Rugeley Villa Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 is global warming just a natural occurence though? maybe it would happen regardless although im not one of these types who say its all a big hoax and we have nothing to worry about. if this ratio carries on happening what can we expect to come our way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 I am not sure it matters if people believe in anthropogenic climate change or not: the result is exactly the same. The argument is really about how much we are prepared to be taxed to subsidise the alternatives industry and discourage people from producing greenhouse gases. Carbon taxes will impose a carbon ration on the poor and leave the prosperous middle-classes to do just as they are doing now. Flying to Australia from London increases a person's carbon footprint by 50% (5 tonnes). Britain's CO2 emissions from aviation doubled between 1990 and 2000, but I don't know anyone who claims to believe in man-made climate-change who refuses to fly on principle. Even Rob Newman has started flying long-haul again. Those who claim to believe that climate change is man-made tend to ignore their own behaviour and blame it on big bad capitalists; the same big bad capitalists who they buy their cars and their long-haul flights from. The question is what are those who believe in man-made climate-change willing to give up, to substantiate the sincerity of their piety? Not a lot, I don't suppose. Believing in it and pretending it is only other people who need to change their behaviour, seems just as dodgy morally as those who deny it because they don't want to be taxed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 10 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said: Believing in it and pretending it is only other people who need to change their behaviour, seems just as dodgy morally as those who deny it because they don't want to be taxed. Yeah. The money/tax/economy led society is suicide in its current form, but it is consumer lead. Alas, they're watching Kyle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post blandy Posted December 31, 2015 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted December 31, 2015 1 hour ago, MakemineVanilla said: I am not sure it matters if people believe in anthropogenic climate change or not: the result is exactly the same. The argument is really about how much we are prepared to be taxed to subsidise the alternatives industry and discourage people from producing greenhouse gases. Carbon taxes will impose a carbon ration on the poor and leave the prosperous middle-classes to do just as they are doing now. Flying to Australia from London increases a person's carbon footprint by 50% (5 tonnes). Britain's CO2 emissions from aviation doubled between 1990 and 2000, but I don't know anyone who claims to believe in man-made climate-change who refuses to fly on principle.... Those who claim to believe that climate change is man-made tend to ignore their own behaviour and blame it on big bad capitalists; the same big bad capitalists who they buy their cars and their long-haul flights from. The question is what are those who believe in man-made climate-change willing to give up, to substantiate the sincerity of their piety? Not a lot, I don't suppose. Believing in it and pretending it is only other people who need to change their behaviour, seems just as dodgy morally as those who deny it because they don't want to be taxed. 48 minutes ago, Xann said: The money/tax/economy led society is suicide in its current form, but it is consumer lead. Those two posts aren't exactly wrong (IMO) but they're not how I see it at all - though there's definitely more than an element of truth in both of them. I just look at it differently. Firstly it very much does matter if people "believe" the scientists and experts. Because when/if they do, they become (not all of them, but many) more accepting of actions that need to be done. It's also not about tax, not really. Or not about increasing taxes, overall. There are currently subsidies for Oil and Coal (and Nuclear). Huge subsidies. Is that the right way to tackle climate change? No. So it needs the balance of tax changing, but not necessarily an overall increase. The other side with taxes is that (theoretically at least) when tax revenues increase, the money can then be used for "good" things. This is a very simplistic example to make a point, but if tax on (non-renewable) electricity is increased and the money used to provide insulation for buildings so they use less electricity, then the overall bills the owners pay can remain the same (or even come down. If money is put into a technology (like Solar) and it is initially subsidised then the demand stimulates economies of scale, technological improvements and the actual cost comes down to install, either in farms, or on individual buildings. And when these buildings and solar farms are up and running, there's no need to build or repair or replace (like for like) more coal stations. So it shifts the energy used and generated from one source to another. Flying. Many people and businesses have reduced their use of air travel. Meanwhile aircraft engines are getting more efficient and will continue to do so. It's not practical to stop all flying, but it is practical to reduce it, to make more fuel efficient planes and lower emissions that way. What are people willing to give up? Plenty. Maybe reluctantly at first, but trains, trams, cycle paths and so on are busier than ever. traffic free cities are catching on and are proving more popular than not. There are gazillions of examples of people changing behaviours with the gentlest of nudges. All those plastic carrier bags. Put a 5p levy on them like they have and suddenly people re-use them. After grumbling initially, it becomes just accepted normality to re-use them. The money/tax/economy led society is suicide in its current form, but it is not consumer lead. It's instigated by businesses and Govt's, and the consumers follow that lead. It's why it's so important that Governments do the opposite of what ours does. They hand everything to Private control, where the profit motive rules. They should be co-ordinating and legislating for the collective benefit of the people of the country. An approach of incentives, disincentives, laws and information and a willingness to act in more than just their own short term personal and party interests is essential. You're right, we sit in front of our tellies and tablets and facebooks and are initially content to sit there as dumb animals. But then something happens and if the Government and local will is there, things change. Storms and floods, wildfires, drought and all the rest. All these things do make people change their behaviours. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 (edited) From the half full glass perspective, it's worth noting that things are changing. Solar and wind are now competitive on price (I loved how you could see the solar eclipse in German electricity output earlier this year), and are rapidly gaining social acceptance. Energy storage is playing catch up but is making progress. These 2 things will allow the majority of ground transportation and consumer electricity generation to move from fossil fuels (10-30yr timescale). Then we need the material science folks to figure out how to remove oil from the product cycle... I have no idea where we are in this as it seems like a particularly tricky problem. Of course, all of the above doesn't matter to a degree as damage has been done and even if we stop being naughty right now it will would take the planetary ecosystem ~ 20 - 50yrs or more to find a new quasi-equilibrium, e.g., our understanding of how the oceans store and transport energy is currently lacking. Hmmmm, maybe that glass is half empty afterall... Edited December 31, 2015 by villakram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 1, 2016 Share Posted January 1, 2016 I'm not sure what I believe, I do however believe that charging me 5p a carrier bag and changing my car tax is the equivalent of pissing in the ocean, don't get me wrong our government has to be seen to be doing something and will no doubt want to be front runners but I'm fed up of being told I'm going to save the world if I wash out my bean tins, it's beyond you and me It's an industry problem that the big boys will fix, not us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 1, 2016 Share Posted January 1, 2016 11 hours ago, villa4europe said: It's an industry problem that the big boys will fix, not us When a companys whack all the fish they catch into freezers to be sent via container ship to Thailand or China to be filleted and packaged before shipping it back to the uk because it's cheaper whilst joe public has to pick up the tab on phony plastic bag taxes you know that nobody really cares about addressing global warming 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 1, 2016 Moderator Share Posted January 1, 2016 7 hours ago, tonyh29 said: When a companys whack all the fish they catch into freezers to be sent via container ship to Thailand or China to be filleted and packaged before shipping it back to the uk because it's cheaper whilst joe public has to pick up the tab on phony plastic bag taxes you know that nobody really cares about addressing global warming Which companies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted January 1, 2016 Administrator Share Posted January 1, 2016 10 hours ago, villa4europe said: I'm not sure what I believe, I do however believe that charging me 5p a carrier bag and changing my car tax is the equivalent of pissing in the ocean, don't get me wrong our government has to be seen to be doing something and will no doubt want to be front runners but I'm fed up of being told I'm going to save the world if I wash out my bean tins, it's beyond you and me I suspect that the main reason for these little things is to increase awareness and drive acceptance for changes we will have to make. Production of cars creates a crazy amount of CO2 and most cars are actually in use for a tiny fraction of time. We have to move to a model where there is lower car ownership and higher utilisation. We have to stop using bricks for building (sorry Ruge). These things take time to become acceptable and we don't have time. 10 hours ago, villa4europe said: It's an industry problem that the big boys will fix, not us And why will they do that? Any changes have to benefit their shareholders. Until there is a need to appease their consumers or because of legal changes through consumers influencing the political process, industry will do nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 1, 2016 Share Posted January 1, 2016 4 hours ago, blandy said: Which companies? It was a show I watched on TV a couple of years back so I can't recall the companies involved but they went inside the plant in Thailand as well and showed how bad the conditions were , which I think was the point the show was focusing on rather than environmental aspect !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 1, 2016 Moderator Share Posted January 1, 2016 4 minutes ago, tonyh29 said: It was a show I watched on TV a couple of years back so I can't recall the companies involved but they went inside the plant in Thailand as well and showed how bad the conditions were , which I think was the point the show was focusing on rather than environmental aspect !! Ok ta. I know John West have a bad record in terms of their fishing methods and workers conditions. But it's not a case of nobody cares., though many don't know. Those who do know tend to care. Quote Tuna has finally gone mainstream, following the outcry in the media that John West* has broken its sustainability and traceability promises. We’ve reached millions of people, from This Morning with Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and Radio 2’s Jeremy Vine show, to The Times front page and countless other newspapers, everyone is outraged by the embarrassing progress John West has made meeting its sustainability promise to customers. Yet, instead of admitting its mistakes and taking responsibility for its actions (which is rule no.1 of companies dealing with crisis), it continues to do the very opposite. It’s making weak denials which are fooling nobody. In fact, John West’s behaviour has been described as “semi-criminal” by a global Corporate Social Responsibility expert. Thousands demand change More than 70,000 people have pledged not to buy unsustainable and unjust tuna, and more than 110,000 emails have been sent to John West, their PR company Grayling, John West’s EU owners MW Brands, as well as their overall owners Thai Union.... I've not heard about companies catching stuff here, sending it to China and then getting it sent back. It doesn't make sense, tbh, because to process the fish it needs to be defrosted, and to ship it it needs to be frozen (or canned or whatever). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 1, 2016 Share Posted January 1, 2016 I found ,This article it wasn't the one I was thinking of originally but it does kinda touch on the same point Cod caught off Scotland is being sent on a 10,000-mile round trip to China and back again to be filleted for supermarkets, shops and fish suppers.The fish is caught in the North Atlantic, deep frozen, shipped to China for processing by workers earning less than £1 a day before being refrozen and returned to Scotland. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted January 1, 2016 Share Posted January 1, 2016 15 minutes ago, tonyh29 said: I found ,This article it wasn't the one I was thinking of originally but it does kinda touch on the same point That's deliberately inflammatory Spoiler Scottish fish supper = Haddock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 Quote Gigantic Gravity Waves to Mix Summer With Winter? Wrecked Jet Stream Now Runs From Pole-to-Pole. It’s as if global warming were ringing the Earth’s atmosphere like some great, cacophonous alarm bell. The upper level zonal winds are swinging wildly from record high positive anomalies to record low negative anomalies. Gravity waves — the kinds of big atmospheric waves that tend to move air from the Tropics all the way to the Poles and are powerful enough to cause the Caribbean Sea to ‘whistle’ in the satellite monitors — are growing larger. And the Jet Stream now has redefined all boundaries — flowing at times from the East Siberian Sea in the Arctic across the Equator and all the way south to West Antarctica. Robertscribbler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 read last night the hole in the ozone is shrinking .. well kind of it got bigger but if you exclude the Chile Volcano then it had shrunk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted August 30, 2016 Share Posted August 30, 2016 (edited) Quote "Planet Earth has entered a new epoch dubbed the Anthropocene because of the extent of humanity’s impact on the planet, according to a group of experts. An international working group set up to consider the question voted by 34 to zero, with one abstention, that the Anthropocene was real in a geological sense. The warming temperature, higher sea levels, ash from fossil fuels, plastic waste, a dramatic increase in erosion, the spread of animal species around the world and radioactive particles left around the world from nuclear bomb tests would all contribute to permanent changes in the Earth’s rocks, the scientists said. They are still considering what date should be chosen for the so-called “Golden Spike” – a line in the rock the marks the boundary between the Holocene and Anthropocene epochs, but believe it should be in the mid-20th century Independent Edited August 30, 2016 by blandy Gaps removed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted August 30, 2016 Share Posted August 30, 2016 Quote Planet Earth has entered a new epoch dubbed the Anthropocene because of the extent of humanity’s impact on the planet, according to a group of experts. An international working group set up to consider the question voted by 34 to zero, with one abstention, that the Anthropocene was real in a geological sense. The warming temperature, higher sea levels, ash from fossil fuels, plastic waste, a dramatic increase in erosion, the spread of animal species around the world and radioactive particles left around the world from nuclear bomb tests would all contribute to permanent changes in the Earth’s rocks, the scientists said. They are still considering what date should be chosen for the so-called “Golden Spike” – a line in the rock the marks the boundary between the Holocene and Anthropocene epochs, but believe it should be in the mid-20th century The Quaternary and the Holocence (our present geological period) are already listed as extinction events caused by man and so they don't need a new one but their PR department obviously does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted September 22, 2016 Share Posted September 22, 2016 Quote If the Science is Sound, Why Do People Still Deny Man-Made Climate Change? “The climate change countermovement has had a real political and ecological impact on the failure of the world to act on global warming,” the authors’ noted in a statement. “Like a play on Broadway, the countermovement has stars in the spotlight – often prominent contrarian scientists or conservative politicians – but behind the stars is an organizational structure of directors, script writers and producers. If you want to understand what’s driving this movement, you have to look at what’s going on behind the scenes.” In short, there is a major issue with foundations who have significant things to gain from promoting “ultra-free-market ideas,” and these are centered on non-governmental interference in relation to corporate carbon emissions. Futurism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPower_14 Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 This is just a webcomic but it's pretty good. The change in temperature since the industrial revolution is enormous and undeniable. https://xkcd.com/1732/ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 11 hours ago, ThunderPower_14 said: This is just a webcomic but it's pretty good. The change in temperature since the industrial revolution is enormous and undeniable. https://xkcd.com/1732/ Shows current temperatures are very similar to those ~5000BC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts