, TVs, computers, phones, electric cars... rich people buy new things and fund tech development and bigger factories, so prices go down. The UK has bought enough offshore wind power to make it cheap. Europe did the same for solar. With the lower prices China's going nuts building renewables. UK needs to go to tidal and get ahead of the game. Need to be selfish and work to our own ends, forget worrying about everyone else's get our own thing right and worry about exporting it later.
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 22, 2023 18:44:38 GMT
|
|