Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 5)
Discussion
robinessex said:
Ditch cars to meet climate change targets, say MPs
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49425402
People will have to get out of their cars if the UK is to meet its climate change targets, MPs say.
The Science and Technology Select Committee says technology alone cannot solve the problem of greenhouse gas emissions from transport.
It says the government cannot achieve sufficient emissions cuts by swapping existing vehicles for cleaner versions.
The government said it would consider the committee's findings.
In its report, the committee said: “In the long-term, widespread personal vehicle ownership does not appear to be compatible with significant decarbonisation.”
It echoes a report from an Oxford-based group of academics who warned that even electric cars produce pollution through their tyres and brakes......continues
Totally unbelievable that so many idiots think we can actually change anything, not that it's required in the first place. All the people I know wouldn't be able to function without personal mobility. It's just impossible. The country has spent 75 years getting mobile, no way you can change or stop it now.
If you cut back in cars (or more broadly personal transport) you might also be able to cut back on infrastructure - and indeed unless a completely different social structure was discovered rather quickly, the collapse of a working economy might well follow swiftly.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49425402
People will have to get out of their cars if the UK is to meet its climate change targets, MPs say.
The Science and Technology Select Committee says technology alone cannot solve the problem of greenhouse gas emissions from transport.
It says the government cannot achieve sufficient emissions cuts by swapping existing vehicles for cleaner versions.
The government said it would consider the committee's findings.
In its report, the committee said: “In the long-term, widespread personal vehicle ownership does not appear to be compatible with significant decarbonisation.”
It echoes a report from an Oxford-based group of academics who warned that even electric cars produce pollution through their tyres and brakes......continues
Totally unbelievable that so many idiots think we can actually change anything, not that it's required in the first place. All the people I know wouldn't be able to function without personal mobility. It's just impossible. The country has spent 75 years getting mobile, no way you can change or stop it now.
That should sort things out climate wise - one way or another.
It we step back to a pre-industrialisation scenario one obvious challenge right at the start would the size of the population and how to feed it. (Let's assume that this whole process could be achieved without inducing wide area deadly conflicts, although such a scenario would perhaps resolve most of the human induced issues that some think are threatening the existence of the planet.)
The downside of that is that pre-industrialisation had come to the point where animals were supply both energy and transport needs and many people think that animals even at today's numbers, need to be significantly reduced in order to hit the emissions targets. (Although, of course, nobody would be measuring the target data by then ...)
So late say we look at the numbers for the UK for 1700.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by...
That means the current population of the UK is about 10 times greater than it was then.
If we consider reversing the use of vehicles and returning to animal power as an energy source (I would assume that the use of slaves might, initially, be deemed unacceptable) as well as a food source we might need to estimate how many methane and CO2 producing bests might be deemed necessary.
Here are some current farm beast population numbers.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-set...
For Horsepower we may need to consider that horses are mainly a recreational beast these days and that a return to using them as beasts of burden and farming engines may be considered necessary. We might need to work out a horse per head of population formula but for now lets just look at the available numbers. (Assuming that these numbers are accurate enough to got some idea about the current stock.)
http://www.beta-uk.org/pages/industry-information/...
So the questions of interest might be;
"If we reduce the population of the UK to, say, 1700 levels, how few animals (as both energy sources and food) would we need to keep things going?
Would further population reductions help to control any excess animal requirements and keep within global CO2 output targets?
Could farmers claim carbon offsets by turning their livestock out to feed on local grass and hay?
turbobloke said:
Randy Winkman said:
V10leptoquark said:
I've always wondered when the realisation of what climate change politics is all about will finally take hold.
Its nothing more than left wing anti-capitalist global authoritarianism.
Ban oil, ban factories, ban cars, ban planes, ban meat eaters - what do you have left?, well you have a greeny left wing utopia where no one is subject to those bad oppressive big company employers and where likely everyone only has the state to rely on for income, whilst also being a vegetarian tree hugger who should identify as a cis-trans polar bear so that records show polar bear numbers are satisfactory.
Its likely that the issue of climate change is a left vs right issue to be honest - and nothing more.
Always wondered why the issue took hold in the late 90's when Clinton and Blair were leaders. With the left at the time creating a problem surrounding their core issue that separates them from the right, which is capitalism vs socialism. So if they could create a "project fear" issue with capitalism at the heart of the problem then it becomes a global issue that only the left can solve. With the sole intention being that voters should be voting left if they wanted to "save the planet".
Which is also one reason why the impending doomsday clock is always within reach of term elections (about 10 or 12 years away) - just enough time for voters to think that if they voted left then there will be just enough time for their policies to save them from certain death. But people must act quickly of course, project fear only works if they act quickly.
aturalIts nothing more than left wing anti-capitalist global authoritarianism.
Ban oil, ban factories, ban cars, ban planes, ban meat eaters - what do you have left?, well you have a greeny left wing utopia where no one is subject to those bad oppressive big company employers and where likely everyone only has the state to rely on for income, whilst also being a vegetarian tree hugger who should identify as a cis-trans polar bear so that records show polar bear numbers are satisfactory.
Its likely that the issue of climate change is a left vs right issue to be honest - and nothing more.
Always wondered why the issue took hold in the late 90's when Clinton and Blair were leaders. With the left at the time creating a problem surrounding their core issue that separates them from the right, which is capitalism vs socialism. So if they could create a "project fear" issue with capitalism at the heart of the problem then it becomes a global issue that only the left can solve. With the sole intention being that voters should be voting left if they wanted to "save the planet".
Which is also one reason why the impending doomsday clock is always within reach of term elections (about 10 or 12 years away) - just enough time for voters to think that if they voted left then there will be just enough time for their policies to save them from certain death. But people must act quickly of course, project fear only works if they act quickly.
I agree that concern about climate change and individuals spending loads of money don't really fit well together. Hence issues about private jets. But it doesn't stop me thinking that climate change is a significant concern.
Put aside politically motivated opinion and look at the evidence.
Given that the average temperature of the lower atmosphere is currently the same as it was in 1988 (UAH LTT v6), that in spite of hysterical propaganda there has been no increase in extreme weather (Pielke, Goklany and others) which science tells us is a symptom of global cooling in any case, ocean changes are no different to the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries (Kamenos & Hennige, Andersson, and others), and so and and so forth, why are you concerned any more than any person living in any era should be concerned that mother nature can and will splatter humans at any time with any number of natural phenomena? Is it because of a choice (i.e. yours) in who to listen to rather than pursuing evidence for what's being said?
This is a political phenomenon and as indicated by Labour's Lord Donoughue, it's been adopted by left-wing activists to pursue typical left-wing agendas i.e. class struggle, anti-corporatism and redistribution of wealth generally.
Randy Winkman said:
I don't think that "the evidence" can be condensed into one paragraph that one person I've never met has chosen to post on a car website. Why would I change my view because of that?
But 'they' also have the various right wing blog spots, Judith Curry and also Marc Morano.Shirley enough to convince any doubting Thomas?
Sure, Turbospam may have totally misrepresented the odd scientist here and there, altered or failed to reference the odd quote now and again, but really, the denier stuff does all stack up.
Randy Winkman said:
I don't think that "the evidence" can be condensed into one paragraph that one person I've never met has chosen to post on a car website. Why would I change my view because of that?
I guess what would be very strange is for any advocate of climate change politics to be a person who would choose to be on a car forum - given that cars are now the enemy of their belief.Unless of course their purpose is nothing more than trolling.
(not aiming that at you Randy, just now that cars have been defined as the enemy any pro-warming believer should now follow the religion and deem themselves to be very much anti-car - I guess those people will either choose to troll such motoring forums with anti-car messages and a blame game on car ownership or they would choose to remove themselves from a forum environment that they now must be in total opposition to).
zygalski said:
But 'they' also have the various right wing blog spots, Judith Curry and also Marc Morano.
Shirley enough to convince any doubting Thomas?
Sure, Turbospam may have totally misrepresented the odd scientist here and there, altered or failed to reference the odd quote now and again, but really, the denier stuff does all stack up.
Climate Etc. is a right wing blog now? Shirley enough to convince any doubting Thomas?
Sure, Turbospam may have totally misrepresented the odd scientist here and there, altered or failed to reference the odd quote now and again, but really, the denier stuff does all stack up.
I suggest you actually read the discussions on Climate Etc. and also maybe try to stop polarising everything as Right wing (evil) and Left wing (virtuous) as the wide world deosn't work that way.
turbobloke said:
NASA: Amazon Fires Slightly Below Average Rates
Tax gas still on holiday.
The world's oceans have an even greater effect on global climate than forests do so watch out for ocean fires
Interesting point. Funny thatTax gas still on holiday.
The world's oceans have an even greater effect on global climate than forests do so watch out for ocean fires
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-494...
France is using the fires to go against the new EU / Mercosur 20 years in the making deal just after French farmers have got upset
https://iegpolicy.agribusinessintelligence.informa...
So this seems very very political. French farmers are like UK miners in the 80s.
It would be good to see the actual amount of burning this summer. The big question is is man made or not, and even if not, is a 2019 Amazon more susceptible to fires, or not. The science on these two questions seems lost in the bunfight politically.
By politicising it, they might have taken peoples eyes off any real underlying problem.
Forgetting climate change, burning forests are poor for biodiversity.
What a mess these agw Weavers weave, but now there's newish news...lawsuit lost (again), what a TimBallache for the Mann.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/22/breaking-dr...
More to come in this jolly hockeysticks soap.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/22/breaking-dr...
More to come in this jolly hockeysticks soap.
Russia sees record summer cold temperatures, frostio not scorchio, tax gas still on holiday.
https://electroverse.net/record-cold-grips-russia-...
Everyone should panic and pay higher taxes obviously.
https://electroverse.net/record-cold-grips-russia-...
- average temperature holding at least 8C below normal for large areas of the country all month
- over the past few days, a large number of new all-time record-low temperatures have be set in the Magadan region
Everyone should panic and pay higher taxes obviously.
Gandahar said:
turbobloke said:
NASA: Amazon Fires Slightly Below Average Rates
Tax gas still on holiday.
The world's oceans have an even greater effect on global climate than forests do so watch out for ocean fires
Interesting point. Funny thatTax gas still on holiday.
The world's oceans have an even greater effect on global climate than forests do so watch out for ocean fires
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-494...
France is using the fires to go against the new EU / Mercosur 20 years in the making deal just after French farmers have got upset
https://iegpolicy.agribusinessintelligence.informa...
So this seems very very political. French farmers are like UK miners in the 80s.
It would be good to see the actual amount of burning this summer. The big question is is man made or not, and even if not, is a 2019 Amazon more susceptible to fires, or not. The science on these two questions seems lost in the bunfight politically.
By politicising it, they might have taken peoples eyes off any real underlying problem.
Forgetting climate change, burning forests are poor for biodiversity.
Media make s
t up that happens all time to attack him, end deals and shame Brazil.But the media arnt biased oh no.
LongQ said:
robinessex said:
I do religiously re-cycle my stuff, I even have the old compost bin at the bottom of the garden (is that good thing, can't keep up these days?). I do get pissed off when the local rubbish collectors then toss it all in with the general rubbish though.
So do I. What the council does with it after that I have no idea.
I'm fairly sure that "sorting" it is just a complete waste of time.
markcoznottz said:
LongQ said:
robinessex said:
I do religiously re-cycle my stuff, I even have the old compost bin at the bottom of the garden (is that good thing, can't keep up these days?). I do get pissed off when the local rubbish collectors then toss it all in with the general rubbish though.
So do I. What the council does with it after that I have no idea.
