And if our governments are ineffectual, then we as a society need to take action to rectify that problem. The real question is; how can we achieve that?

By taking political action. It’s literally the only option if our elected representatives fail to do what is in their constituents interests. But you’ve already declared yourself opposed to that. So I ask again, what do you want? What is your magic solution* if people aren’t allowed to take political action to achieve change?

*I suspect I know, but seeing as you’ve declined to say it I’m not gonna put words in your mouth.

I think the benefits of effective home insulation were known long before IB came along.

Disingenuous.

And I doubt most folk have given IB more thought than ‘what a bunch of selfish idiots’ really. 

Doesn’t matter.

The government isn’t talking about their issues or announcing some nationwide scheme to fit insulation to all homes.

“The government is exploring plans to link mortgages to green home improvements by imposing targets for lenders, to help decarbonise the UK’s ageing and leaky housing stock.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/19/mortgages-tied-to-green-home-improvements-considered-by-uk

The only real debate is about how much disruption they’ve caused.

Doesn’t matter.

Basically what we need to do is destroy cash we earn. As it does not matter what you spend it on it will eventually get into the hands of someone who is going to spend it on something that needs carbon burning.

Even if you spend it with a company that has green credentials they will pay some of it to their employees, they are going to buy stuff with it.

it will eventually get into the hands of someone who is going to spend it on something that needs carbon burning.

Which is why this needs macroeconomic structural change. Governments are the only organisations with the power and finance to coordinate and implement that sort of thing. Towards the end of the second world war the allied governments came together at Bretton Woods to design a new financial system which would aid in the effort to rebuild after the war and avoid another great depression. It’s this sort of thing that’s required now, and without it no amount of inidividual action or technological innovation will be enough.

Just what kind of home insulation are IB promulgating?

Is the home insulation something that will be outlawed in 20 years time?

Very few people are daring to contemplate the possibilities of hemp cultivation as a solution to our environmental problems.

So far, I’ve seen no mention on the BBC’s news pages or any discussions about hemp cultivation on the radio.

What if:

a) To improve the habitat for insects, we all stopped mowing our lawns.

b) When we have a haircut, we toss the shorn hair back into the weeds. This will give the birds something to build their nests out of.

c) There’s loads of ‘village green preservation societies’ in the uk. They could easily raise the £536? application fee for a hemp cultivation licence. They could then plant the hemp along the roadsides, etc.

Or we could leave it to the WI could get the ball rolling…

d) the govt should encourage hemp cultivation. Maybe some kind of tax-break or special discount on the DEFRA licence.
For example, there was a bit of a brouhaha down in Peterborough?, with sugar-beet farmers wishing to use nicotine pesticides, and environmentalists saying ‘No’.

I think we’ve got quite enough sugar in this country. (Was the agricultural policy being determined by the whims of the owners of the sugar refinery?)

DEFRA could have encouraged the sugar-beet farmers to grow hemp for a couple of years, thus replenishing the soil after decades of intensive farming.
Easy-Peasy?

e) I think it’s been mentioned, but too much of the urban policy is determined by people who drive to the council offices every day.
We’d need to stipulate that they could only drive to work once every five days.
Only after they have to use public transport would you start to see any real improvements in transport infrastructure.

Sounds like you’re smoking the other type of hemp 😆

Basically what we need to do is destroy cash we earn.

Or do things with it other than spend it on manufactured stuff (or flying). For example, I know that the service industry is much derided, but if we spend our money on gaming, or Netflix instead of material goods, that should allow us to save some energy. And yes, I know that data centres for internet services are a huge problem currently, but that is eminently soluble – see efforts to put DCs in cold places, under the sea, or next to renewable energy sources etc.

My kids started asking to spend their pocket money on in-game purchases and initially I said no, it was a waste of money – but then I realised it was probably significantly better than buying the small plastic toys they had been.

Similarly, instead of flying off to exotic locations we could make UK holidays better. Ok so the weather’s often poor, but there’s no reason we can’t create great experiences with luxury accomodation/glamping and whatnot and quality activities. Fortunately this is starting to happen.

I think it should be possible to reduce at least some of our embedded carbon along these lines.

Re hemp – stoners like to go on about it but really, whilst yes it’s a useful product, it’s not going to solve all our problems. We need thousands of initiatives like that.

As for forcing councils to use PT – that’s the ‘stick’ approach. The ‘carrot’ approach is to fund PT properly in the first place, then it becomes better than driving.

Disingenuous.
Doesn’t matter.
Doesn’t matter.

What a fantastic argument.

“The government is exploring plans to link mortgages to green home improvements by imposing targets for lenders, to help decarbonise the UK’s ageing and leaky housing stock.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/19/mortgages-tied-to-green-home-improvements-considered-by-uk

The problem with not reading an article properly, before posting it to support your own argument, is that you miss really important points such as:

“The government is exploring plans”

Which even an idiot would concede, is a very, very long way from ‘the government is acting on demands by a bunch of people who glued their hands to roads’. And contains problems such as:

“However, there are concerns that discouraging banks from having less energy efficient homes on their mortgage books would risk disadvantaging poorer customers, who could struggle to improve their property’s rating”

Still; if IB ‘protestors’ did the labour for free, that could help a bit, I suppose.

By taking political action. It’s literally the only option if our elected representatives fail to do what is in their constituents interests. But you’ve already declared yourself opposed to that.

I haven’t. You’ve just decided that I have, based on an imagined narrative. I’m all for proper effective action; I’ve been involved in a bit myself. But the action needs to be proportionate and relevant to the issues. Glueing yourself to a road because insulation, is just utterly **** stupid.

Re hemp – stoners like to go on about it

Yes, only ‘stoners’. Enlightened.

But the action needs to be proportionate and relevant to the issues.

So enlighten us then. All you’ve said so far is some airy-fairy bollocks about how WE should all work together. Give us some detail of this great masterplan, I’m sure we’d all like to hear it.

What a fantastic argument.

Thanks.

The problem with not reading an article properly, before posting it to support your own argument, is that you miss really important points such as:

“The government is exploring plans”

Which even an idiot would concede, is a very, very long way from ‘the government is acting on demands by a bunch of people who glued their hands to roads’. And contains problems such as:

“However, there are concerns that discouraging banks from having less energy efficient homes on their mortgage books would risk disadvantaging poorer customers, who could struggle to improve their property’s rating”

Still; if IB ‘protestors’ did the labour for free, that could help a bit, I suppose.

Don’t worry, sneering condescension of every single argument put to you is expected (even though IB are actually and ironically 98% aligned with you).

I love the warmth, generosity, and mutual respect, this thread generates.

I don’t believe you. 😉

What we all need to do is buy insulation, triple glazing, heat pumps, solar panels, more efficient white goods and an electric car or 2.

Anyone else worry that the climate crisis is primarily being used as just another way of selling us stuff?

Anyone else worry that the climate crisis is primarily being used as just another way of selling us stuff?

Unfortunately, as above that’s baked into our way of life. As it is, there are millions of people employed in making stuff that they need to sell us. If we all stopped buying things overnight there’d be a hell of a crisis.

Yes, only ‘stoners’. Enlightened.

I didn’t say ‘only’ stoners, did I? Like I said, it’s a useful crop but it’s not the world saviour. However, stoners and/or hippies seem to focus on it for some reason in my experience.

Re hemp – stoners like to go on about it but really, whilst yes it’s a useful product, it’s not going to solve all our problems. We need thousands of initiatives like that.

When I was working in Romania thats a crop the local farmers grew to make cloth and rope from.

I love the warmth, generosity, and mutual respect, this thread generates.

It’s the irrational rage boiling up in some people, inevitably contributing to climate change. 🙁

So enlighten us then

Maybe when you’ve calmed down and stop imagining things.

I didn’t say ‘only’ stoners, did I? Like I said, it’s a useful crop but it’s not the world saviour. However, stoners and/or hippies seem to focus on it for some reason in my experience.

Why mention ‘stoners’ and ‘hippies’ at all? Hemp has been used by humanity since the dawn of time. For a multitude of reasons. You clearly don’t know very much about the plant species; what we call ‘hemp’ is different to the variety cultivated for use as a drug:

https://www.webmd.com/vitamins/ai/ingredientmono-1605/hemp

https://www.healthline.com/health/hemp-vs-marijuana#marijuana

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashoka/2013/05/29/industrial-hemp-a-win-win-for-the-economy-and-the-environment/?sh=63e74faa289b

It’s worth learning about this amazing, extremely versatile plant.

Maybe when you’ve calmed down and stop imagining things.

Such a tease – “I believe that the only way to progress is for we as a society to take action to rectify the problem (apart from IB) but I refuse to elucidate unless you all speak nicely to me”.

Does anyone know what happened to Range Rover driving Karen? Was she charged for her driving, her lack of tax or her bald tyre?

The mental health specialist and entrepreneur? Don’t think so, just sold her story of being a victim to the gammon press and made a rakeload, I think.

So; using a sexist slur against the driver is ok? Or is there a male equivalent of ‘Karen’?

Does anyone know what happened (to the driver)…?

Her own slot on GBeebies?

As well as being an outstanding carbon-sink and nitrogen-fixer, hemp is also a great source of nutrients.

Most of the Amazonian farming is to grow soy beans to supply Chinese pig farmers.
The Chinese aren’t going to give up pork in a hurry.

If we could grow more hemp, we could sell it to the Chinese pig farmers and reverse the Amazonian deforestation.

When the hemp stalks pass through the pigs, they aren’t completely digested.
The resulting pulpy, fibrous slurry can make an excellent cavity wall insulator.

When we’re done with covid, food security is going to be the next big thing.
As the world powers try to re-jig the food supply, it’s going to get tight…like being squeezed through the backside of a rhinoceros.

So; using a sexist slur against the driver is ok? Or is there a male equivalent of ‘Karen’?

Kevin.

I thought Karen was a slur against racists?

Didn’t it originate from African-American community?

Which is why this needs macroeconomic structural change. Governments are the only organisations with the power and finance to coordinate and implement that sort of thing.

@dazh I’ve recommended Kim Stanley Robinson’s book The Ministry for the Future on another thread. Yes, it’s a Sci-Fi novel but he’s no ordinary novelist.

I won’t regurgitate, except to say it takes the idea that all the COPs fail and a global ministry is created to take responsibility for human survival on Earth. It looks at a range of ideas, economic, political, technological, climate terrorism, in quite a lot detail. Well worth reading IMHO.

Here’s a review, there’s heaps more:
https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/book-review-ministry-future

From the final paragraph of that review:

” Early in the novel, one character voices the familiar quip that it is easier to imagine the end of the world than to imagine the end of capitalism. By the end, I concluded that Robinson’s mission was to undo this joke: the purpose of The Ministry for the Future is to make a post-capitalist world order seem not just plausible and realistic, but overwhelmingly beneficial for humanity and the planet. It’s just that, for readers who aren’t trained in economics and monetary theory, it will be very difficult to judge if Robinson has succeeded.”

I thought Karen was a slur against racists?

Nah, it’s always been about entitled whining middle class women.

I always thought of them as Sheila’s (of Broflovski fame) but Australia obviously called dibs on that.

Nah, it’s always been about entitled whining middle class women.

And that was my point. It’s a term that is used only towards women; ergo, it is sexist. And I thought we’d done that issue some weeks ago?

I thought Karen was a slur against racists?

It was originally, yes.

I’ve recommended Kim Stanley Robinson’s book The Ministry for the Future on another thread. Yes, it’s a Sci-Fi novel but he’s no ordinary novelist.

Thanks I’ll have a look at that. The only viable solution to climate change and other problems is some form post-capitalist economy. It doesn’t take a mathematician to work out that exponential economic growth is not a good idea. We’re already approaching the limits of what the planet can sustain, so the options in front of us are fairly simple. Either we find a way to reorganise society based on zero or negative economic growth, or we face economic collapse and chaos.

Someone on the sleaze thread said the public want an ‘aspirational’ government because they themselves are aspirational. The trouble with that is that aspirational means being privately rich, and that is an idea pushed on us by the already privately rich via the media and popular culture. We need to change that narrative so that we see the rich as the parasites which they undoubtedly are. Until we understand this as a society then nothing will change.

And that was my point. It’s a term that is used only towards women; ergo, it is sexist.

Ah, that old bollocks. If it refers to a woman it’s sexist.

It reminds me of a particularly moronic comment Jeremy Corbyn once made when he claimed that the term “stupid woman” was sexist and misogynist. Which obviously means that the term “stupid man” is acceptable.

It’s nonsense like that which alienates people from genuine issues. It simply pisses them off. Then they wonder why no one is listening.

It reminds me of a particularly moronic comment Jeremy Corbyn once made when he claimed that the term “stupid woman” was sexist and misogynist.

No. He called Theresa May a stupid woman. It was others that claimed he was being sexist and misogynist.

No. He called Theresa May a stupid woman. It was others that claimed he was being sexist and misogynist.

Nope. He vehemently denied that he called Theresa May a “stupid woman”. In response to the accusation he said “I would never make a sexist or misogynist comment”.

Idiot. It would have been far better if he had admitted to saying it, even if he hadn’t, by claiming “yeah that’s right, I think she’s stupid”.

Instead of his ultra politically correct middle-class liberal “kinder type of politics” bollocks. No wonder they were able to wipe the floor with him.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46619689

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has denied calling Theresa May a “stupid woman” during Prime Minister’s Questions.

He was asked to make a statement to MPs after facing Tory calls to apologise for the alleged insult.

Mr Corbyn said he was “opposed to the use of sexist and misogynist language in any form” and insisted he had actually said “stupid people”.

I thought Karen was a slur against racists?

Nah, it’s always been about entitled whining middle class women.

It’s so confusing, I don’t know whether to be offended or not.

If you aren’t sure it is probably best to be offended.

Just in case you should be.

Amendment 319C criminalises “wilful obstruction of a highway”.

Amendment 319D criminalises the obstruction of “major transport works”, including roads, rail lines or airport runways.

Amendment 319A creates an offence of “locking on”, or carrying equipment which might facilitate it. It targets anyone who attaches themselves to “a person, to an object or to land”.

These all come with a potential 51 week prison sentence. In fact, this penalty is plastered all over the legislation.

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/priti-patel-anti-protest-powers-stuffed-policing-bill-1316830

Amendment 319C criminalises “wilful obstruction of a highway”.

Amendment 319D criminalises the obstruction of “major transport works”, including roads, rail lines or airport runways.

Amendment 319A creates an offence of “locking on”, or carrying equipment which might facilitate it. It targets anyone who attaches themselves to “a person, to an object or to land”.

These all come with a potential 51 week prison sentence. In fact, this penalty is plastered all over the legislation.

Excellent.

Did’t our Prime Minister promise to obstruct construction of an airport runway?

Anyway, this pattern of criminalising more and more forms of protest won’t end well.