"Just stop oil"

[adidan]

Does being an old duffer preclude them from being treated the same as the young'uns? Fling them in too I say. A bit more gently though, don't want to break their hips.

I just asked the question.

 

[Diddums]

I just asked the question.

Well, the answer for me then is no. No it does not.

 

[JonRGV250]

a lot of them in recent tweets in here look like somebody's gran or grandad in comfortable slacks rather than hippies.

You want to throw some old timers into the Thames?

Absolutely.
Maybe fill their pockets with a few bars of soap first though.

 

[adidan]

Well, the answer for me then is no. No it does not.

I didn't ask your question.

Absolutely.
Maybe fill their pockets with a few bars of soap first though.

Thanks for answering.

Ok big lads, if one of you films the other one doing it it'll be good for the evidence trail

 

[b0rn2sk8]

To be fair he was being a bit aggressive/heavy handed but I agree it's overall a terrible look for the police.

He went well past the line and in the police defence, violent crime trumps peaceful but annoying protests.

There was what 3 or 4 of them in the video and at least twice as many protestors. It’s not like they could dismantle it with the resources they had there.

Not only that it was a completely disproportionate response. They were in London, do a U-turn and go down a different street, it’s not like there isn’t a maze of streets they could have gone down.

 

[JonRGV250]

They were in London, do a U-turn and go down a different street, it’s not like there isn’t a maze of streets they could have gone down.

They were blocking traffic at Blackfriars bridge, I'm sure a detour wouldn't been that easy?

 

[b0rn2sk8]

They were blocking traffic at Blackfriars bridge, I'm sure a detour wouldn't been that easy?

So what you lose 20-25 mins going up to the next bridge. Easier than dealing with the consequences of assaulting 2-3 people while literally stood in front of 3-4 police officers.

What did he honestly think he get, a pat on the back?

 

[m4rmite]

Forgive me for posting a daily fail link, i come across it somewhere else but can't remember where

While British cops do nothing, German police raid protester properties

Police deployed 170 officers across seven of Germany's federal states to search 15 properties as part of an investigation into protests by climate activist group the Letzte Generation.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[JonRGV250]

I don't think he got charged with anything?
I can't blame him one bit, and at some point someone may do something much worse that he did.
People just want to get to work/get on with their lives without being inconvenienced by these delusional fruit loops.

 

[JonRGV250]

How it should be done..

https://twitter.com/x/status/1660905784115441664

 

[Maple Leaf]

That's part of the point that seemed to be totally missed. These places have people living in real poverty and not only does the average citizen in say India emit far far less but the very poorest are going to be emitting very little at all, those are the people who will be hit the hardest initially, quite possibly within our lifetimes in some Indian cities.

Yes, the poorest in the worst affected countries will be hit the hardest by global warming. I see nothing positive about that either. Those that have emitted the most CO2 and their offspring will be able to afford properly insulated homes and air conditioning.

I don’t really get the narrative that developing countries will just turn to burning enormous amounts of coil and oil (which is typically imported).

Why would developing countries want to build huge fossil fuel power stations which need a huge amount of centralised infrastructure and imported expensive fuel when they can deploy renewables for much less?

Many of them produce the coal, gas and oil themselves so they don't need to import it. For example, South Africa still generates 93% of its electricity from its coal, Nigeria generates 80% of its power from its gas and most of the remainder comes from its oil. Vietnam gets 50% of it energy from its coal and 22% from oil.

Any developing country would much prefer to use its own natural resources to generate power and keep its own people in fairly well paid work rather than have to buy expensive high-technology from abroad to construct a sophisticated energy grid based around renewables and energy storage systems/baseload nuclear. We have failed to do the latter in this country despite being wealthy and being very early adopters of nuclear energy. If renewables are so much cheaper and easier to implement then why is the USA still emitting over 5 billion tonnes of CO2 a year, down only 18.4% since its peak emission year in 2007?

I hate to tell you, but Russia could benefit from global warming. They have vast areas of currently unusable land in Siberia, that will become useable when things warm up a bit. Sure, eventually we will all die, but in the meantime Russia could end up with one of the few places in the world that is habitable.

Yes, I am aware of that attitude within the Russian establishment. The idea that a psychopath like Vladimir Putin, who invades peaceful neighbouring countries simply because he desires more territory, would try to phase out the fossil fuel industry (which is the cornerstone of Russia's economy) is idiotic. Of course, Russia will continue to churn out fossil fuels for domestic use and export without a care in the world.

Protesting that pees off the public typically has that effect.

The public were apathetic before the protests began too. I don't approve of these protest methods, but I see why people resort to them as nice polite peaceful protests by environmentalists just don't get reported on by the media in this country. However, you would have to be pretty silly to disapprove of government action to insulate poor people's houses properly just because some OAPs glued themselves to a motorway!

 

[GGizmo]

The British government doesn't do anything for the British people. So antagonising the public isn't going to work.

 

[PlacidCasual]

This is why they have a cab rank rule; someone has to defend a person charged with a crime for the justice system to function no matter how evil or socially unacceptable the criminal is deemed to be.

Sadly quite a number of UK barristers have publicly said they won’t honour the cab rank rule for climate cases.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

Many of them produce the coal, gas and oil themselves so they don't need to import it. For example, South Africa still generates 93% of its electricity from its coal, Nigeria generates 80% of its power from its gas and most of the remainder comes from its oil. Vietnam gets 50% of it energy from its coal and 22% from oil.

Any developing country would much prefer to use its own natural resources to generate power and keep its own people in fairly well paid work rather than have to buy expensive high-technology from abroad to construct a sophisticated energy grid based around renewables and energy storage systems/baseload nuclear. We have failed to do the latter in this country despite being wealthy and being very early adopters of nuclear energy. If renewables are so much cheaper and easier to implement then why is the USA still emitting over 5 billion tonnes of CO2 a year, down only 18.4% since its peak emission year in 2007?

The argument still ignores the economics of renewables and I didn't mention nuclear at all. Solar panels are not expensive the opposite is in fact true and wind turbines certainly be manufactured locally giving good well paying jobs. Even if the fuel is cheaper because it is produced domestically, wind and solar is still typically cheaper. Hydro will be more expensive but there are other obvious non-cost issues to consider.

The USA is a basket case in terms of its energy policy and has only just woken up to renewables. You say we are struggling but in reality we have made significant inroads with some very old grid infrastructure. Grid where emissions are down by over 70% since 1990 with a reduction in overall electricity consumption of over 5%.

I don't see the UK actually building a large fleet of nuclear stations providing baseload supplemented by renewables simply because we wont build them fast enough and they will be too expensive. I expect the reality will be a few reactors and the rest made up with significant over capacity of wind turbines and interconnects to Europe. Time of use pricing to manage down peaks will be the norm and we will rely on the likes of Norway's hydro assets when its a low wind day and likewise they'll take our cheap wind when its blowing off the north sea cost.

While that will not be total energy security which the purists want, it is where my expectations are for what we will end up with.

 

[dowie]

I think many people accept that we're either fooked or we're not, based entirely on how things pan out whilst continuing to emit at close to present-day levels.

There just isn't the will (regardless of all the talk) to take action that would make much of a difference at this point.

I can see why people might have this impression, especially after seeing the hysterics from unhinged protestors but, at least as far as the UK and some other developed nations are concerned, there is plenty of will to take action and we have been doing so:

UK CO2 emissions are currently at 5.15t per capita

United Kingdom: CO2 Country Profile

United Kingdom: How much CO2 does your country emit? Are emissions falling? How does it compare to other countries?

ourworldindata.org

France, a big investor in nuclear power, is doing even better: at 4.74:

France: CO2 Country Profile

France: How much CO2 does your country emit? Are emissions falling? How does it compare to other countries?

ourworldindata.org

Germany is at 8.09 though:

Germany: CO2 Country Profile

Germany: How much CO2 does your country emit? Are emissions falling? How does it compare to other countries?

ourworldindata.org

Granted they're a big exporter... still could they make some changes... yup:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1660480637407485955

^^^ which of those two countries is burning coal, shutting down nuclear and has "greens" in government....

A lot of the time the "activist" types don't really have much to offer here, opposing infrastructure projects like HS2, opposing nuclear etc.. and this pointless "just stop oil" which isn't asking for us to consume less but to simplt stop exploration in our back yard... it's an attractive cause for people who want to virtue signal and be passionate about some cause that seems vaguely climate-related but it's just fluff and isn't really seeking to achieve much even if successful.

 

[JonRGV250]

How anyone (who's even remotely in possession of their own sanity) can justify what the lunatic fringe that are JSO are trying to achieve is just beyond me.
I'm sure this vid has been posted before, but if it hasn't (and I give fair warning) it has GBeebies, JRM and the utterly brain washed bat poop crazy feckwit that is Phoebe Plumber in it.
View at ones own discretion, and don't blame me if ones IQ drops several points or to the point that any viewer becomes a drooling vegetable.
You have been warned..

 

[gingergundog]

bat poop crazy

Pink hair seems to have that effect.

These people just want to rant, JRM has the patience of a saint.

 

[Maple Leaf]

The argument still ignores the economics of renewables and I didn't mention nuclear at all. Solar panels are not expensive the opposite is in fact true and wind turbines certainly be manufactured locally giving good well paying jobs. Even if the fuel is cheaper because it is produced domestically, wind and solar is still typically cheaper.

Solar panels may be a lot cheaper now and wind turbines can be made domestically in most places, but you still need a way to store the energy they produce to use when the sun is not shining or on windless days. The storage systems capable of storing enough energy to backup a nation's grid are very expensive. Nuclear baseload generating capability (for sophisticated countries) is one way around huge expensive storage systems. You can have as many solar panels and wind turbines as you like but if you only have enough energy storage capacity to power the country for literally a couple of hours during dead calm cold dark winter days then they are useless.

The USA is a basket case in terms of its energy policy and has only just woken up to renewables. You say we are struggling but in reality we have made significant inroads with some very old grid infrastructure. Grid where emissions are down by over 70% since 1990 with a reduction in overall electricity consumption of over 5%.

If renewables are so much cheaper and easier to implement, as you claimed, then the American private sector would have got to work on them. It wouldn't be about environmentalism but simply about maximising their profit margins.

I said we have failed to produce 'a sophisticated energy grid based around renewables and energy storage systems/baseload nuclear' not that we are "struggling". Obviously, there has been progress in the UK compared to many other countries, for example, we have phased out coal. However, in 2019, 40.9% of our electricity was generated with gas. Oil and gas meet more than three quarters of Britain’s total energy needs currently.

I don't see the UK actually building a large fleet of nuclear stations providing baseload supplemented by renewables simply because we wont build them fast enough and they will be too expensive. I expect the reality will be a few reactors and the rest made up with significant over capacity of wind turbines and interconnects to Europe.

The New Labour government made the sensible decision to refurbish and extend the life of all our existing nuclear power stations from 25 to 50 years. The ones that are still operational will be shut down soon. The government gave themselves plenty of breathing space to replace them, which regrettably they and the Tories subsequently squandered with foolish appeals to private industry to pick up the bill for strategic national infrastructure.

In 2006, the DTI considered measures needed by 2020 and beyond to tackle climate change and ensure secure and affordable energy supplies:

...The report confirms that nuclear power is "back on the agenda with a vengeance". It says a mix of energy supplies is essential and that new nuclear power stations could make a significant contribution. The review says it will be up to the private sector to cover the costs of investment, decommissioning and storage of nuclear waste... Article

Note the bold text. This attitude is why we only have one new nuclear power station that is still offline, 5 years behind schedule and billions of pounds over budget. They should have started building new nuclear generating capacity 15 years ago.

Time of use pricing to manage down peaks will be the norm and we will rely on the likes of Norway's hydro assets when its a low wind day and likewise they'll take our cheap wind when its blowing off the north sea cost.

While that will not be total energy security which the purists want, it is where my expectations are for what we will end up with.

Very interesting. It wouldn't be necessary to rely on the Norwegians etc if our useless government had got its finger out and built sufficient nuclear baseload generating capacity at the appropriate time.

 

[FoxEye]

I’m curious. Why does everyone’s predictions of the future seem to involve humans not adapting to the change in climate?

Crops failing globally isn't really something you can adapt to.

It's pretty bleak stuff if/when runaway climate change occurs.

Maybe a tiny number of humans persist in habitats like those you'd have to build to live on Mars. But we'd have wiped 99.9% of all the flora and fauna on the planet, which is the true tragedy.

 

[FoxEye]

@dowie There is a question tho about how much of "our" emissions we have simply moved to a 3rd country. E.g. because we moved such a lot of our manufacturing to China, etc. So now "our" emissions are their emissions, but those goods are still destined for our consumers.

Globally, emissions continue to rise at a staggering rate.

CO₂ emissions

How much CO₂ does the world emit? Which countries emit the most?

ourworldindata.org