MPs say car ownership not compatible with decarbonisation

[powerstroke]

Jasandjules said:

All predicated on the incorrect CO2 will kill us all bull***t...

God knows what will it take to bring these climate alarmists down , watermelons are still ascending .....
people still valueing the wild predictions these charlatans have been making despite most have been proved to be wrong!!
Snow in the UK and Mediterranean climate Maldives under water etc

Edited by powerstroke on Friday 23 August 08:49

[deckster]

powerstroke said:

Jasandjules said:

All predicated on the incorrect CO2 will kill us all bull***t...

God knows what will it take to bring these climate alarmists down watermelons are still ascending .....
people still valueing the wild predictions these charlatans have been making despite most have been proved to be wrong!!
Snow in the UK and Mediterranean climate Maldives under water etc

And this is why nothing ever gets done. People don't want to let go of their toys or like the perception of others 'interfering' with their way of life, so they stick their fingers in their ears, wilfully misrepresent that fact that there is actual science here that is beyond question, and start throwing around insults.

Christ knows I'm no environmentalist, but it's beyond obvious that as a species we are consuming far more than is sustainable and that we are having a measurable impact on the climate of our world. Now clearly there are conversations to be had around what we can do to reduce consumption and manage our impact on the planet - but people need to start being honest with themselves. If you don't want to change, that's fine. If you couldn't give a rats arse about the environment and our impact on it, that's fine too. But don't keep repeating this dogma that climate change is a myth perpetuated by people that want to scare and control us.

[RobDickinson]

Digga said:

which is it's already too late. Especially with what those wkpuffins are doing to the Amazon now.

I'd find it hard to argue against that :/

[jurbie]

deckster said:

And this is why nothing ever gets done. People don't want to let go of their toys or like the perception of others 'interfering' with their way of life, so they stick their fingers in their ears, wilfully misrepresent that fact that there is actual science here that is beyond question, and start throwing around insults.

Why do you have the impression that nothing gets done? The UK has cut it's carbon emissions by 40% so I wouldn't count that as nothing.

[deckster]

jurbie said:

deckster said:

And this is why nothing ever gets done. People don't want to let go of their toys or like the perception of others 'interfering' with their way of life, so they stick their fingers in their ears, wilfully misrepresent that fact that there is actual science here that is beyond question, and start throwing around insults.

Why do you have the impression that nothing gets done? The UK has cut it's carbon emissions by 40% so I wouldn't count that as nothing.

True. I was more reacting to the previous posts, which thankfully don't reflect official government policy (on this side of the pond at least).

[powerstroke]

deckster said:

powerstroke said:

Jasandjules said:

All predicated on the incorrect CO2 will kill us all bull***t...

God knows what will it take to bring these climate alarmists down watermelons are still ascending .....
people still valueing the wild predictions these charlatans have been making despite most have been proved to be wrong!!
Snow in the UK and Mediterranean climate Maldives under water etc

And this is why nothing ever gets done. People don't want to let go of their toys or like the perception of others 'interfering' with their way of life, so they stick their fingers in their ears, wilfully misrepresent that fact that there is actual science here that is beyond question, and start throwing around insults.

Christ knows I'm no environmentalist, but it's beyond obvious that as a species we are consuming far more than is sustainable and that we are having a measurable impact on the climate of our world. Now clearly there are conversations to be had around what we can do to reduce consumption and manage our impact on the planet - but people need to start being honest with themselves. If you don't want to change, that's fine. If you couldn't give a rats arse about the environment and our impact on it, that's fine too. But don't keep repeating this dogma that climate change is a myth perpetuated by people that want to scare and control us.

We really do need a world war or serious natural disaster It's been too cushy for too long humans need something real to worry about !!!

[Evanivitch]

Jasandjules said:

All predicated on the incorrect CO2 will kill us all bull***t...

If we all walked into a room full of CO2 it would kill us all, so there's an element of truth to that.

Or would we all just get greener and leafier?

[AstonZagato]

I'm old enough to remember when the climate scientists were saying we were facing the next ice age. I take all this talk of Armageddon with a pinch of salt.