I'm fairly sure that "sorting" it is just a complete waste of time.
Spiked said:
Every now and then the environmentalist mask slips. And we get a glimpse of the elitist and authoritarian movement that lurks beneath the hippyish green facade. The hysteria over the rainforest fires in Brazil is one of those moments.
Greenblob reaction to defiance over their alarmists' and extremists' diktats is always revelatory.Everything They Say About The Amazon Including the Fires and that it's The "Lungs Of The World" Is Wrong
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/23/world/americas/...
turbobloke said:
Spiked said:
Every now and then the environmentalist mask slips. And we get a glimpse of the elitist and authoritarian movement that lurks beneath the hippyish green facade. The hysteria over the rainforest fires in Brazil is one of those moments.
Greenblob reaction to defiance over their alarmists' and extremists' diktats is always revelatory.Everything They Say About The Amazon Including the Fires and that it's The "Lungs Of The World" Is Wrong
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/23/world/americas/...
How very opportune that such a story should be regaling the Mail readers on the day they buy (?) the Ad page.
This from the BBC
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49466596
"A woman cools off by jumping into the sea at Whitby, North Yorkshire"
Normally on a hot day when you want to keep cool in the sea you don't have to put on a wetsuit to keep yourself warm in the sea
That's not even a feckin shorty for fecks sake ...
Who comes up with this claptrap?
My wife swum off Folkstone this morning and said the sea was lovely. No need for a wetsuit.
This woman is just a "look at me" snowflake. I can't even see the sea in that photo, she was probably on a trampolene....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49466596
"A woman cools off by jumping into the sea at Whitby, North Yorkshire"
Normally on a hot day when you want to keep cool in the sea you don't have to put on a wetsuit to keep yourself warm in the sea
That's not even a feckin shorty for fecks sake ... Who comes up with this claptrap?
My wife swum off Folkstone this morning and said the sea was lovely. No need for a wetsuit.
This woman is just a "look at me" snowflake. I can't even see the sea in that photo, she was probably on a trampolene....
Edited by Gandahar on Monday 26th August 15:04
This from the BBC
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49466596
From that article:-
"The government's advisory Committee on Climate Change has warned the UK is not prepared for the increase in heatwaves that is expected with global warming. Earlier this summer, it called for more action to make sure homes and other buildings such as hospitals and care facilities could be comfortable and safe in higher temperatures."
That's for the 6 days each we may get hot weather. Brilliant.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49466596
From that article:-
"The government's advisory Committee on Climate Change has warned the UK is not prepared for the increase in heatwaves that is expected with global warming. Earlier this summer, it called for more action to make sure homes and other buildings such as hospitals and care facilities could be comfortable and safe in higher temperatures."
That's for the 6 days each we may get hot weather. Brilliant.
Gandahar said:
This from the BBC
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49466596
"A woman cools off by jumping into the sea at Whitby, North Yorkshire"
Normally on a hot day when you want to keep cool in the sea you don't have to put on a wetsuit to keep yourself warm in the sea That's not even a feckin shorty for fecks sake ...
Who comes up with this claptrap?
My wife swum off Folkstone this morning and said the sea was lovely. No need for a wetsuit.
This woman is just a "look at me" snowflake. I can't even see the sea in that photo, she was probably on a trampolene....
That’s not a wetsuit. It is an acid proof swim suit, due to ocean acidification we could all need one within the next 12 years.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49466596
"A woman cools off by jumping into the sea at Whitby, North Yorkshire"
Normally on a hot day when you want to keep cool in the sea you don't have to put on a wetsuit to keep yourself warm in the sea
That's not even a feckin shorty for fecks sake ... Who comes up with this claptrap?
My wife swum off Folkstone this morning and said the sea was lovely. No need for a wetsuit.
This woman is just a "look at me" snowflake. I can't even see the sea in that photo, she was probably on a trampolene....
Edited by Gandahar on Monday 26th August 15:04
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff