Well aware of it. I’m also well aware of the fact that we’re not going to radically change our consumption models – and certainly not in the timeframe we need to change them in.
What's the time frame? 30 years? How're you going to reduce the world's population to 3bn in 30 years?
And no, I don’t need to do any better than what I posted tbh
You do. Your reasoning is crap and your message is toxic. It's doing more harm than good.
Given the idea we might not subsidise families with more than two children causes whole populations to meltdown and causes voting habits to change, how the hell do you think we’re going to achieve that – for both the “rich” west and the “poor” developing world?
Wait, it's a two-kid limit now?
There is literally no problem that isn’t made worse by the addition of more humans, and no problem that’s very much eased by less.
True but there are lots of solutions to that problem OTHER than a one-child policy.
We can’t achieve the radical transformation of society that we need to have any chance of continuing as a species and retain the same economic model we currently run.
Oh we do absolutely need to change the economic model. I've argued this for years. I'm quite interested in HOW we actually change it thought. I can imagine if you were a football coach your half-time talk would be "We need to score more goals! We cannot win the match if we don't score more goals!".
Oh, and btw:
And you can kiss goodbye to any kind of technological solution in that case.
We've had the technological solutions to our energy problems for a long long time. The one of the old heads of the UN Environment Comittee said he cried when we bailed out the banks in 2008 because if he'd have had the same level of funding he could have fixed our energy supply problem.
The problem isn't technology - we've had that a long time. It's will and intellect. And humans don't have enough of either.
It’s will and intellect. And humans don’t have enough of either.
As you're doing a good job of demonstrating here.
I could say the same to you @Molgrips - but you chose to go there first.
Anyway:
You do. Your reasoning is crap and your message is toxic. It’s doing more harm than good.
No. I've already said - the message isn't wrong. The receivers of the message are the problem because they don't like it.
Population reduction isn't an option - it's one of many mandatory steps we would need to take if we want humans to survive.
But we ain't going to take them - because humans don't even like the idea. - you've shown it yourself - a one child policy is going to be way late. Do you advocate a faster reduction in population by some mechanism then? Because if we want to survive, we need less humans.
Wait, it’s a two-kid limit now?
No. My (and the union of concerned scientists) would be one - because that's what is needed. But the actual real two kid limit for benefits in the UK provokes outrage and reversal of that is in all of the opposition parties' manifestos. - Hardly a recognition of the size of the existential problem that faces us and a willingness to take the "hard decisions" the country needs to face up to, eh?
https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/lln-2022-0019/
The difference between you and me is that for you this is theoretical. For me - I've been watching this crap pan out in real life for my whole life.
I've done my bit and it's cost me many many thousands in cold hard readies and means I live a very different life from most people - including my own family. And this is despite having a sizeable disposable income that I could spend on living it up joyously consumptively.
What are you doing?
No. I’ve already said – the message isn’t wrong. The receivers of the message are the problem because they don’t like it.
The message is wrong or being delivered incorrectly then.
I’ve done my bit and it’s cost me many many thousands in cold hard readies and means I live a very different life from most people
Everything you described is based around you and you alone. That’s quite selfish. What have you done for the wider community, to help others, for your place of work? You living sustainably, whilst commendable, is just as much use as doing nothing. You’ve not even managed to convince members of your own family to make change.
I have two kids. We have one car, only used for work when necessary. Don’t use air travel, don’t eat cow, have a 99% plant based diet, only buy UK made or second hand clothing, mend and repair whatever we can, have minimal (and used) tech.
I educate others on what they can do, work on reducing my works, customers and supply chain emissions. Work with the local council on helping to educate SME’s and guilt trip as many contacts as I can in to lending their expertise to charities and local communities for free. That’s not enough so I’ll keep trying to do more and not attempt to point the finger whilst doing so.
No. I’ve already said – the message isn’t wrong. The receivers of the message are the problem because they don’t like it.
Right, and how do you make them like it?
My (and the union of concerned scientists) would be one – because that’s what is needed.
That would cause serious economic issues (and take ages) so you'd ALSO have to reconfigure the global economy, how're you going to do that?
The difference between you and me is that for you this is theoretical. For me – I’ve been watching this crap pan out in real life for my whole life
What do you mean by this?
I think the difference between you and me is that I understand how to manipulate people a lot better.
Right, and how do you make them like it?
You can't. It's a fundamentally unlikeable message for most people.
Which is why we don't make it.
That would cause serious economic issues (and take ages) so you’d ALSO have to reconfigure the global economy
I already said this. You're now not even following the basic argument and straying into just "saying stuff".
Wholesale radical change - economy, lifestyle, population size. Wholesale radical change.
@tjagain gets what's required.
Everything you described is based around you and you alone. That’s quite selfish.
So, I've done everything possible for myself at great personal cost - and now I have to do it for other people?
Get your heads out of your asses and be responsible for your own actions.
Are you all babies? You can see what's required. Quit whining about it and DO IT.
Jesus Christ! Reread what you’ve just typed and realise why nobody will ever listen to you or agree with you. Your people skills are living in the negative zone.
I’m fully responsible for my own actions thanks. I’m also aware that it’s not always easy for others to be. Hence why I’ve chosen to help. When it comes to climate change the more people that fully understand the issues, the better. That has to be delivered by people with people skills, empathy and understanding. Things you appear to lack. Building your own sustainable world at great expense is fine and dandy. If you’ve not even managed to convince your own family to make change then you’ve just pissed in the wind.
You can’t.
You can't, no. Fortunately others in this area aren't so misanthropic and don't give up quite so easily.
Wholesale radical change – economy, lifestyle, population size. Wholesale radical change.
Yes.. but HOW??? Everyone who's thought about this knows there needs to be major changes - it's so easy to say. But how to actually do it? That's what I am concerned about.
Basically, you've come on saying 'we need change' and then when gone 'oh it's too hard let's give up' when pressed. I mean, really.
Education (including Carbon Literacy for adults),
Lobbying your MP,
Direct Action,
Community work,
Joining organisations/charities,
Pensions,
Diet,
Reducing car use,
Measure your own Carbon Footprint and plan to reduce (to circa 7t to start) as much as possible.
Monitor energy usage,
Turn your thermostat down by a couple of degrees,
Repair clothes, buy UK made or second hand.
They are all starting points that are relatively simple as per the OP and they will actually make a difference despite what some would have you believe.
Anything else is longer term and needs proper planning. It’s not too late despite what others are posting on here. We can limit warming, we just all need to start taking action now, small steps with a plan to go bigger within five years. Aim for a 5t footprint. Giving up or demanding everyone kills their firstborn child and lives in a Yurt close to their place of work isn’t going to work.
What's very disappointing is the government's failure to capitalise on the WFH boom. Companies are trying to get people back into offices and the govt is encouraging it. This is an absolute scandal as it's wasting millions of gallons of fuel for no good reason.
If companies were incentivised to have employees WFH then they'd be all over it.
I think one of the biggest things we could do would be to somehow get people to stop buying tat. My wife had a conversation at work yesterday with someone who was complaining about the cost of living, and that they couldn't afford to buy Christmas pyjamas for the family this year. That's right - Christmas pyjamas. Every year they bought a new set of matching pyjamas for their family, for Christmas. What the actual **** is wrong with people? THIS kind of thing needs to be unacceptable.
However, half the world's economy is based on selling cheap tat to the other half. So if we all stopped over night, there would need to be some serious economic re-adjustment in large parts of the world. Solutions are likely to cause knock-on problems. That's why it's hard, and that's why it needs a lot of planning.
This is funny:
My wife had a conversation at work yesterday with someone who was complaining about the cost of living, and that they couldn’t afford to buy Christmas pyjamas for the family this year. That’s right – Christmas pyjamas. Every year they bought a new set of matching pyjamas for their family, for Christmas. What the actual **** is wrong with people? THIS kind of thing needs to be unacceptable.
This is my family.
There is no convincing people like this of the wholesale reform they need to make to their lives. And, frankly, this is the majority of humans.
All the things on @funkmasterp's list I've done and a lot more. I've "been the change you want to see in others" - and frankly, I have great social skills - I'm the guy they send in to calm shit down (and I'm very well paid for it). Just not on the internet - where's the benefit?
After 70 years of touchy-feely environmental activism we've done nothing. We're tinkering around the edges.
Last post just for thought:
The suffragettes. Remember them? Universally applauded for really getting the ball rolling on women's equality.
Their single most effective action that brought about change? No, it's not blocking roads or chaining themselves to fences (although they did indeed do a lot of that).
It was the bombing campaign they carried out.
...
Humans ain't going to do anything about the environment. Not really. We've overseen a 70% decline in living animal species since 1970. 70%. Yet we've taken more action over Ukraine - like that's anything other than just another idiotic human chimpanzee-like squabble.
Collectively we are dumb as a box of frogs. We don't make it. We know what to do - but people moan about messaging.
YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO - SO JUST BLOODY DO IT. If you've not already done everything you can possibly do yourself, then you're a hypocrite to moan about anything or anyone else.
Energy tax in all forms. By which I mean, the more energy you use the more it's going to cost per unit.
Want a big thirsty car? Sure but as you are going to put more petrol in it, your petrol will cost more per litre.
Big house that's inefficient and wastes energy? You will pay more per unit as your chucking lots of energy away.
Small car, small house, efficient use of power? You pay less per unit.
No. I’ve already said – the message isn’t wrong. The receivers of the message are the problem because they don’t like it.
funkmaster
The message is wrong or being delivered incorrectly then.
So assume the message is correct - how do you propose to deliver it?
Any population level of above about 3bn needs *massive* changes to our consumption models. If you read the actual studies (rather than post a normal distribution curve of studies that have been done (regardless of quality)) that becomes really clear.
So we can argue over 3 or 5 ... but possibly more important is what does "our" mean? STW, the UK or globally?
As I posted earlier we actually need to define what "eco solutions for society" actually means and stop pissing about with peripheral stuff. The example I gave was assuming we could agree the most pressing problem is climate change then replace petrol with diesel and abolish ULEZ zones.
Both of these would cut CO2 ... but it seems people are more concerned by air quality, not having nuclear or having fracking close to them.
In another thread I suggested we need to start fracking for gas and using CBM whilst we develop nuclear.... but nope people aren't happy to have fracking due to pretty much the same people prevented us having nuclear in place for decades.
Rather than the inconvenience, people would rather use the gas that billions need to cook without open wood fires in the 3rd world and let 3rd world taxis and rickshaws run on old petrol engines even if that gas is fracked/CBM.
So instead we end up virtue signalling to the developing world whilst stealing the resources they need.
If WE (STW/UK) are not going to put up with some small inconveniences how on earth do we expect the developing world to make the changes they need to do?
Energy tax in all forms.
Yep. But what does that mean in reality.
Oh wait? Energy is going to cost us 4 grand a year? WE NEED BAILOUTS!
We need proper government action - "insulate britain" has been around in some form since the mid 1980's. It's been no secret. But voters will be voters and governments will be governments.
The suggestion by some MPs that we put on jumpers and wrap up warm has had the public (and the press) calling them facists.
Try having more expensive home heating in a manifesto and see how many votes you get. Many people support eco friendly in theory but not when it means it is costing them money or they need to stop taking international flights.
So assume the message is correct – how do you propose to deliver it?
firstly you need to get the great unwashed to understand how big of an issue climate change actually is. Because at the moment people really don’t get it. This place isn’t a great example of the world at large. Relatively affluent and educated in the main to above the level of most is how I would describe this place.
That isn’t the norm. Hell, I don’t meet any of the above criteria. This means keeping the climate crisis front and centre in the news and media in general. Not demonising those taking direct action and altering the car is king culture we have. Then you do things such as Carbon Literacy training in the workplace and community. Begin to educate everyone on what’s happening, why it’s happening and how we, as individuals, families, communities, workplaces and countries need to address it.
Get people invested in making a change, reward them in some way. Be that financially or a metaphorical pat on the head. Being a bit of a ****, yelling at people and calling them babies is never going to get results other than being ignored, told to **** off or being physically assaulted.
We managed to get people to (mostly) comply with Covid restrictions for the greater good. If we can do that then we can do this. Treat it in the same way. An urgent, life threatening matter, because after all that is precisely what it is. Rather than telling folk they can’t have kids or a car, show them and tell them how the world will look in five, ten, fifteen years etc. Make them realise that yes, this will have a negative impact on you.
Anything is better than the attitude of some shown on this thread. I’ve done my bit or I’m not making change are both shitty positions to take. Do something, anything! That starts with knowledge and that’s what the majority are lacking. Having Attenborough do twice yearly specials isn’t going to cut it.
I don’t have all the answers, nobody does and that’s the whole point. It’s better for a few billion people to start by making changes they can live with than doing **** all or beavering away making your own changes without educating others as to why you’re doing it.
We managed to get people to (mostly) comply with Covid restrictions for the greater good.
Not sure that is the best example. If beating climate change means not attending funerals and being a criminal for exercising more than 5 miles from home I'm out.
2 years of Covid rules nearly bankrupted the country how long will we need to run with eco rules?
Anyone that wants to impose huge lifestyle changes on the country needs to put it in a manifesto and run for parliament.
It’s a great example. It shows you can get the majority of a nation to adapt and change quickly to a threatening event. Climate change needs to be treated with the same level of urgency and receive a similar level of media coverage.
Your other points are rather odd and pretty specific to Covid. Although traveling five miles to exercise regularly, if done by car, probably isn’t a great thing to do tbh.
As per always, those advocating a sharp decline in population are more than welcome to inspire the rest of us and lead by example.
I take issue with whoever it was on this thread stating most folk on this thread want to be a part of the solution. Its simply not so. You only want to be a part of the solution if you can do so without the lifestle changes needed.
People need to understand that without radical change the planet is fubar.
Only a couple of folk on here actually understand this
Only a couple of folk on here actually understand this
And one of thems a crypto evangelist - so even they don't really understand even if they talk about doing so.
Frankly - it's not a life style change your proposing. In the current market of wages and costs that your clearly massively out of touch with as evidenced through out the whole thread. - it's largely homelessness(at least in the UK)your proposing.
That's why your proposals are about as popular as Liz truss manifesto.
As I pointed out much earlier 40 years ago this was a choice
Today it's not unless your born with the silver spoo or very lucky.
Asside from mass euthanasia
And there you make my point for me. Without radical change then the planet is fubar but any solutions are seen as not acceptable
Re flights, I've been on 2 in my entire life. Was curious about proportion of population which does regularly fly. There's a study which suggests 90% of UK flights are taken by 2% of the population.
And there you make my point for me. Without radical change then the planet is fubar but any solutions are seen as not acceptable
Well when you come up with real solutions . Let us know. Right now your solutions are the real world equivalent of go back to the stone age and live in caves.
People need to understand that without radical change the planet is fubar.
I accept this. What I am doing is pointing out how difficult this is to actually implement, because that's where we need to focus our efforts.
Saying 'we need radical change' is not very useful. Figuring out how to get people to accept and actually want radical change is the real problem that needs solving. That's what I'm trying to explore here. It appears that you think I'm denying the issue, but I'm not - just moving onto the actual difficult parts.
So let's talk about HOW to get the radical change we need? How to create the desire for change? How to get our political leaders to enact it?
Only a couple of folk on here actually understand this
Most people over the age of 10 realise that the world we live in the Rich "Western countries" in is unsustainable. For most people I think they feel (rightly) IMO that the tinkering around the edges that is available to them is (largely) pointless frippery that while slaving their own conscious will do little to nothing to actually help on the scale that's needed.
most people over the age of 10 realise that the world we live in the Rich “Western countries” in is unsustainable.
I honestly don’t think they do and if they do, it’s a rather woolly interpretation. As per my previous posts STW is not representative of the country as a whole. This is why keeping it front and centre in the news and educating all ages are fundamental first steps.
I was speaking at a community event a couple of weeks ago and there were adults in the audience that didn’t know methane was a GHG, let alone a potent one.
Is it too much to ask that we all follow this man's example of a low carbon lifestyle? We would have to substitute the porcupines for hedgehogs though.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-63389045
Having a wash clearly lead to his demise. Proof that not washing my bike car or children is the correct choice!
I was speaking at a community event a couple of weeks ago and there were adults in the audience that didn’t know methane was a GHG, let alone a potent one.
And yet here we are, advocating a vegan diet 🙂
Only a couple of folk on here actually understand this
@tjagain - Please, do tell - who understands this and who doesn't? I'm genuinely curious. Also, please be aware, that If any of my posts came across as insulting/aggravating, that wasn't my intent. I'm just here for debate. I abhor and echo chamber.
I honestly don’t think they do.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/belief-in-climate-change
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/are-concerns-around-climate-change-exaggerated
Most people recognise it's happening, and most people understand that the threat isn't exaggerated.
I was reflecting yesterday - I have (ridiculously) taken UK internal flights on occasion. No more, and so was sat on the London-Edinburgh train.
Related to carbon taxes, we should immediately remove the tax free fuel from all airlines. That money should then go directly into long term investment internally for better and faster rail travel. The only exception should be the roads based pricing for the Scottish islands flights.
Why should there be an islands exception? Start of a slippery slope once you say something needs done but.....
Daffy
Who on here is prepared to make the major lifestyle changes? Almost no one. Are you prepared to give up you car?
Its obvious that folk simply do not get the reality of how severe this is. Its obvious because they will not accept that the only solution is radical lifestyle changes. They are only paying lip service.
Who on here is prepared to make the major lifestyle changes? Almost no one. Are you prepared to give up you car?
We have competing pressures. Most people are not in great control over their lives, because they don't have enough money to be able to take that control. Now please, for the love of mike, don't say 'well I managed it so you can too'. That's just not helpful. Not everyone is in the same situation as you, not everyone's lives follow the same path. So you need to try and understand other people's needs and their problems, and what is preventing them from making the right changes.
I agree with you in so much as "most" folks, (as this thread neatly demonstrates) have either no belief that they can do much to change how the world is currently organised, and their efforts are; by that scale, teeny. Or have a comprehension of the sorts of things that rich western countries have to do to stop or reverse what we're doing, and have come to conclusion that without a supra-national organisation to drive it, it probably won't happen, or are waiting for the "Genius with a plan" to come along and save us from ourselves.
Then you've got the issue that what's possible on an individual basis becomes problematic when everyone does it. So let's say my wife gets a job at one of the few local businesses - great, I can boast about that. But clearly not everyone who lives in this area can do that as there simply aren't enough local businesses.
If we stop buying stuff - then yay us, we're the good guys. But if everyone stops buying stuff, the economy collapses and millions become destitute. So how do you gradually move the global economy away from material consumption? That's not a simple task, but that's what's needed.
Mrs dB & I do what we can but in reality it doesn't barely scratch the surface, then I'll go to a site for work where they are building a private house with an under ground car park for 12 cars and a dedicated "jet lag" room and realise that even if I gave it all up and lived in a cave we'd still be pissing in the wind. Without government intervention to steer the population in the right direction we are well and truly at the mercy of whatever climate change is going to bring ☹️
Who on here is prepared to make the major lifestyle changes? Almost no one. Are you prepared to give up you car?
Giving up a car is a misnomer - your argument was about it being unsustainable. Anyway - I pretty much have - I do 1500 miles per year (in the 20y old car) and most of that is where it's impractical to do anything else, such as transporting a large amount of things or people from point to point. I purposfully haven't traded this for another EV as the embedded energy required for its creation would never outweight the fuel used on my current car even if I kept it until retirement , given my current mileage. But as for the electric car - why should we? It's sustainable. It was bought SH and will be kept until it physically dies, like to the older car - not to when they're uneconomical to repair, but until they can't be repaired, it's powered by renewable energy and was built from a large amount of recycled material. It's also very efficient - these were the reasons it was bought. My climate impact is largely drive by work, but the work I do more than offsets (by several orders of magnitude) my impact and that, as you continually focus on, was a choice. Still - I do press my management for less physical travel.
My only real concession to luxury/lifestyle with limited consideration for climate is fruit and even that, I do try, but love berries (Straw/Blue/Rasp/Black/Etc).
Why should there be an islands exception? Start of a slippery slope once you say something needs done but…..
I think that there is a balance to be struck here. There are a lot of folk suggesting that rural communities should stop travelling around - basically ending a way of life. Yet few are suggesting that rural housing (a bigger emitter of carbon than the travelling) should be prioritised for super insulation and micro-renewables before cities. Few are suggesting that the food and products we all use, many sourced from rural areas, need to keep being produced and transported to the urban areas where demand is highest. Few are suggesting that renewable energy generation should be as close to large conurbations as possible (balanced against effectiveness) to reduce transmission losses - in fact NIMBYISM would protest a wind turbine proposed in the South Downs, yet happy to scatter them in Wales and Scotland.
So yes, the UK islands and rural areas do need some thought and different approaches - but I don't agree that the transport issue is the biggest issue or easiest to solve.
Again molegrips you make my point. You wont make tbe lifestyle changes needed. You just are not prepared to do so.
This is why i have given up on this. People just pay lip service
Again molegrips you make my point. You wont make tbe lifestyle changes needed. You just are not prepared to do so.
People do not feel in a position to make the changes needed. If you want to talk about me, personally, I've hardly left the bloody house in years, so my transport footprint is pretty low. But this isn't about me, or you, it's about society.
You ignored my points. Why don't you engage properly?
There’s a study which suggests 90% of UK flights are taken by 2% of the population.
Just to clarify, that stat refers to domestic flights only, not all UK flights.
This is why i have given up on this. People just pay lip service
You included. Lots of noise but are unwilling to make the radical change needed. Why is it your so willing to shout about it but not actually do the radical change and just the frivolous stuff round the edges ?
