1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Have Environment Issues Caused a Change in Your Behaviour?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Edrof, Sep 6, 2019.

  1. adidan

    Hitman

    Joined: Aug 26, 2018

    Posts: 614

    Location: Outside your house

    My parents didn't even install a shower until i left home.

    Bath night was Sunday.

    I rest my walking cane.
     
  2. vanillaface

    Hitman

    Joined: Jul 18, 2010

    Posts: 538

    I decided not to use renewable energy because of the toxic lakes being created in China due to the manufacture of enormous magnets from rare Earth metals.
     
  3. Roar87

    Soldato

    Joined: May 10, 2012

    Posts: 5,874

    Location: Leeds

    I went to Florida a few years back and realised the insignificance of what we do in this country
     
  4. plasmahal

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Feb 5, 2006

    Posts: 2,242

    And listening to the charts. :)
     
  5. Puzzled

    Soldato

    Joined: Jul 9, 2003

    Posts: 6,242

    The scale of protests world wide was impressive and its good that the message is getting across to governments that the upcoming voter base will expect change but some of the comments made by parents and children on the news last night were bordering on hysterical.

    One mum said she can't look her kids in the eye about what the future holds and several kids seemed to have the impression that the world was going to end in the near future if change didn't happen now. That can't be a healthy outlook for children and psychologists are already warning about the effect of eco-anxiety:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/he...rn-against-eco-anxiety-in-children/ar-AAHr5OW

    Sure change things in your control for the better but let kids be kids and not have the fate of the world on their minds at 5 years old.
     
  6. Rroff

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 13, 2006

    Posts: 65,760

    Something else that bothers me is that a good number of activists have a very set opinion of what needs to be done and won't deviate from it or accept anything else even if someone proves another approach is better or that what they are asking is actually detrimental. If you aren't onboard with exactly what they think we should be doing you are the enemy.
     
  7. azazl187

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jan 19, 2010

    Posts: 2,277

    I'm a carpenter. I need a van to ferry my tools around
     
  8. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 22,930

    Well when all the evidence points increasingly towards unknown qualities hastening the extremities of climate change and weather events (the scientists involved are themselves becoming depressed at the lack of movement from governments and at the data that just gets worse and worse), absolutism is entirely justified, especially against a group of people who seem to want to ignore everything as an "opinion".

    Should have done something decades ago, now it's likely too late and eco-terrorism will be very much on the cards, regardless if you think it's illogical or self-defeating (when is it ever not so?)... I would say, that this ultimately what people wanted, the detractors want the concerned to be violent so they can shift their pointless "war on terror" to civilians with a desire to not die of starvation, lack of water, increasing inequality and whatever other reason might be of note.

    We're already set for zero global growth by the end of the century, ignoring terrorism, now what happens when the ME explodes (lack of water, lack of food, increasingly savaged by authoritarians) and Western refineries are bomb targets? Inflation in the 70s might have been awful, nothing like what's about to happen.

    Humans aren't rational by nature, so complaining about this isn't going to change the course we're on, only action will, a lack of action from supposed leaders, will only engender action in vigilantes who feel there's nothing in the future if they don't act now. They have nothing to lose.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2019
  9. Rroff

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 13, 2006

    Posts: 65,760

    Problem is modern working patterns and environment don't accommodate it even if the individual wants to adjust to make more efficient use of vehicles. I was talking to someone the other day who was adamant for environmental reasons we should legally have a cap of 2 vehicles max per household - doesn't work in the real world (unless there is a huge shift in society and business).

    Not in the face of evidence otherwise however.

    I see your point but I don't consider it healthy or productive - that kind of attitude might save us from this disaster (not that I think it will) but ultimately if the human race can't move on from that consciousness it is ultimately doomed any how.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2019
  10. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 22,930

    If we can choose not to nuke ourselves, i think we can choose not to starve.
     
  11. ubersonic

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 26, 2009

    Posts: 20,675

    The funniest thing about it all is, the entire reason we are currently in this mess is because of governments listening to irate environmentalists in the goddamn first place. If it wasn't for environmentalists we would already have given up using fossil fuels to generate power in the UK and our renewables would be a lot more viable. But as usual they shout and shout about what they don't want while only offering pie in the sky ideas for alternatives and the politicians try their best to appease them.

    Back in the late 80's and early to mid 90's the environmentalists whined and whined about our nuclear power programs because they didn't understand the fundamental differences between the type we used and the type the USSR used, as a result the Blair government cancelled not just the nuclear power program but the accompanying pumped storage program. If that hadn't happened then today we would have no coal/gas power stations still in service (replaced by cleaner/cheaper/more efficient modern nuclear power plants), the current nuclear power stations would have been decommissioned years ago (as opposed to having their lifespans extended due to lack of replacements) and our wind and solar power networks would be X times more effective as they would be able to contribute to the pumped storage network.

    The kicker is it's going to get even worse before it gets better as the existing nuclear plants cannot be extended indefinitely and when they are taken off like there will need to be additional coal/gas power brought on line to make up the shortfall lol.
     
  12. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 22,930

    I think you're making the mistake of lumping people together here, it's accurate, but still. Also this is another case of government's failing to educate people, they'd rather give up and electioneer than do the right thing.

    Certainly wouldn't blame it all on the cold war hippies.
     
  13. Rroff

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 13, 2006

    Posts: 65,760

    The worrying thing in that context is, and a lot of the reason Fukushima ended up the disaster it was, properly designed and ran nuclear power stations are actually incredibly safe - it is when they are extended beyond their original design lifespan and chances taken on how long they can push materials, etc. that they become incredibly risky to the environment.

    Dealing with spent fuel is another consideration though.
     
  14. teaboy5

    Soldato

    Joined: Jan 12, 2006

    Posts: 5,421

    Location: NI

    Always thinking on the positive side! Reading some of your posts on the subject is like reading the climate section on reddit, which is full of people just repeating "We are all dead". If there is one thing normal folk wont want to hear is that they and their kids are doomed. They will simply reject the person as a "Nutter".

    I do think we will see our current lifestyle change in the years to come, but jesus we will not all be killed due to climate change. Now folks in the 3rd world might be in some serious trouble which is going to create millions of climate refugees
     
  15. vanillaface

    Hitman

    Joined: Jul 18, 2010

    Posts: 538

    This climate emergency thing is a scam, and frightening kids half to death because of it is a form of child abuse. Never, ever, let socialists or globalists near your kids.

    If you're old enough to remember, then think about the "acid rain" scam and how it was used to persuade the Swedish people to adopt nuclear power when they didn't want it.
    Because of its success, various environmental fear scams have arisen to get the easily led to support whatever it is that "they" want them to support.
     
  16. adidan

    Hitman

    Joined: Aug 26, 2018

    Posts: 614

    Location: Outside your house

    Yeah, no it's not.

    Oh unless you want to ignore science then yes it is.
     
  17. Judgeneo

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 15, 2010

    Posts: 10,013

    Location: Out of Coventry

    When my car lease expires in a couple of years I'll probably go electric as the technology seems to be pretty decent these days. I went vegan around a year ago, for animal wellbeing reasons but that helps the environment too I guess.

    But not a lot else really, I remember to recycle most of the time... What else can be done?

    Lowering consumption just isn't going to cut it, we need to find ways to improve the environment without sacrificing human wellbeing and economic growth.
     
  18. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 22,930

    We're going to have to sacrifice at some point, better to do it soon rather than when the economic drag is -3%, the average global growth has been around 3% for decades, ignoring blips.

    So what you're really sacrificing in trying to be "measured" is exactly the thing you wish not to, they are becoming mutually exclusive with every moment.

    Compassionate as ever, we may not be dead, but what do you think will be the policies in a world where entire regions are uninhabitable and hundreds of millions of people are at the gates of the privileged?

    I don't see anyone moaning about Snoopers charter anymore, even though it's confirmed to have allowed the use of citizens data seemingly unabated with little recourse. Government has tried awfully to keep China in line... wonder why that is? Couldn't have anything to do with it's near perfect digital autocracy, administered handily by it's own people against themselves.

    We may not be killed, but some people will, that could very well be you, me or literally anyone, terrorism doesn't much care for people, it cares for goals and don't fool yourself into thinking that it's anything like religious extremism, it's an entirely different ball game when the goal, rightly or wrongly, is to save humanity from itself. Keep being foolish if you wish, i wont and neither will the people at the top.

    We're in the perfect storm, because people keep thinking it will be OK, well it ******* isn't, we're losing our antibiotics, water scarcity is increasing by the day, fish stocks are likely to completely disappear by 2050, the inevitable nuclear terrorist is still absent, every recession is going to create reactionaries worse than the last, the judiciaries are untrusted, the police are untrusted, the government is untrusted.

    I couldn't have imagined such a future 20 years ago, but i wont lie to myself now just to be fake-happy, i'd rather be able to survive the worst, regardless of how tame it could all very well be which is obviously what i'd hope, but hope is not a survival instinct. Maybe it's all depressing, but i don't really care if it is, it's simply a matter of being ready for outcomes, even regardless of compassion, this is purely selfish.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2019
  19. Destination

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 31, 2009

    Posts: 19,461

    When cars hit a range of 400 miles or so, then everyone will start making the shift.
    Also they need to state what is to be done with old batteries, and how much of the car can be reused, rehoused, recycled, when the ten years is up.
     
  20. Judgeneo

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 15, 2010

    Posts: 10,013

    Location: Out of Coventry

    Economic drag that is high enough to lead us to stagnation is pretty severe. Populuces that don't experience increases in individual wellbeing very often become unstable - fast. There must be ways to lessen our climate impact without such effects. I'd recommend starting by removing fossil fuel subsidies to let market forces seek out lower emission productions methods for instance.

    Yes we need to figure out batteries, but 400 miles is high, when do you do more than 200m miles in a single day? Very rarely for me, so I'd just do my daily mileage and then plug in at home/work. The most I've ever done in a day is 720 miles, if I was driving a model 3 (the car I'm currently thinking of getting unless something better value appears when my lease comes up), then I'd need 2-3 rapid (30m) charges to charge it enough to last the distance, and I stopped about that many times near charging points on that journey as it was just to dose up on caffeine. The cost is a little high at the moment, but that should drop soon and I see many people switching over.