That said, we are f**cking the planet right now. CO2 isn't the only problem. It may not even be the biggest problem. Pollution is poisoning the world. It is very difficult to stop as we all consume so much rubbish. Politicians are interested in soundbites and quick fixes. They see opportunities to tax and lecture - both of which they love to do. They have no idea how to solve it and will almost certainly make it worse (see their push for more diesels - that went well).

But we are not going to give up our excessive consumption - it is not in human nature. So we need fewer humans - good luck to any politician who goes down that route!

[RobDickinson]

AstonZagato said:

I'm old enough to remember when the climate scientists were saying we were facing the next ice age.

casual bullst.

Yes we are facing an ice age in the future, but not near future, climate models even the very old ones from the early 70s, even ones made by Enron show exactly whats happening.

[Digga]

AstonZagato said:

I'm old enough to remember when the climate scientists were saying we were facing the next ice age. I take all this talk of Armageddon with a pinch of salt.

That said, we are f**cking the planet right now. CO2 isn't the only problem. It may not even be the biggest problem. Pollution is poisoning the world. It is very difficult to stop as we all consume so much rubbish. Politicians are interested in soundbites and quick fixes. They see opportunities to tax and lecture - both of which they love to do. They have no idea how to solve it and will almost certainly make it worse (see their push for more diesels - that went well).

But we are not going to give up our excessive consumption - it is not in human nature. So we need fewer humans - good luck to any politician who goes down that route!

I agree.

I can remember playing on beaches as a child and wondering where the fk all the rubbish washed up from and how it was ever going to get tidied up. It was something so seldom mentioned that you felt you were the only one considering it.

[RobDickinson]

We really need less humans.

And less consumerism, and casual waste of resources with tat and single use st no one really wants or needs.

[Pan Pan Pan]

This is not helped by that foul, gurning Mays parting shot to make the UK carbon neutral by 2050.
Nor by the fact that most London centric politicians do not live in the real word, and rarely have to consider how they are going to get to work on a daily basis, and at their own expense.
Trying to force millions who rely on cars to go about their daily lives (not forgetting those who for having a house, a decent car, and a foreign holiday is what really all they get out of bed for every day) is going to be difficult.
On a lighter note, I have designed a superb his n hers save the world kit, for those who think humans are destroying the planet and its climate. and s not even that expensive.
For blokes it consists of a pair of nicely weighted engineering bricks, and for the ladies it is a reasonable sized tube of superglue, all with a how to use instructions thrown in of course

Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Friday 23 August 09:33

[Jasandjules]

Evanivitch said:

If we all walked into a room full of CO2 it would kill us all, so there's an element of truth to that.

Or would we all just get greener and leafier?

If we walked into a room full of Oxygen it would kill us. Your argument is at best puerile.

[Gecko1978]

biggles330d said:

Gecko1978 said:

driverless tech at level 5 will reduce congestion by virtue of being more efficient... .

Really? I saw a presentation of a study recently that was looking at autonomous cars and the conclusion was that the greater shift you'd find was people getting out of 'mass' public transport to travel in the much more pleasant environment of their own space. Sure, you'd get some shift from driven car to autonomous car (but its still a car, right?), but congestion would go through the roof as you'd remove the consolidation effect of the bus or train. Plus all these empty autonomous vehicles have to reposition to the next booking - during commuter times that's a lot of capacity all going one way and empty back out again.

It challenged quite a few myths about them being a congestion busting silver bullet. All as yet unproven of course, but the point was careful what you wish for as once it's here you'll never get it back in the bottle.

I should I suppose have given more detail of this aspect. So I see driverless tech in the future being more like mobility pods possibly single seater ones so 4 fit into the space taken by one car. or maybe 2 if its a 2 seater. They would communicate with each other an you and road network getting optimal travel time and route. There would be less stop start and better flows though a bit liek minority report the ride might feel like a lot of near misses as cars were so much closer together (again less space on the road).

But I still think the biggest impact is not travelling at all. So as I said before remote working for all who are able to. Cut office space in half reduce need to support it, the need to transport as many people to one location, cut emissions etc.

But this will cause others issues so let me play it out.

Liverpool st London Busiest station in the city.

All firms now must off 3 days a week remote working where it is possible

So we estimate that where possible leads to a 50% reduction in foot fall through the station on a given day

People work remotely on a rolling basis so not everyone travels on a Monday but not Friday etc

The roles that require a physical presence i,e, support staff in offices, retail staff etc the demand or need for them also falls

Office space falls and delivery of resources to offices falls

The strain on public transport also falls

Win win > except the government looses tax revenue from business rates, spending in businesses in the area (why pay £4 for a sandwich when u can make it at home where u are), staff in roles like security, office management, cleaning, catering all face job cuts, less offices are built, Transport for London loose huge revenue stream so need to raise ticket prices (the size of the tube is fixed after all)

So less pollution sure but also the future does present a lot less money for the government. Throw in AI into the mix an many office workers don't have jobs either.

I see this as the most viable way of reducing emissions not making the same system more efficient but changing the way it works. In the Last 5 years remote working really has become the norm in the city and I would love to know the impact its has on public transport journeys.

An before someone says how will you mix concrete or such like remotely I would counter and say a lot of industry it geared towards supporting infrastructure in the city, which would given the above have massive over capacity so again don't need those jobs either.

[irc]

deckster said:

But don't keep repeating this dogma that climate change is a myth perpetuated by people that want to scare and control us.

It's just that the expert past predictions are frequently wrong.

https://principia-scientific.org/30-years-later-sc...

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/12/12/moving-the-...

Climate changes but the experts don't know what will happen 20 or 30 years out. Reducing slightly the 1% or so UK share of CO2 while China and India rapidly increase theirs is pointless. I'll keep driving.

[TT1138]

The fundamental problem is that all of the ways that governments in the U.K. have tried to reduce private car use are all stick rather than carrot.

Make electric car ownership more heavily subsidised so that people can actually afford them, tax breaks for companies that prioritise home working and video conference meetings, make the motorcycle and scooter licensing system easy and cheap. Two wheels = less congestion. Subsidise e-bikes and utility bicycles. Make train travel quicker and cheaper than using the car. Open up town and city centres for housing so that people can have genuinely affordable housing within walking distance of work.

Also massively increase the UKs nuclear power program, but that’s one for another thread!

Ultimately, for ‘green’ travel (and I’m still not overly convinced about how ‘green’ electric cars are over their whole term life but again, that’s for another thread) there needs to be incentives.

At the moment it’s all about trying to reduce people’s use of cars, rather than making the alternatives more attractive and cheaper.

[Evanivitch]

Jasandjules said:

Evanivitch said:

If we all walked into a room full of CO2 it would kill us all, so there's an element of truth to that.

Or would we all just get greener and leafier?

If we walked into a room full of Oxygen it would kill us. Your argument is at best puerile.

Did I say anything about Oxygen?

[turbobloke]

Evanivitch said:

Jasandjules said:

Evanivitch said:

If we all walked into a room full of CO2 it would kill us all, so there's an element of truth to that.

Or would we all just get greener and leafier?

If we walked into a room full of Oxygen it would kill us. Your argument is at best puerile.

Did I say anything about Oxygen?

A room full of nitrogen would kill us all so what was your own non-point again?

Humans operate well in submarine environments at 8,000 ppmv carbon dioxide and up to 10,600 ppmv (the current atmospheric level is just over 400 ppmv i.e. 20x lower) and medical oxygen cylinders used on patients in critical conditions are 50,000 ppmv carbon dioxide i.e. 125x higher than the atmosphere.

There's so much bovine excreta in carbon dioxide mythology it must be bad for the environment.

[Canute]

55palfers said:

When China, India, USA, Russia, etc. have "decarbonised" do pop back and collect my car keys.

Until then, bugger off.

So helpful

[turbobloke]

Canute said:

55palfers said:

When China, India, USA, Russia, etc. have "decarbonised" do pop back and collect my car keys.

Until then, bugger off.

So helpful

More helpful than UK national stupicide by decarbonisation, when if achieved which is a remote possibility would remove the UK's less than 1% of a mere 5% total global perturbation to the natural annual CO2 cycle (a pointless but costly 0.05% change overall )which will not have a measurable effect on Al Gore's temperature and will be offset by economic growth in developing economies within months.

That's unhelpful.

Let's do it to show 'em