It’s a seemingly disorganised group, looking to belong to a protest

I think  you are talking about XR and that’s what they are – a protest group.  Their view seems to be that there are other groups doing the various nature, climates, what you can change personally things and that is not their niche.  As I understand it their central message is to get goverments to take climate change seriously and be top of every agenda rather than advocating for one particular solution or action

other groups are available 🙂

It’s alright for a bunch of quite well off people on a bike forum (you are well off if you can afford a £500 bike) to lecture what other people should be doing about climate change but there are millions of people who don’t care.

They don’t care not because they don’t believe in climate change, or can’t be bothered to do anything, they just worry about keeping their job, getting to the end of the week, caring for their kids, keeping the house warm, buying enough food. It’s not something they think about, and even if they do it’s a load of rich peoples problems. When you are in a life situation where your forward planning at w stretch is a month ahead the 2050 climate targets may as well be from outer space.

And the people in this situation are very rich compared to the vast majority in the world who live much poorer lives than everyone in this country.

to lecture what other people should be doing about climate change

Exactly, we shouldn’t be doing that.  We should be focusing on doing everything that WE can as well as getting the government to do everything that THEY can.  Whataboutery is a waste of time now

And the people in this situation are very rich compared to the vast majority in the world who live much poorer lives than everyone in this country.

Yes.  This is why we need our governent to take action now.  Poorer countries will be the first to be **** so we need to be making change ourselves first rather than waiting for them to get on with it

If we needed an effective UN it is now but that is never going to happen

Rather than demanding people are forced to comply you should put your energy into developing better technology.

I’ll buy a nuclear car if you make it better value than my diesel. I’ll buy solar if someone comes up with a technology with a better return on investment. I’ll stop my quarterly trek to London if someone comes up with decent VR.

Negative campaigning will never work. We need better shit. And less people.

How about sex androids?

Rather than demanding people are forced to comply you should put your energy into developing better technology.

Both is also an option.  Not sure there is time to design and deploy new technology.  Time is against us

Curing ageing. That’s where we should put the effort.

If I wasn’t planning on being dead shortly I’d look at things rather differently.

I’ll buy a nuclear car if you make it better value than my diesel. I’ll buy solar if someone comes up with a technology with a better return on investment. I’ll stop my quarterly trek to London if someone comes up with decent VR.

I know you’re being glib, but it’s this attitude that is the problem.

It doesn’t need to be “I’ll stop using diesel when a better cheaper solution comes along” , its has to be “I’ll stop using diesel now, work around the changes that will bring, and maybe in the future be able to go back to how things are now but with clean energy”.

I work from home, so what I drive is irrelevant, but give me something better and I’ll buy it. It does have to be better though. Trying to sell something that is worse will only appeal to the virtue signalling rich.

If they can, then fair enough. More tax. Then what, spend the new found revenue on extra jollies for the mayor to that twinned town in Brazil?

And this is an example of why it’s so depressing reading this sort of thread.

And this is an example of why it’s so depressing reading this sort of thread.

Come up with actual solutions then. Making people’s life worse for, at best, insignificant results isn’t a winner.

I’d be happy with extinction if it shut that mouthy **** 5thelefant up.

I find the concept of XR wholly self indulgent. As I understand it their focus is saving the human race (or it’s place on the planet at least). Not about the planet per se.

Why not take it a step further. Accept that the human system is unviable and make it clear to people that they can do what they want but have to accept the consequences – extinction.

Fatalistic environmentalism.

Population reduction is the only way.

Look at whats happened from 1950 to present
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-population-by-world-regions-post-1820

<satire> boomers really have f’ed up everything </satire>

but look at the regions. Simplistically, its india/china, followed by africa; not us in europe and america who have got themselves from rural subsidence farming to urban living and working in secondary and increasingly tertiary industry, with the resulting increase in life expectancy within one persons lifetime.

We need to be helping them to not make the same mistakes we did 50 or 100 years before, rather than exploiting them as the global ghetto of cheap labour and produce like we are currently.
How to do this without being a post-colonial condescending hypocritical arsehole, I have no idea.

Here’s the prediction in the decrease in population growth.
https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2013/05/Updated-World-Population-Growth-Rate-Annual-1950-2100.png
Its a decrease in growth (based on UN predictions), but still not a decrease in population.

Fatalistic environmentalism.

Probably responded with an indifferent shrug or “someone will invent something”

I care, a lot. The more I learn about it the more I realise we have left things way too late. Sadly people are lazy (me included) and don’t want to change their comfy lifestyles that they’re used to, I’ve done virtually everything I can to reduce I’m footprint, I just need to ditch the car and make the step from being a veggie to vegan.

It’s clear many will only act in (perceived) self interest.

Recent elections have seen big data/analytics/click bait fake news/micro targeted ads weaponized to serve the baddies.

Even ignoring climate change, the growth in SUV sales and car use in general is already pushing me to action. Air quality and noise near big roads, jams on narrow streets that you can’t even cycle past, parents clogging up roads near schools waiting for their obese kid, …

I might try writing a Twitter/Facebook bot to convince people that cycling instead of driving can be fun and healthy.

Question to all.

Does volcano eruptions contribute to global warming?

Bear in mind there are so many volcanos constantly spewing toxic fume at a slow rate but in large amount.

How does that compare to human generated fume?

Remember the theory that dinosaur was wiped out by volcano eruptions causing the weather to change?

Does that make sense?

I care

Does volcano eruptions contribute to global warming?

Bear in mind there are so many volcanos constantly spewing toxic fume at a slow rate but in large amount.

How does that compare to human generated fume?

Remember the theory that dinosaur was wiped out by volcano eruptions causing the weather to change?

Does that make sense?

Seems Krakatoa (1883) had the opposite effect:

There was a lasting effect on the world’s climate, too: aerosols emitted into the atmosphere by the blast led global air temperatures to drop by as much as 2.2 degrees Fahrenheit (1.2 degrees Celsius). According to a 2006 article in the journal Nature, the volcano caused oceans to cool for as much as a century, offsetting the effect of human activity on ocean temperatures. If the volcano had not erupted, the authors argue, our sea levels might be much higher than they are today.

@chewk – admirable whataboutery, let me check that for you.

This argument that human-caused carbon emissions are merely a drop in the bucket compared to greenhouse gases generated by volcanoes has been making its way around the rumor mill for years. And while it may sound plausible, the science just doesn’t back it up.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 billion tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide. Despite the arguments to the contrary, the facts speak for themselves: Greenhouse gas emissions from volcanoes comprise less than one percent of those generated by today’s human endeavors.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earthtalks-volcanoes-or-humans/

A bot should be dealing with questions like this 🙁

Does volcano eruptions contribute to global warming?

Yes they do, to a greater or lesser extent. The Mount St Helens eruption in the 80s proved the early climate change modeling as the worlds climate reacted exactly as the models predicted it would.

But at the moment, the scientific consensus seems to be that they are not as significant a factor as man made pollution, and it would take a considerable increase in volcanic activity to drive us towards a mass extinction event, but not reversing man made pollution is going to guarantee it.

A bot should be dealing with questions like this

A bot dealing with a bot? Nice idea.  I suspect we would would move a bit faster on this stuff without the trolls having their bit of fun.  In general though whataboutery is a real problem as thinking there is a bigger problem elsewhere let’s us off the hook

Right now we need to be doing it all and then some.  This isn’t like an election where if it goes wrong someone can reverse that decision further down the line.  One chance and we should really have started properly some time ago

I cared, still do but to a lesser degree since the GE result has shown that people generally aren’t that bothered about the sort of world their offspring’ll inherit. They’d rather get some arbitrary short-term goal completed and worry about the important shit later when it’s already too late. Meh. I’m enjoying not feeling monumentally guilty about owning a (low powered, admittedly) classic-ish motorcycle now, I genuinely feel like a weight’s been lifted off my shoulders.

For what it’s worth, we’re still mostly veggie and walk or cycle to the shops and stuff. I haven’t been on an aeroplane since 2002 (I think) and my OH has never been abroad. Unfortunately our (me and my OH) responsible bits are offset by the idiots queuing at the local McD’s drive through for plastic-wrapped shit burgers.

**** it. We’re doing what we can but not to the detriment of our mental health. I was losing sleep over this shit FFS.

#entropy #heatdeath

Kevin Anderson who is a Professor of Energy and Climate Change at the University of Manchester gives an honest assessment of where he thinks we’re at and what we need to do – worth a watch and sharing:

Watch here:

Keypoints:

• Legacy of not caring about the next generation
• Governments are deluding themselves (being ‘creative’ with the emissions reduction numbers – look far better than they actually are)
• Governments relying on tech solutions that don’t exist yet (carbon capture/negative emissions) to make their figures work
• We know what we need to do to reduce impacts (we are just not doing it)
• Greenwashing – business as usual can continue with some green tweaks – this is what we are being sold by the establishment
• All wealthy parts of the world only have 9 years at current emissions left, if we want to stick to Paris commitment.
• UK would need to reduce it’s emissions by 70 – 80% by 2030 to stay below 1.5 degrees
• 50% of global carbon dioxide emissions come from 10% of the global population
• Fundamental change in lifestyle of the to 10% – 20% is required (No more large houses, holiday homes, prestige cars, first class flights, fewer consumer goods).

Can i just ask a pertinent Q.
What exactly, that exists on this planet, actually causes the most problems regarding climate change. CO2, greenhouse gas, whatever. ?

Human beings. There are far too many of us fighting (literally) over resources. I think I read that the planet could reasonably be expected to sustain (and not be consumed/destroyed in the process) around 1 million humans. To paraphrase Guy Martin, the job’s ****, chief.

edit- oh, and capitalism.

Humans +7.8 billion

Humans, far too many of us on the planet and far too many of us consuming goods.

As I understand it, any gas made of differing atoms, CO2, Methane CH4, Sulphur Hexaflouride (SF6) are green house gases.  I think the bond between the atoms is the energy absorber bit (any clever bods care to correct me).   Methane is more absorbing gas than CO2 and SF6 is orders of magnitude worse than both but so far there is comparatively little in the atmosphere but its very persistent and as more 80’s/90’s/00’s vintage HV electrical switchgear is decommissioned more will escape.

Methane levels will increase dramatically as the tundra permafrost melts and the old frozen vegetation starts decomposing, also if the ocean temperature rises on certain bits of the continental shelf ridge bottoms the methane hydrates trapped by low temps and high pressure could degas and there are many millions of tonnes down there.

Volcanoes can warm and cool as the the CO2 emitted acts as a energy trap and the fine particulates that get lofted into the upper atmosphere in BIG eruptions acts as a sunshine reflector so cooling.

Well said Kayla & Houns.
So why do we keep reproducing what is killing the planet, in the numbers we do?
Doesn’t matter how ‘green’ you bring up your sprogs, we all have a carbon footprint. SO when you think you might have a bigger family, think again eh?

Doesn’t matter how ‘green’ you bring up your sprogs, we all have a carbon footprint.

It does matter. Compare the carbon footprint of the 1% of richest people with the 1% of poorest people. The idea the the poor shouldn’t have kids to mitigate the impact of people with Learjets is as old as the hills. It’s the “why seriously change how we do things, the real problem is other people having kids” meme.

@twowheels

@chewk – admirable whataboutery, let me check that for you.

This argument that human-caused carbon emissions are merely a drop in the bucket compared to greenhouse gases generated by volcanoes has been making its way around the rumor mill for years. And while it may sound plausible, the science just doesn’t back it up.

Now your assumption is that I have heard the rumour but the truth is I have never heard of that at all. I asked because of the Ring of Fire in my region as there are many volcanoes waiting to erupt in near future. Including the largest of them all in my home town as we have earthquakes in the recent years.

Me. If we all do our bit we can do a lot mor ethan our respective governements. If you start to do things it will influence people around you too. I’ve been inspired by others and hope to inspire. When people visit and see what you’ve done it gives them ideas. When they hear that you use BlaBlaCar or Flixbus, and avoid flying they start to consider the possibility too. When you’re happy with your electric car someone from a company makes enquiries about including electric vehicles in their fleet. It’s a cultural thing and that will reduce emissions as much as anything our goverments will do.

Me. If we all do our bit we can do a lot mor ethan our respective governements. If you start to do things it will influence people around you too. I’ve been inspired by others and hope to inspire. When people visit and see what you’ve done it gives them ideas. When they hear that you use BlaBlaCar or Flixbus, and avoid flying they start to consider the possibility too. When you’re happy with your electric car someone from a company makes enquiries about including electric vehicles in their fleet. It’s a cultural thing and that will reduce emissions as much as anything our goverments will do.

Shite from start to finish. As a species, humans in the west are keen to rape the planet. Other parts of the planet are doing it on our behalf. I include myself in this. I am just back from a meal out in Edinburgh. I see it more so at Xmas. Every little thing that we in the first world consider a necessity is something that people in some parts of the world can consider a pipe dream. Our consumerism blinds us to how much we require to keep it going. There are people on the planet that wake up with a belief that surviving the day is a success not far removed from finding food and water similar to animals. Our wish for more efficient loft insulation or a reduction of 20 to 5 flights a year ring hollow. I say this typing into a smart phone whilst watching a Hollywood film on a 40 inch TV with a spaghetti junction of power cables behind the TV for a printer, xmas tree lights, xbox 360, tv box, Wifi box, Nintendo wii and a stereo. Is anyone else’s tv area much different?

Who knew?

SUVs were the second largest contributor to the increase in global carbon emissions from 2010 to 2018

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2019/oct/25/suvs-second-biggest-cause-of-emissions-rise-figures-reveal

@chewkw – indeed I did assume that and having seen how other threads have degenerated have decided to apologise.

I am serious about building a bot though 🙂

It’s funny how eco-warriors have taken on many of the most negative aspects of religion: asceticism (I must restrict myself from these terrible pleasures, such as cars, heating and ample food); eschatology (the world’s going to end in an inferno); and mortification (I must suffer for my sins against the environment).

If people could avoid relentlessly pursuing this sort of cultish proselytising and instead focused on solutions that didn’t involve taking society back to pre-industrial levels of development then we’d be in a much better situation.

Technology has repeatedly been able to solve humanity’s problems, yet is viewed in the most pessimistic light by most eco types. If you don’t accept this, consider, like an MP did in the late Victorian era, just how many horses the population of London would now require had the internal combustion engine not been invented and productionised. Let’s just say the streets would not have smelt good. Ultimately, a technology that the Victorians hadn’t even foreseen circumvented a prospective problem.

This is just one example of hundreds where technology has provided a solution to a seemingly impossible problem. It is worth remembering, in all this self-flaggelation, that human beings are nothing if not ingenious, especially when there is necessity involved.

But then, I’m an optimist, unlike all the doomsday members on here, who, presumably were building bunkers in the 80s to protect themselves from the cause du jour back then.

JP

Shite from start to finish.

Athray continues to work hard in his critical thinking lessons. Despite his efforts his recent work shows that he is handicapped by a poor of grasp of the fundamentals of this subject. Unless rectified he will continue to obtain results below his potential.

Do you take pride in being insultingly dismissive? As much pride as you take in maxing out your carbon footprint?

Technology has repeatedly been able to solve humanity’s problems, yet is viewed in the most pessimistic light by most eco types.

Most ‘eco types’ I know are very much in favour of advancing and utilising technology to move us away from unnecessary commutes, and getting our energy from sources other than burning stuff.

I don’t think it’s a question of being a doomsday member; it’s more the recognition of the increasingly likelihood that we are utterly ****. For all the well meaning intentions of individuals (which is absolutely not deriding the importance of individual action) en masse, humans are self-serving and wilfully ignorant. And as long as the voters are self serving and willfully ignorant, then governments will follow suit.

Personally, the issue fills me with complete dread. I have 2 young children and my heart aches at the thought of the the state of the world we will hand over to them. But as someone else posted above, I cannot stand by and do nothing (even if I believe my actions are futile) yet look my kids in the face and plead ignorance.

Er, the streets of london do not smell good, in fact they are poisonous and inefficient.

yay for technological solutions.. I think I would rather smell horseshit than have to listen to it.