The impending environmental disaster

413x

413x

413x

Caporegime
Joined
13 Jan 2010
Posts
33,198
Location
Llaneirwg
Quite a lot of news articles currently on the local and global environment. Rightly so it's becoming a hotter and hotter (excuse the pun) topic. Especially with the COP summit.

BBC News - Climate change: Fossil fuel production set to soar over next decade
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58971131

We are continuing as a society to move way off course For decarbonising our lives. We are constantly getting told we need to do more by scientists and yet the temp rises keep coming.

Half measures of 5k for heat pumps and small subsides for green initiatives don't go far enough. And apparently UK has a better road map than most countries.



People are now not having kids due to this issue. And I don't blame them. There won't be much left to inherit at the current rate in a lifetime.

Sunak has even said the cost of inaction outweighs the cost of action. Yet still we fall short.


At the local level the house of Lords proposals for more local changes such as cleaning up our rivers has been thrown out.

BBC News - Environment bill: Green groups' dismay as ministers reject changes https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58968871



I'm of the opinion we are well into requiring unrealised/unproven/unproductionised technology now being required to curb the problem. Luckily (for myself) I'll probably only feel the tail end of this being mid 30s.

I just don't think we have it in us as a species to turn the tide. It will only be when it's too late that people collectively might go "whoops, should have taken that seriously"

Do any of us think that we are going to escape this worsening situation?
 
200sols said:
This govt don't give a crap, it's all lip service.
Click to expand...

It's probably a symptom of an older ruling party and voting demographic.
You only care for your self (despite Boris having loads of kids).

If you only have to think of the next 4 years, climate change is no biggy
 
413x said:
It's probably a symptom of an older ruling party and voting demographic.
You only care for your self (despite Boris having loads of kids).

If you only have to think of the next 4 years, climate change is no biggy
Click to expand...

They only care about money and they've brainwashed most of the population anyway. How many times do we hear on these forums 'but China...' as a response to environmental concerns...
 
200sols said:
They only care about money and they've brainwashed most of the population anyway. How many times do we hear on these forums 'but China...' as a response to environmental concerns...
Click to expand...

I was talking to someone yesterday who said 'but China'

Most. Of china's emissions are likely due to the west buying stuff.
 
None of these Green people ever suggest curtailing population growth, and then reducing it though, which is the obvious fix. I thought Covid might make an indent, but it's a bit of a damp squib from that perspective. Is the UK population still growing despite Covid? India? China? USA?
 
The UK could disappear tomorrow and it still wouldn't change the current direction. Do what you can on a personal level but the amount of change required is on such a huge scale that I don't see it happening until we are forced and then it will likely be too late.

Ignore the cartoon look, this is a good take on what is required.



The concept of your personal carbon footprint was popularized by the oil producer BP in a 2005 ad campaign. Arguably one of the most effective and sinister pieces of propaganda that still seriously distracts all of us from the reality of the situation. If you eliminated 100% of your [CO2] emissions for the rest of your life, you would have saved one second's worth of emissions from the global energy sector. Even the most motivated person can't even make a tiny dent
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
probably because when it comes to a choice between having a decent life now, or making sacrifices to benefit people you'll never know, most people choose the former.

take cars- the vast majority of people don't give a damn about efficiency or emissions, all they care about is having a small tax/fuel bill.

or power generation- everyone mumbles about not wanting fossil fuels generating our power, but they shout at the top of their lungs when you want to put a windmill/hydro plant/nuclear power station in their back yard.

if there's one thing humans are incredibly good at, it's kicking the can down the road, letting the corrective action for a problem build up until there's no option but to take the most drastic of action.
 
413x said:
I was talking to someone yesterday who said 'but China'

Most. Of china's emissions are likely due to the west buying stuff.
Click to expand...

This

Also, we are all hypocrites. In the west, we all demand to have maximum variety in what we eat and drink, which is massively harmful to the environment. Personally i think food indulgence is probably one of the worst things we do as a society (and i'm not claiming to be any sort of saint in that area).

We don't **** need avocados.
 
We were saying the same in 1989, except it was called global warming back then, not "climate change".

We have done some right things though in the last 30 years. Less CFCs, less smoking, recycling more.

I will still have my bacon sandwich regardless :-)

That jailbait witch Greta needs to sod off.
 
I've noticed the argument of "do your bit" has been replaced with "it's all the mega corps fault so it is pointless to do your bit" by the younger generations, the generation that is growingly (if that's a word) anti-capitalist at least on mainstreamy US media.

I don't really agree with this as the mega corps will make what we ask for and consume. The corps who only care about money will sell what we ask for. We need to ask and expect less.

It was interesting that during the lockdowns world wide co2 emissions did not drop by much. People were still consuming, but differently (I.e. not travelling but consuming tech, food, etc)

But mega corps also need to change how they influence our behaviour. We don't need a brand new car every 36 months.

I also can't see how some sort of regulation or replacement of the current system so corps emit less can be uncoupled from less output, less money circulating, fewer jobs etc. It will probably happen regardless of what 'system' is in place.

I would also suggest the predicted growth of fossil fuels for the next 10 years is so that the lights stay on at all.
 
I think the plastic issue is going to be a greater threat to life than the climate issue will be, neither are good but humans and life in general will likely adapt and survive the climate problems just like our ancestors have done in the past when climate has changed drastically, the plastic issue with micro plastics already being in our bodies and even found in babies isn't something we can suddenly adapt to because plastic isn't supposed to be inside us, not to mention the issue of wildlife eating plastics because they think it's food and dying as a result of it

Not saying that climate isn't a problem, it's certainly going to be a problem but I think not as much as plastic will be
 
Jono8 said:
This

Also, we are all hypocrites. In the west, we all demand to have maximum variety in what we eat and drink, which is massively harmful to the environment. Personally i think food indulgence is probably one of the worst things we do as a society (and i'm not claiming to be any sort of saint in that area).

We don't **** need avocados.
Click to expand...

Same. I'm well aware I'm a hypocrite too.
I don't eat any meat but I could cut dairy.
Do I really need a 34 in new monitor?

Even people who care can't make the changes and most people don't care.

So I don't see us winning it.
 
413x said:
Same. I'm well aware I'm a hypocrite too.
I don't eat any meat but I could cut dairy.
Do I really need a 34 in new monitor?

Even people who care can't make the changes and most people don't care.

So I don't see us winning it.
Click to expand...

Problem is that switching to the idea of buying what you "need" rather than what you "want" completely breaks our current economic models of continual growth.
 
Last edited:
Puzzled said:
Problem is that switching to the idea of buying what you "need" rather than what you "want" completely breaks our current economic models of continual growth.
Click to expand...

Same as curbing population growth.
Which causes a massive issue.

I'm very much closer to buying what I need than want. Especially with clothes. Also my desktop. Its ancient but its just not worth upgrading.

However I have to admit that's more to do with cost than climate

Next car will hopefully be electric. But as someone who does maybe 20 miles max in a typical week it's probably worse to get an electric due to environmental costs producing it
 
413x said:
I'm of the opinion we are well into requiring unrealised/unproven/unproductionised technology now being required to curb the problem. Luckily (for myself) I'll probably only feel the tail end of this being mid 30s.

I just don't think we have it in us as a species to turn the tide. It will only be when it's too late that people collectively might go "whoops, should have taken that seriously"

Do any of us think that we are going to escape this worsening situation?
Click to expand...

I think you are being optimistic there. I think the worse affects of us not doing enough now will start effecting you badly by the time you are mid 50s. You will definitely feel the pain.

Wheres I will be retired and will miss most of the issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom