Climate Change thread

[Chekhov]

12 hours ago, Anna B said:

There are many things they can do to clean up the earth, that are relatively simple but haven't been tried yet.

Let's stop encouraging mass consumption. Let's have a 4 day week. Let's plant more trees (not chop them down...) Let's  put solar panels on all roofs and use white tiles on roofs to reflect the heat, let's use tidal power, let's stop the bombing round the world..  Let's...

I would be in favour of those (solar panels on as many roofs as possible anyway)

 

The thing is Anna, the environmental Zealots are so illogical and inconsistent.

One the one hand they want more people to use the trains, the most environmentally friendly form of transport, yet they are having a big battle to stop HS2 being built. They should be volunteering to work on it for free !

Tidal power is one of the best forms of renewable energy as it is more reliable, but the zealots oppose that because it will disrupt mud flats for wading birds on the River Severn. They say the world is heading for climate disaster and they're banging on about some wading birds ! !

The same could be said for their attitude to nuclear energy.

Basically they want us all to stop travelling (esp flying or using cars), stop heating our homes to a comfortable level, stop eating meat etc etc.

Well they can 'eff off because the great majority of people in this country do not want any of that and would not vote for it

Edited February 23, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

12 hours ago, El Cid said:

The UK would benefit from more warmth/sun, but the Sahara would benefit from more precipitation.

It is forecast that we will get more cloud cover and precipitation, more warmth and more extreme weather.

I think it's a little more complex than you are suggesting.

They don't know any of that for sure.

But, the fact "the experts" are now trying to get us all on board by saying "it'll be even worse than just a warmer world, everyone will have worse weather", just reminds me of the sort of scaremongering **** they came out during Covid. I do not trust them (or the governments who take notice of them) anymore.

 

23 minutes ago, Magilla said:

Presumably, you didn't respond the last two times this was expanded on, so you could spout it again?

Remind me again, how many tree's have you eaten today?

The principle is the same, you increase CO2 concentration and water and you get more efficient photosynthesis (even more so if it's also warmer and sunnier), which uses up that CO2 and converts it to Oxygen.

Edited February 23, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

30 minutes ago, Magilla said:

It also doesn't mean we can't, and certainly doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

YES IT DOES, if it does if it's going to hugely affect people's lives in a very negative way for an uncertain outcome.

The parallels with what they did during Covid are stark.

 

30 minutes ago, Magilla said:

Pretty sure they voted in a party who claimed they were going to be the greenest ever.

You are not seriously saying that people voted for any party because it was pro Nett Zero ! ? ! I would be amazed if more than a tiny percentage did, but it is irrelevant anyway, because the electorate had no choice in the matter as all the main parties stood on essentially the same policy. More to the point, this will only become significant when these Nett Zero polices start affecting how people live on a  day to day basis, like when they can no longer buy their own relatively cheap petrol car which will reliably get them from one end of the country to the other if necessary, or when the price of air travel is artificially hiked by huge taxes (or even rationed......).

Edited February 23, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

31 minutes ago, Magilla said:

>>Chekhov said : Assuming they are given the democratic opportunity to do that [reject Nett Zero] of course.....<<

 

Clearly, that opportunity exists.... of course, the only people offering it are complete loons with no idea how anything works, so you take your chances.

Have you any idea how arrogant that sounds ?

And the opportunity to vote against Nett Zero does not "clearly exist" as all the main parties are standing on the same policy. It's totally undemocratic, particularly for something which will affect our lives in unprecedented ways that most people have no idea about.

[Magilla]

58 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

The principle is the same, you increase CO2 concentration and water and you get more efficient photosynthesis (even more so if it's also warmer and sunnier), which uses up that CO2 and converts it to Oxygen.

Assuming all things are equal... there's no guarantee they will be.

Their lifespan is dramatically reduced, dead tree's also emit large quantities of methane.

Nutrition, and protein content drops with higher CO2 concentrations in crops that most humans eat.

[El Cid]

50 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

Have you any idea how arrogant that sounds ?

And the opportunity to vote against Nett Zero does not "clearly exist" as all the main parties are standing on the same policy. It's totally undemocratic, particularly for something which will affect our lives in unprecedented ways that most people have no idea about.

I find that these loons support our democracy as it is and they don't have a sense of humour 

[Annie Bynnol]

2 hours ago, trastrick said:

"salad rationing" ?

Go ask people in the World if that is on their list of "Crises", too! 

Better spent time would be how to get out of the endless European Wars and unsustainable, spiraling National Debt.

But we all have our personal priorities! 

    One priority should be to understand the economics of food production and its impact on countries, producers and consumers which can be negative and positive. Decisions made are sometime positive, sometimes negative and sometimes both- rarely neutral. When in the UK we consume foods that requires more  energy to produce than the energy they contain there is something wrong and has been widely discussed in the UK on MSM for decades. There are so many issues but an example is Kenya. For 50 years foreign companies were allocated too much of their best farmland and resources to producing food for cash and have become net importers of food  and the chemicals needed for the cash crops and subject to the vagaries of global economics. If their climate changes too quickly will they be able to adapt? I do not think 'doom and gloom' like the activists but I don't dismiss it like you. Like every other plant they have a limited range- the climate has always governed this distribution to the extent that fractions of a degree can change the ecosystem enough to advantage/disadvantage a species. It won't be the climate changes that effects the agribusiness in a region it will be the economic costs. Encouraging gradual adaptation over time starting now will benefit everybody,

[Magilla]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

YES IT DOES, if it does if it's going to hugely affect people's lives in a very negative way for an uncertain outcome.

Not doing anything will also effect people lives in a negative way.

 

Quote

The parallels with what they did during Covid are stark.

In your head.

 

Quote

You are not seriously saying that people voted for any party because it was pro Nett Zero ! ? !

It's was one of the considerations.

 

Quote

I would be amazed if more than a tiny percentage did, but it is irrelevant anyway, because the electorate had no choice in the matter as all the main parties stood on essentially the same policy.

There were parties that didn't have that policy. If you want one of the main parties not to have, campaign as one of their members!

 

Quote

More to the point, this will only become significant when these Nett Zero polices start affecting how people live on a  day to day basis, like when they can no longer buy their own relatively cheap petrol car which will reliably get them from one end of the country to the other if necessary, or when the price of air travel is artificially hiked by huge taxes (or even rationed......).

Again, you discount any notion that doing nothing may also have the same effect.

 

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

Have you any idea how arrogant that sounds ?

It isn't, they are loons.

 

That they're all ardent Brexiteers makes the point succinctly.

 

Quote

And the opportunity to vote against Nett Zero does not "clearly exist" as all the main parties are standing on the same policy. It's totally undemocratic, particularly for something which will affect our lives in unprecedented ways that most people have no idea about.

Have you any idea how arrogant that sounds ?

 

 

Edited February 23, 2023 by Magilla

[Chekhov]

7 hours ago, Magilla said:

>>Chekhov said : The parallels with what they did during Covid are stark.<<

 

In your head.

It's not just in my head.

 

We have a load of "experts", most of whom (certainly those on the MSM and those listened to by the government) telling us how bad things could be (the implication being how bad things will be). 

Exactly the same as what happened during Covid.

 

Scientists are by their very nature over cautious.

Exactly the same as what happened during Covid.

 

The scientists are not really that bothered about the effects of their recommended policies on the economy, and even less bothered about the effects on people's personal freedoms.

Exactly the same as what happened during Covid.

 

We have a government saying "we will be led by the science" so they can abdicate responsibility for making any serious decisions (even though the science is not certain, particularly as to the long term effects of rising CO2 concentrations and indeed how much we can do about it).

Exactly the same as what happened during Covid.

 

We have all of the MSM talking like climate change is a certainty and that Nett Zero is required with the implied assumption it will work, They also imply that anyone who disagrees with it is an unthinking crank.

Exactly the same as what happened during Covid.

 

All major political parties have more or less the same policy on Nett Zero, there is no option to vote against it.

Exactly the same as what happened during Covid.

 

They, the government and the MSM as well as the scientists, more or less ignore the massive cost (social as well as financial) of their nett zero policy. It's a case of whatever it costs, it does not matter, we will do it : TINA (there is no alternative).

Exactly the same as what happened during Covid.

 

Edited February 23, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

2 hours ago, Magilla said:

>> Chekhov said : And the opportunity to vote against Nett Zero does not "clearly exist" as all the main parties are standing on the same policy. It's totally undemocratic, particularly for something which will affect our lives in unprecedented ways that most people have no idea about.<<

 

Have you any idea how arrogant that sounds ?

Why is it arrogant ? Most of it is simply a statement of fact, apart, arguably, this bit :

 

something which will affect our lives in unprecedented ways that most people have no idea about.

 

Most people really do not have any idea what will be required to get to Nett Zero, they really do not. We ain't see nothin' yet.....

 

Take the arbitrary decision to ban the sale of internal combustion cars from 2030. Just on its own that would be ludicrous, but the fact most people in the industry agree there will never be cheap electric cars (certainly not by 2030) and we do not even have the charging infrastructure in place just makes it a crazy pipe dream. 

 

Here are my predictions if the government are stupid enough to stick to the 2030 abolition of the sale of new petrol / diesel cars :

 

1 - The price of internal combustion cars will go through the roof as 2030 approaches.

2 - The price of second hand petrol/ diesel cars will absolutely rocket, it really will go into the stratosphere.

3 - The number of second hand petrol / diesel cars scrapped will fall to historic lows, we may even go the way of Cuba. The only problem being that the salt on our roads will prevent that long term.

4 - If the government persist in trying to get rid of all internal combustion  cars they will start raising the taxes on petrol and oil hugely. And then the **** really will hit the fan in big big way. People will be voting on nett zero then and the government will lose, but civil insurrection is also possible, maybe even probable

 

 

Edited February 23, 2023 by Chekhov