Houses more ecologicaly dirty than cars!
Discussion
quote:
did they explain how exactly a house emits CO2?
Presumably they're talking about heating systems or something?
TOUGH SHITE!
No just some Bimbo commenting on the World Conference in SA....
I assume they mean those inneficient oil/gas/coal burning heating types......
Really puts the mockers on the governments lies about the cars being responsible for 90% of pollution though when agriculture+electricity generating pollutes 55%, industry 30% and homes 13%, leaves only 2% of TOTAL pollution to vehicles!!!!!!
Lying socialist swine.........
The latest On The Road (ABD) has figures for CO2 production in the UK.
Cars: 13%
Houses: 16% (Domestic HEating)
Industry: 29%
Can't remember the rest. But basically its a LOT better to buy "green" production goods and turn down the central heating 2 degress and wear a jumper than it is to carpool.
I'm not saying car-pools are a bad idea...they're sensible when doing journey's that are no fun...just that the anti-car shite is just shite.
The BBC ran a story last week that STARTED with the statement..the biggest CO2 producer in the country is CARS. I DID throw my slippers at the telly.
I've given up on the Beed. I thought they *tried* to report fairly. Now I KNOW they don't.
Cars: 13%
Houses: 16% (Domestic HEating)
Industry: 29%
Can't remember the rest. But basically its a LOT better to buy "green" production goods and turn down the central heating 2 degress and wear a jumper than it is to carpool.
I'm not saying car-pools are a bad idea...they're sensible when doing journey's that are no fun...just that the anti-car shite is just shite.
The BBC ran a story last week that STARTED with the statement..the biggest CO2 producer in the country is CARS. I DID throw my slippers at the telly.
I've given up on the Beed. I thought they *tried* to report fairly. Now I KNOW they don't.
I've been trawling around for some data and found the UK's official numbers ... as in these are the basis for local authority air polution estimates, submissions to the UN on climate change etc.
www.aeat.co.uk
Power Stations 26.5%
Domestic 16.0%
Other Industry 14.7%
All Cars 13.0%
Other Energy 8.7%
HGV LGV coaches 8.4%
Iron & Steel 5.1%
Misc 3.0%
Public Srvcs 2.6%
Aircraft 0.9%
Agriculture 0.6%
Railways 0.4%
M/cycle 0.1%
Looks like the ABD numbers came from the same place. Just depends how you slice and dice "industry".
Needless to say, this doesn't give you any info on efficiency.
www.aeat.co.uk
Power Stations 26.5%
Domestic 16.0%
Other Industry 14.7%
All Cars 13.0%
Other Energy 8.7%
HGV LGV coaches 8.4%
Iron & Steel 5.1%
Misc 3.0%
Public Srvcs 2.6%
Aircraft 0.9%
Agriculture 0.6%
Railways 0.4%
M/cycle 0.1%
Looks like the ABD numbers came from the same place. Just depends how you slice and dice "industry".
Needless to say, this doesn't give you any info on efficiency.
Dont get me started on the emissions shite propaganda!
What about "Natural" CO2 emissions. What do you think volcanoes churn out? And Cows and other animals?
I'm from a scientific background and when I questioned the "global warming" con, the reply I got at a conference was: "well, its because they can tax you on it!"
The truth is (IMHO)CO2 levels are cyclical. More CO2, more dissolves in sea, more algae/plankton, more fish and more plant growth producing more O2. (simplified).
"The worst floods since 18 oatcake" no cars then though !!so what caused them then? Ask Noah
What about "Natural" CO2 emissions. What do you think volcanoes churn out? And Cows and other animals?
I'm from a scientific background and when I questioned the "global warming" con, the reply I got at a conference was: "well, its because they can tax you on it!"
The truth is (IMHO)CO2 levels are cyclical. More CO2, more dissolves in sea, more algae/plankton, more fish and more plant growth producing more O2. (simplified).
"The worst floods since 18 oatcake" no cars then though !!so what caused them then? Ask Noah
The output of C02 from volcanoes is of the order of 1% of man's output, so pretty insignificant. Sulphur dioxide and dust has a much greater, but short term impact.
Main problem with cows is methane, not CO2. Agriculture in the UK releases about 1000 kilotonnes per annum. Fuel manufacture and use releases about 750 kilotonnes (vast majority of which is accidental loss) and garbage disposal about 700 kilotonnes.
Politicians may spin and look for propaganda, but this data is produced under peer reviewed academic conditions. It could be wrong, but it has been produced honestly.
It is certainly possible that there are feedback mechanisms that will absorb large percentages of the CO2 and there are some interesting theories around. But there isn't yet much evidence to suggest this happens in practice.
Seems to me that "global warming" is a finely balanced argument that suffers from (a) trying to model an enormously complicated, dynamic system (b) very little reliable data with which to calibrate or test the models.
Total emissions can be estimated with pretty good accuracy, and it is clear that man's contribution to those emissions is considerable. It's just bloody hard to predict if there will be any consequences, and if so, what they will be.
>> Edited by ATG on Wednesday 4th September 19:21
Main problem with cows is methane, not CO2. Agriculture in the UK releases about 1000 kilotonnes per annum. Fuel manufacture and use releases about 750 kilotonnes (vast majority of which is accidental loss) and garbage disposal about 700 kilotonnes.
Politicians may spin and look for propaganda, but this data is produced under peer reviewed academic conditions. It could be wrong, but it has been produced honestly.
It is certainly possible that there are feedback mechanisms that will absorb large percentages of the CO2 and there are some interesting theories around. But there isn't yet much evidence to suggest this happens in practice.
Seems to me that "global warming" is a finely balanced argument that suffers from (a) trying to model an enormously complicated, dynamic system (b) very little reliable data with which to calibrate or test the models.
Total emissions can be estimated with pretty good accuracy, and it is clear that man's contribution to those emissions is considerable. It's just bloody hard to predict if there will be any consequences, and if so, what they will be.
>> Edited by ATG on Wednesday 4th September 19:21
Putting it in crude scientific terms, the generation and consumption of CO2 is a matter of equilibrium. The more is produced then the more is consumed, the difficulty comes from the rate at which the production of CO2 grows. If it increases rapidly enough then the ecosystem cannot compensate and the hypothetical global warming takes place.
The changes we make to the production of CO2 alters the equilibrium slightly but only for a time. Only by making a concerted effort to prevent the consumption of CO2 are likely to tip the balance to far, for example by burning all of the grassland in the world (trees consume relatively little CO2 in comparison with grass) and turning it into desert.
To be honest, my opinion of all this CO2 business is that is is a load of shite with a kernel of truth - like everything in politics it is blown completely out of proportion for the benefit of the (voting) masses and to raise dosh!
The real problem with cars is the pollution from the creation and disposal of the vehicles. Most cars (individually) create more pollution during the manufacturing process than the entire rest of their recognisable lives, even disposing of a car which is messy at best doesn't compare. By all means tax us on the inefficiencies and pollution of the manufacturing process and maybe we'll start seeing leather upholstery become standard and cheap tacky vinyl/plastic interiors become a luxury item for the rich. Possibly even have proper wood veneer in our cars instead of the impossibly bad plastic interpretation - it isn't so long ago that wooden dashboards were standard, even my old Austin MkIII came with a wooden dash and it was the lowest spec you could buy in the UK without having to pedal the car along (although most of them had to be pushed along on many occasions).
The reality of the situation is that it is VERY easy for the government to tax us on CO2 emissions because it is easy to measure in a testing bay. Working out how much REAL pollution a car creates just from a cursory inspection is never going to happen.
The changes we make to the production of CO2 alters the equilibrium slightly but only for a time. Only by making a concerted effort to prevent the consumption of CO2 are likely to tip the balance to far, for example by burning all of the grassland in the world (trees consume relatively little CO2 in comparison with grass) and turning it into desert.
To be honest, my opinion of all this CO2 business is that is is a load of shite with a kernel of truth - like everything in politics it is blown completely out of proportion for the benefit of the (voting) masses and to raise dosh!
The real problem with cars is the pollution from the creation and disposal of the vehicles. Most cars (individually) create more pollution during the manufacturing process than the entire rest of their recognisable lives, even disposing of a car which is messy at best doesn't compare. By all means tax us on the inefficiencies and pollution of the manufacturing process and maybe we'll start seeing leather upholstery become standard and cheap tacky vinyl/plastic interiors become a luxury item for the rich.
Possibly even have proper wood veneer in our cars instead of the impossibly bad plastic interpretation - it isn't so long ago that wooden dashboards were standard, even my old Austin MkIII came with a wooden dash and it was the lowest spec you could buy in the UK without having to pedal the car along (although most of them had to be pushed along on many occasions). The reality of the situation is that it is VERY easy for the government to tax us on CO2 emissions because it is easy to measure in a testing bay. Working out how much REAL pollution a car creates just from a cursory inspection is never going to happen.
In a simple equlibrium, the concentration of atmospheric CO2 has to rise in order to start stimulating increased CO2 absorbtion. If you start emitting more CO2, then the atmosperic equilibrium concentration will be higher than it was previously.
Also there is no reason to suppose that the CO2 level can be modelled with a simple equlibrium. It is just as likely that the process is chaotic. In chaotic systems you tend to have regions of reasonable stability called "attractors", the state of the system tends to be near these attractors but can jump from one to another. The CO2 mass in the atmosphere therefore might find a new "equilibrium" at a significantly different level to what we have at present.
Quite agree that the manufacturing process for things like cars uses loads of energy. But look at the stats below and you'll see nonetheless that car fuel is significant too.
Also there is no reason to suppose that the CO2 level can be modelled with a simple equlibrium. It is just as likely that the process is chaotic. In chaotic systems you tend to have regions of reasonable stability called "attractors", the state of the system tends to be near these attractors but can jump from one to another. The CO2 mass in the atmosphere therefore might find a new "equilibrium" at a significantly different level to what we have at present.
Quite agree that the manufacturing process for things like cars uses loads of energy. But look at the stats below and you'll see nonetheless that car fuel is significant too.
This might be a tad irrelevant, but does anyone know a good source for making a house more ecologically sound?
Basically, I'm due to start a complete renovation of a listed farmhouse, and kinda like the idea of using green materials and sustainable energy sources (solar power, wind turbines and the like).
Thought there might be some kind of energy efficiency grants kicking around too (which should help pay for all my petrol).
Basically, I'm due to start a complete renovation of a listed farmhouse, and kinda like the idea of using green materials and sustainable energy sources (solar power, wind turbines and the like).
Thought there might be some kind of energy efficiency grants kicking around too (which should help pay for all my petrol).
spoonman
try www.sustainablehomes.co.uk
www.sustainabilityworks.co.uk
www.greebuildingcompany.co.uk
there are loads out, but probably the best place to start is the Centre for Alternative Technology Bookshop, well worth a visit but its in Machynlleth in Mid Wales, if you say they you're only going to the bookshop they'll let you in for free. Loads of books/publications on greener houses and energy.(www.cat.org.uk). I'd be interested to know how you get on, we recently bought a farmhouse in Mid-Wales, but heating system needs to be updated, looking at supplementing it with Solar Heating and possibly with Wind Power as we are 500ft up on a ridge.
davidy
try www.sustainablehomes.co.uk
www.sustainabilityworks.co.uk
www.greebuildingcompany.co.uk
there are loads out, but probably the best place to start is the Centre for Alternative Technology Bookshop, well worth a visit but its in Machynlleth in Mid Wales, if you say they you're only going to the bookshop they'll let you in for free. Loads of books/publications on greener houses and energy.(www.cat.org.uk). I'd be interested to know how you get on, we recently bought a farmhouse in Mid-Wales, but heating system needs to be updated, looking at supplementing it with Solar Heating and possibly with Wind Power as we are 500ft up on a ridge.
davidy
Thanks for the tips, davidy – I'll certainly check them out. I'd not really given the idea much thought until I read this thread. Plus my girlfriend likes wind turbines (maybe it's because they're big, thrusting, erect... well, I don't really know why).
Have you looked into the grants situation? Got one years ago simply for insulation of an old property – they really chuck money at you.
Sounds like we're in the same boat. But at least yours already has some heating (instead of hole in the walls...) Keep me posted on your progress.
Cheers
Have you looked into the grants situation? Got one years ago simply for insulation of an old property – they really chuck money at you.
Sounds like we're in the same boat. But at least yours already has some heating (instead of hole in the walls...) Keep me posted on your progress.
Cheers
Cars are indeed a Machiavellian scapegoat. It would appear to be the consensus on this forum that this is because it is easy logistically and propaganda-wise to distract the nations majorities (bless them all, every one) with a shiny object (looky-wooky!) rather than admit that it is far more complex and will actually require some time and effort to change the way things are.
I think that by targeting the car, bigger players are out of the limelight and can do the business as usual cha-cha making plentyloads in the process. However, this does not mean that global warming is in itself a non-problem. Equilibriums are all chemically maintained with buffers. The oceans act as very large buffers for CO2 but only up to a point. Anyone who's done chemistry A-level may be able to recall the weak/strong acid or alkali buffer solutions that resisted pH change 'to a point' then collapsed suddenly.
The main fear is that natures stability will act in a similar way, hence the call by cautiously minded greens (not the ranting fools you so rightly mock on this site) to address these issues. Global Warming was not originally devised as an albatross for the british motorist, although l suspect that it has been hi-jacked as such.
I think that by targeting the car, bigger players are out of the limelight and can do the business as usual cha-cha making plentyloads in the process. However, this does not mean that global warming is in itself a non-problem. Equilibriums are all chemically maintained with buffers. The oceans act as very large buffers for CO2 but only up to a point. Anyone who's done chemistry A-level may be able to recall the weak/strong acid or alkali buffer solutions that resisted pH change 'to a point' then collapsed suddenly.
The main fear is that natures stability will act in a similar way, hence the call by cautiously minded greens (not the ranting fools you so rightly mock on this site) to address these issues. Global Warming was not originally devised as an albatross for the british motorist, although l suspect that it has been hi-jacked as such.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff