Climate change and activists (1 Viewer)

[fernandopartridge]

CO2 Emissions per Capita

#	Country	CO2 Emissions per capita (tons)
1	China	7.38
2	United States	15.52
3	India	1.91
4	Russia	11.44

There's the problem.
We do more than most and produce 1% of the worlds emissions. Whatever we do as a country wont matter a jot if the above don't get their acts together.

We've done well but we have just outsourced a lot of our emissions

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

---

[fernandopartridge]

Because I drive all the way down roads with them on multiple times a day and see how it's caused more traffic with hardly any people actually cycling on them.

Lol of course, nothing like a detailed study

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[Nick]

Lol of course, nothing like a detailed study

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

You can't move for all the cyclists on them.

 

[shmmeee]

No, but there's a do too Little too late option which I think is the course we're on and will stay on until we're in deep shit.
I can't see us getting out of this.

I think we’ll go for last ditch geoengineering and it’s 50:50 whether that’ll work.

I still think we should transition away from fossil fuels anyway. The modern tech is so much better and ultimately will be way cheaper.

 

[shmmeee]

You can't move for all the cyclists on them.

It’s chicken and egg mate. No one cycles cos there’s no infrastructure, there’s no infrastructure cos no one cycles.

 

[Nick]

It’s chicken and egg mate. No one cycles cos there’s no infrastructure, there’s no infrastructure cos no one cycles.

There is the infrastructure.

All it's done is cause more traffic and issues on the roads.

 

[fernandopartridge]

There is the infrastructure.

All it's done is cause more traffic and issues on the roads.

It doesn't cause more traffic as in there are no more vehicles, conversely more road space doesn't mean less traffic. Get yourself a bike.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[shmmeee]

There is the infrastructure.

All it's done is cause more traffic and issues on the roads.

There’s really not. Cycling in Coventry is taking your life in your hands for most of it.

Compare Coventry to Utrecht in The Netherlands (both roughly the same population)

 

[rob9872]

Massive pointless con. This world is fucked up by humanity and will cease to exist in a few generations regardless, so this do it for your kids is nonsense. Until then enjoy the warmer weather or move a bit north to a cooler climate.

I wonder how many of you on here are taking a flight this Sumner? One flight less is more than a single person can achieve in their lifetime recycling. Complete hypocrisy.

 

[shmmeee]

I really think suburban areas and city centres should be personal mobility (walking, cycling, e-scooters, mobility scooters, etc) first.

Leaving aside the environmental benefits, it would bring life to the streets which would bring down crime, it would get people healthier which would save the NHS a crap ton of cash.

There’s also the fact that they’re the hardest place for autonomous vehicles to go, so you could aim for a sharing auto taxi model quicker.

Massive pointless con. This world is fucked up by humanity and will cease to exist in a few generations regardless, so this do it for your kids is nonsense. Until then enjoy the warmer weather or move a bit north to a cooler climate.

I wonder how many of you on here are taking a flight this Sumner? One flight less is more than a single person can achieve in their lifetime recycling. Complete hypocrisy.

With this logic why not let rip Corbyn style and give everyone free shit, after all whos going to be around to pick up the tab?

 

[Alan Dugdales Moustache]

Massive pointless con. This world is fucked up by humanity and will cease to exist in a few generations regardless, so this do it for your kids is nonsense. Until then enjoy the warmer weather or move a bit north to a cooler climate.

I wonder how many of you on here are taking a flight this Sumner? One flight less is more than a single person can achieve in their lifetime recycling. Complete hypocrisy.

I think at this rate it won't even be a few generations .

 

[SAJ]

How many years before owning an electric car is feasible?

Depends on how you fuel it. Solar panels do it for free. True you have to spend about 6k on getting them installed but at current electric prices they pay for themselves I. About 6 years.

 

[SAJ]

At the moment yes, the cost is generally prohibitive and it's not made that practical if you want to drive more than to and from work every day. My point was those with the power and resources to do so need to make it easier for people to make that switch before we're forced to when the fuels run out and/or the climate goes properly tits up.

Loads of EV’s can now travel over 250 without a recharge. How many people drive more than that a day. The vast majority of car journeys are under 50 miles.

 

[SAJ]

Ultimately society will need to switch to producing electric vehicles that draw their energy from a sustainably powered grid. That doesn't mean an end to personal transport.



Nowhere near soon enough if we want to have a fighting chance-the data and empirical evidence are pretty damning on that.

Octopus energy are currently trialing using energy stored in car batteries coming back into the grid for use between 4 pm and 7 pm as that’s the highest hours of consumption when renewable energies are sufficient in this country to cope with demand.

 

[SAJ]

I'd be all up for getting an electric car and I'm sure many would, its just my perception I haven't actually looked but aren't they much more expensive? Also, although I am starting to see the odd charging point, they're extremely rare. Infrastructure needs to change quicker to get people on board quicker. I'm sure it's easy to understand but a lot of these teenagers may not work yet or have to travel for work in a car etc so I'd argue it's an easier transition for them while in that position. Not disagreeing with anything you say btw, just purely my initial thoughts.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

You can get a charge pint installed at your home address for about £850. Agree it doesn’t work for all properties but it sure helps.

 

[Nick]

It doesn't cause more traffic as in there are no more vehicles, conversely more road space doesn't mean less traffic. Get yourself a bike.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

It does because the road is much thinner so it means you can't go round a bus or a car that's pulled over. You then get a long line of cars having to stop.

Some junctions, cars have to reverse so buses have enough room to swing round.

Drive down them in peak times and see.

 

[OffenhamSkyBlue]

Takes a 1000ltr of water to produce 1 steak.

It takes 6,098 litres of water to produce 1 litre of almond milk. 80% of the entire world's almonds are grown in California, and using that much water to fuel a fad is unsustainable for cities like LA and San Diego.

 

[OffenhamSkyBlue]

CO2 Emissions per Capita

#	Country	CO2 Emissions per capita (tons)
1	China	7.38
2	United States	15.52
3	India	1.91
4	Russia	11.44

There's the problem.
We do more than most and produce 1% of the worlds emissions. Whatever we do as a country wont matter a jot if the above don't get their acts together.

The per capita figures are a bit misleading - China looks pretty low on that measure, compared to USA. But when you look at the absolute quantity, China's contribution is an eye-watering 30% of the global total (12 gigatons). We contribute 0.96% (which is admittedly quite a lot for our piddling population), but we are below Australia (1.14% with 1/4 our population).
We need to do more, but until China and USA (whose output is still rising, by the way) start to "get it", we're pissing in the wind.

 

[skybluetony176]

It takes 6,098 litres of water to produce 1 litre of almond milk. 80% of the entire world's almonds are grown in California, and using that much water to fuel a fad is unsustainable for cities like LA and San Diego.

You’re wrong, it takes 1600 litres, although you’re right about the issues it’s causing in California.

Cows milk takes about 800 litres of water per litre of milk. Personally I use oat milk which only needs 48 litres of water for a litre of milk and soya which needs less than 300 litres per litre of milk. So switching to plant based is good environmental sense and good for you. So long as it’s the right plant based milk of course.

And before anyone starts with the old line of one of the biggest causes of deforestation is to grow soya yes you are correct, problem is over 80% is used for cattle feed, 2nd biggest cause of deforestation is pasture land so cows milk is basically part of the blame for both the first and second biggest causes of deforestation.

 

[shmmeee]

Takes a 1000ltr of water to produce 1 steak.

You’re simply not going to make human herbivores. The focus should be on reducing the impact of meat eating and improving alternatives.

The green lobby has always made the mistake of thinking it can nag people into change. By far the most effective green policy was banning CFCs, no messing about, nothing for the consumer to do, most people didn’t even notice, and now the problem is solved. If we’d just asked people to buy CFC free deodorant and fridges the hole in the ozone layer would be bigger than ever.

 

[OffenhamSkyBlue]

@skybluetony176 NOT in this country it isn't

 

[shmmeee]

The per capita figures are a bit misleading - China looks pretty low on that measure, compared to USA. But when you look at the absolute quantity, China's contribution is an eye-watering 30% of the global total (12 gigatons). We contribute 0.96% (which is admittedly quite a lot for our piddling population), but we are below Australia (1.14% with 1/4 our population).
We need to do more, but until China and USA (whose output is still rising, by the way) start to "get it", we're pissing in the wind.

China fossil fuel usage is due to peak in the next five years, they’re installing more solar per year thanThe US has in total. They’re mostly an agricultural economy with low carbon footprint. Their emissions come from us getting them to build shit.

30% of the energy usage, also 30% of manufacturing output globally.

Pointing at China is just the latest in climate denial TBH.

 

[OffenhamSkyBlue]

How on earth does cow's milk take 800 litres of water to produce a litre?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

China fossil fuel usage is due to peak in the next five years, they’re installing more solar per year thanThe US has in total. They’re mostly an agricultural economy with low carbon footprint. Their emissions come from us getting them to build shit.

30% of the energy usage, also 30% of manufacturing output globally.

Pointing at China is just the latest in climate denial TBH.

China seem to recognise the economic advantages to be had in developing new ‘green’ technology. The US is still mired in the fossil fuel industry corrupting the lawmakers who could force a shift and shows no sign of changing. Heck a big chunk of them still don’t even accept there’s a problem.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

China fossil fuel usage is due to peak in the next five years, they’re installing more solar per year thanThe US has in total. They’re mostly an agricultural economy with low carbon footprint. Their emissions come from us getting them to build shit.

30% of the energy usage, also 30% of manufacturing output globally.

Pointing at China is just the latest in climate denial TBH.

Chin's output is so high because countries like us buy lots of shit from them. We don't buy it, they won't make and their emissions will go down.

I'm really frustrated that this is the biggest business opportunity in a century and we ould be at the forefront, but instead we seem to largely be throwing our lot in with a load of ageing processes that are only going to decline.

Not investing in green tech would be an economic disaster for this country.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

How on earth does cow's milk take 800 litres of water to produce a litre?

Cattle to drink. Grass to grow. Water required in producing bottles and other parts of production and delivery.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

America: The cause of, and solution to, all of life’s problems.

 

[OffenhamSkyBlue]

Cattle to drink. Grass to grow. Water required in producing bottles and other parts of production and delivery.

"Water required in producing bottles and other parts of production and delivery" will essentially be equivalent to any packaged milk. They factor the amount of water grass consumes in growing into the consumption to produce milk? And yet oats seemingly don't need any water to grow if Tony's figures are to be believed.

 

[fernandopartridge]

It does because the road is much thinner so it means you can't go round a bus or a car that's pulled over. You then get a long line of cars having to stop.

Some junctions, cars have to reverse so buses have enough room to swing round.

Drive down them in peak times and see.

That is not more traffic. That is just cars in different positions on the road.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Massive pointless con. This world is fucked up by humanity and will cease to exist in a few generations regardless, so this do it for your kids is nonsense. Until then enjoy the warmer weather or move a bit north to a cooler climate.

I wonder how many of you on here are taking a flight this Sumner? One flight less is more than a single person can achieve in their lifetime recycling. Complete hypocrisy.

It's funny how you Tories are so nihilistic about the climate yet as soon as a politician wants to spend a bit of money improving the lives of the population it's "How are our grandchildren going to pay for it?"

 

[Evo1883]

The strangest thing about the climate argument is the little people (us ) are the ones arguing about it amongst eachother , whilst the people that control the decisions being made globally dont give a shiney shit about the climate ..

When to worry I'd say is when the people that can ACTUALLY influence it start making drastic changes with immediate effect

 

[skybluetony176]

@skybluetony176 NOT in this country it isn't

Well we live on a planet so what happens elsewhere effects us even if we’re the other side of the planet and the fact it’s not happening here is irrelevant, where it is happening is being done to supply us with animal feeds. Made the point yesterday that you have developing countries cutting down forests to grow animal feed to send to developed countries while their own people go hungry so we send aid there. It’s actually quite a ridiculous way to go about things if you think about it.

 

[skybluetony176]

"Water required in producing bottles and other parts of production and delivery" will essentially be equivalent to any packaged milk. They factor the amount of water grass consumes in growing into the consumption to produce milk? And yet oats seemingly don't need any water to grow if Tony's figures are to be believed.

It needs water, just a fraction of what cows milk does. I gave you the figures.

 

[skybluetony176]

Cattle to drink. Grass to grow. Water required in producing bottles and other parts of production and delivery.

Exactly this. Cows don’t live on fresh air.

 

[skybluetony176]

Chin's output is so high because countries like us buy lots of shit from them. We don't buy it, they won't make and their emissions will go down.

I'm really frustrated that this is the biggest business opportunity in a century and we ould be at the forefront, but instead we seem to largely be throwing our lot in with a load of ageing processes that are only going to decline.

Not investing in green tech would be an economic disaster for this country.

Green tech is the fastest growing industry in the world, I think I’m correct in saying it already employs more people than the fossil fuel industry in this country. If the Tories are serious about a high skilled high paid work force there’s an industry staring them in the face that they could invest in to achieve that and it will also help them with environmental targets, we also might actually be world beating in something again. Wouldn’t that be a novelty.