The Hourglass; Extinction Rebellion’s free newspaper

It assumes the planet should stay in a state fit for human life indefinitely when the reality is human life has only been possible for a tiny fraction of the earth’s life. Humans are the anomaly not the norm

People say this with a sort of defeatist attitude, like we should just down tools and get on with dying as quickly as possible as we were just a blip anyway.

“Humans” have been around for about 2.5 million years, give or take a bit that makes you the 166,667’th generation. With a bit of TLC for the planet I’m sure we can manage a few more generations ey?

The annual UK CO2 output divided by the population gives around 18 million tonnes of CO2 per person

I’m not sure about 18 million tonnes. The first figures I could find (UK emission 2016 from gov.uk) and some back of a fag packet calculations made it closer to 18 tonnes per year.

And the good thing about planting something like an oak tree is that it has the potential to adsorb carbon for hundreds of years after I’m dead.

But trees aren’t just a carbon sink. There’s the wildlife aspect and the effect on local weather patterns. The Near East used to be a lot wetter before it was deforested by humans. Re foresting the UK would be good, but it would be better if we could re-forest semi arid areas as well.

The whole carbon offsetting/CO2 tax is bollocks. Just greenwashing designed to make people feel less guilty about their actions.

People say this with a sort of defeatist attitude, like we should just down tools and get on with dying as quickly as possible as we were just a blip anyway

Strikes me more that it’s live fast die young vs a miserable old age. I guess it depends if you’re in the “it’s way to late anyhow” camp or not.

And the good thing about planting something like an oak tree is that it has the potential to adsorb carbon for hundreds of years after I’m dead.

That’s very true, but it’ll be cut down and used for something, likely before you die, long before it’s absorbed all that carbon you planted it to take care of and probably not long after it’s annual absorption inches over the life time annual average used in the calculations for offsetting.

I’m not sure about 18 million tonnes. The first figures I could find (UK emission 2016 from gov.uk) and some back of a fag packet calculations made it closer to 18 tonnes per year.

Checked my maths. You’re right, fair enough. Still, not sure where all those trees are going to go. They’ll also burying before they rot and release it all again.

For those who think we can’t do anything, or that we can solve this by planting some trees, I recommend reading Sustainable Energy – without the hot air. This concludes that we could, with some radical, but not impossible, changes, become carbon neutral. Here’s his suggestions of different ‘sustainable’ energy mixes that could power the UK:

Have a read of the book to see how he calculates those numbers.

^^where are those suggestions supposed to relate to?

(I’m guessing kWh/d isn’t kiloWatt hour per day as 70 doesn’t fit anything, ofgem has generating capacity at 70gWh in 2004, with household consumption at about 12kWh per day)

^^where are those suggestions supposed to relate to?

The UK. A lot of the power is generated here. The ‘solar in deserts’ is generated in Africa and transmitted to here.

It’s technology what got us in this mess, I blame that idiot who tied a piece of flint to a stick.
Technology will certainly get us deeper in the shit, we’re all personally responsible, unfortunately it’s always someone else’s problem.
There is only two scenarios, economic collapse, war, pestilence, famine and death or extinction.
Happy Valentine’s day.

There is only two scenarios, economic collapse, war, pestilence, famine and death or extinction.

What’s the 2nd?

The ‘solar in deserts’ is generated in Africa and transmitted to here.

Ohhhhh I remember a documentary with Richard prior and John Candy where they strapped outboard motors to an ice berg and sailed it to Africa to solve a drought.

So there you go, we older folk can be prejudiced towards young artists even when we feel sure that we’re being objective.

Death by Mau mau.

Strikes me more that it’s live fast die young vs a miserable old age. I guess it depends if you’re in the “it’s way to late anyhow” camp or not.

Yes, but it’s not going to be you that has a slightly wetter old age (incontinence aside), the problem comes in ~100 years when low lying but massively populated countries like Bangladesh start to become nonviable, or countries with a tropical/maritime climate start experiencing weather related “natural disasters” on a frequent basis.

The whole carbon offsetting/CO2 tax is bollocks. Just greenwashing designed to make people feel less guilty about their actions.

The thing is, it really isn’t. A FTSE 100 company might say it is, because to offset their emissions would cost them a huge amount. But when you divide it by the consumers you get to a level where we’re talking about the tens to hundreds of pounds per person, per year. In the scheme of things, it’s probably about the same as not getting free council tax in February and March. It’s a chunk of cash, but not an unrealistic amount. And that’s only to bridge the gap, once you create that demand (i.e. the carbon credits actually have that real value attached to then) then you stimulate the economy to lower it’s emissions (e.g. a nuclear power station might be expensive, but not £00’s per person per year more expensive).

It’s more that without a solution  all countries are going to agree to and actually cover then there is no point.

It’s more that without a solution all countries are going to agree to and actually cover then there is no point.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism